A Writ for Martyrs, Eustace Mullins, R.I.P.

This article was written on February 3rd, 2010, one day after Mullins passed away.

A Writ for Martyrs, Eustace Mullins, R.I.P.

Eustace Mullins (1923-2010), a renowned historian and controversial author of books dealing with conspiracies such as Secrets of the Federal Reserve (1952), has passed away, according to a statement made earlier today by his caretaker, Jesse Lee of Cut and Shoot, Texas. Mullins was 86 years old.

Mullins was born in Roanoake, Virginia, in 1923 to parents Eustace Clarence Mullins and Jane Katherine Muse. He received education at Washington and Lee University, New York University, the University of North Dakota and the Institute of Contemporary Arts in Washington, D.C. before enlisting in the military as a Warrant Officer in 1942. Mullins also served thirty-eight months active service during World War II in the United States Air Force.

Mullins was well known for the association and friendship he maintained with several noteworthy historic figures with whom he frequently visited, earning him the nickname “America’s Guest.” He first became acquainted with American poet Ezra Pound in the winter of 1948, while Pound was being kept at Saint Elizabeth’s Hospital in Washington, D.C. At Pound’s request, Mullins, at the time an employee at the Library of Congress, was commissioned to author a book about the Federal Reserve on Pound’s behalf. Through the publication of such controversial books, as well as his associations with literary and political figures that included Russell Kirk, E.E. Cummings, and Joseph McCarthy, Mullins became an object of concern to the FBI under then-director J. Edgar Hoover, who secretly kept files on Mullins throughout his tenure. Using Freedom of Information Act Requests, Mullins obtained a portion of this record in December of 1981, and subsequently published a book based on his experiences, A Writ for Martyrs (1985).

Due to the controversial nature of some of his written works, Mullins was dogged with accusations of racist and anti-Semitic views expressed in books such as The Curse of Canaan: A Demonology of History. Mullins refuted these accusations, but due to his controversial status was nonetheless frequently asked to appear on radio and television programs that included The Political Cesspool.

Jim Marrs, author of numerous books on conspiracies such as Rule By Secrecy and The Terror Conspiracy shared his feelings about Eustace after hearing of his passing:

Eustace has, and will remain, on my Hero List. His diligent work to bring out the under reported aspects of our national history have been a tremendous help in my own investigations. And I know of no factual information that significantly contradicts his finds and conclusions. If the day ever comes when America honors truth over spin, hype and distraction, the name of Eustace Mullins will be at the top of the list. We must never forget his legacy.

Christopher McCollum, a writer and editor at the Culture of Spirits website, shared the following of his visit with Mullins in winter of 2009:

I would like to say that with my three days that I spent with him, I felt completely at home. His breadth of knowledge and experience was astounding, and the only thing more impressive than that was his willingness and ability to speak about it. Like a rare visit from a favorite uncle, we gathered around him and sat mesmerized as he told his tales.

It was an experience that I will never forget, I daresay. The last of Ezra Pound’s students had the temerity to stand up for himself against unthinkable enemies and odds, and should serve as a beacon to those who think that one man can’t fight the system.

Eustace will be sorely missed, and I thank the heavens that I got to spend the time that I did with him, in his waning days.

Vance Pollock, historical consultant for the L.E.M.U.R. Paranormal Investigations team out of Asheville, North Carolina, also expressed sentiments regarding his many meetings and discussions with Mullins:

For my part, I will miss Eustace as one of the last links to that greatly misrepresented American struggle against “creeping communism” which it seems we lost with a whimper over the last few decades.

To anyone who would question authority and the establishment formula which states what a person should think, feel and believe regarding the way the world is run, Eustace Mullins was that rare and exceptional voice of the free thinker.

Eustace Mullins will forever stand in my mind as the unwavering underdog. In seeking to understand why Eustace will be given the silent treatment afforded all such troublesome characters, I imagine him as a young man standing by the coffin of Joe McCarthy delivering his eulogy (Editor’s note: It is known that Mullins was actually a featured speaker at McCarthy’s funeral).

Fifty some years later, this chapter in history has been rewritten for us to interpret any such sincere and patriotic opposition to “the enemy within” as some confused or misguided paranoia… but was it? Eustace Mullins preserved for us a seed of truth that will continue to be hidden away from the mainstream.

He will continue to be loved, respected and admired by future seekers who search for their answers in the dark, neglected corners of the dustbin of history.

Those who knew him proudly called him a friend, and an American patriot. Mullins was not married at the time of his death, and is survived by one remaining sibling.

The Greatest American Patriot of the 20th Century Passes Away

It has been difficult in deciding an appropriate heading for the blog article that I'm writing tonight. And I still don't know if the title is appropriate enough. Hopefully the careful words I choose pay adequate respect to Eustace Mullins in my piece.

Eustace Clarence Mullins, Jr, the 20th Century's Greatest American Patriot, born on March 9th, 1923 in Roanoke, VA, passed away at noon at the home of his caretaker Jesse Lee in Hockley, Texas. He was 86. It was a blessing and privilege to have met him last year and to have spent some time with him. My only regret is what has become a squandered opportunity, as damnable as it is: not taking the time out to get to know him more than I did. These past few days have been very burdensome for me because withholding the tears is no easy task. To me, he was and still is the greatest political researcher who ever lived.

I loved him like a family member.

His corpus of work, which was the product of Mullins' unique meticulous research, provided a "happy hunting ground" for his student readers to utilize in fighting back against the World Order conspirators. He was a Prophet; a Godsend; a National Treasure; and to those oblivious to him who may yet still discover and cherish his work, he will be known as an Unsung Hero and America's Unknown Soldier.

John Kaminski commented on his passing:

Eustace Mullins was the greatest political historian of the 20th century, and not just because he was not beholden to the power structure that deters candid reports about significant events, but because, guided by the greatest poet of the 20th century who was imprisoned for broadcasting for peace, his meticulous research eventually uncovered virtually every political secret of the last 400 years. It’s a pity so many people are afraid to believe what Mullins told them, because it was much more of the truth than has ever been seen in our schools or our media.

The author of this blog piece hopes to attend the funeral services of this great man.

A Daryl Bradford Smith interview with John Kaminski can be accessed from the following link: http://iamthewitness.com/audio/John.Kaminski/TFC.SMITH.KAMINSKI.04-02-2010.mp3

I will close this article out with Mullins' own words. Asked by James Dyer what he was most proud of in life, Mullins replied:

Getting Ezra Pound out of St. Elizabeth's, and now trying to rehabilitate Joe McCarthy. These are two of the most maligned persons of the 20th century. If I can change public thinking of these two men that I admired and loved, maybe they'll get their just desserts.

Eustace Mullins at 86

Blacklisted historian’s works reveal the deception of mainstream history

by John Kaminski

29th October 2009

Lots of fine folks around the world have been worried lately about the welfare of legendary anti-establishment historian Eustace Mullins.

Actually, half-baked reports and calculated rumors have had him killed, kidnapped, missing or otherwise under siege for decades. Some of these items have been true, others only near misses.

I’m here to tell you tonight that Eustace is fine. One is tempted to describe him as “never better,” but for a writer as young as myself, describing an old codger of 86 years filled with intrigue and tragedy, whose legs don’t work very well anymore and who is prone to nodding off after a good meal, that would be a subjective judgment I would not care to make.

I’ve been hearing stories about the persecution and exploitation of Eustace Mullins by shadowy people with ulterior motives since the late 1980s, when they’d already been happening for 30 years. To make a long story short, Eustace would be dead today — murdered, actually — if not for the miraculous intervention of a guardian angel. Yes, it does happen.

The thing that first strikes me as remarkable about Eustace is his face, especially when he laughs, which is often. Good humor amidst adversity is perhaps the finest human trait, which this battler for objective human truth possesses in abundance.

Even though the subject at hand may be tragic and portend dire consequences for the entire human race, when the point is made, and Eustace laughs wryly, all the wrinkles on his face disappear, except for two little crow’s feet. His eyes sparkle as he glances upward, as if to say, “I tell them what I’ve found, Lord, that’s about all I can do.” The best way I can put it is that he is infused with a kind of light I’ve seen in very few others.

Eustace Mullins is the most blacklisted, suppressed and harassed writer in American history. In the introduction to his “A writ for martyrs,” which is a report on the files the FBI compiled on him for decades, Mullins writes, “In a single day, my life changed from one of peaceful artistic endeavour to one of constant struggle for survival. One dark winter day in in 1948, some friends persuaded me to visit the poet Ezra Pound in his cell at St. Elizabeth’s Hospital, Washington, D.C. That day was to cast a pall over my life, and to bring great suffering to my innocent family.”

After 25 books, including such pertinent titles as “The Secrets of the Federal Reserve,” “Murder by Injection,” and “The World Order: Our Secret Rulers,” Mullins is now living the good life, sort of, thanks to his rescue from oblivion by a lone man who takes life very seriously. Mullins and his steadfast caretaker Jesse Lee are essentially homeless, but touring the country, going from friend to friend, selling the same books Mullins has been peddling for sixty years. (You too can acquire these precious, museum quality books for a song — and possibly get a visit from Eustace and Jesse in the bargain — simply by writing to me and I’ll pass the info on.)

But in their happy travels, they do something a lot more than that. With Jesse’s thoughtful guidance, they raise eyebrows and elicit love wherever and with whomever they meet. The minute Eustace’s message reaches the unenlightened, they seem to universally respond, “I need to hear this information, because it relates to what is happening now more than anything I’ve ever heard on TV.”

Sitting comfortably in an easy chair, Mullins dismisses the physical problems that have plagued him in recent years with a wave of his hand, and says matter-of-factly, chuckling with that twinkle again, “I still have 25 more books to write!”

The astonishing output of works of supreme relevance to our understanding of today’s world can perhaps best be viewed on Wikipedia, a site I don’t normally recommend, and can’t say is accurate. But it gives you an idea of the volume and magnitude of Mullins’ works. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eustace_Mullins Savor the titles. “The plagues of pharaoh.” “Jewish TV: Sick sick sick.” “Why General Patton Was Murdered.”

But more importantly, understand the content of all these publications and simply marvel at the profound enormity of the output.

Among his major works . . .

“The Secrets of the Federal Reserve” may just be the single book that can save the American republic, if that’s possible, because it objectively examines how the international bankers have reshaped reality throughout the 20th century and turned our freedom into slavery.

“Murder by Injection: The Story of the Medical Conspiracy against America” reveals the American Medical Association’s sordid history of killer quackery and heartless profiteering that continues today with the ubiquitous use of poison medicines to cure fictional diagnoses.

“The World Order: Our Secret Rulers” names the five men who rule the world.

In “The Rape of Justice: America’s Tribunals Exposed,” Mullins writes: “ . . . the cause of our legal dilemma, that our Constitutional courts, as authorized in the Constitution, have stealthily been replaced by equity courts, operating on the stern military principles of admiralty punishment.”

So now you have some idea why the notorious FBI director J. Edgar Hoover put a tail on Mullins for decades; in fact, probably, the agent is still posted.

Eustace’s guardian Jesse says “The Curse of Canaan” is the key to all of Mullins’ works, because it explains the demonic plot that has plagued civilization for five thousand years. Back in the late 1980s, when I first encountered “Curse of Canaan,” I was put off by religious terminology I didn’t understand, and I thought all evangelical types were the same — hypocrites.

Since then I’ve learned differently. Like the debate about good Jews and bad Jews, there is no debate that there are good Christians and bad Christians. Israel-poisoned shills like John Hagee, Billy Graham and Jerry Falwell are the bad Christians; but the good ones like Jesse Lee and Eustace leave no doubt in anyone’s mind that they are driven by the light of truth, and overjoyed at the prospects of the trip they’re on.

As stimulating as reading Eustace Mullins can be, conversing with him can be even more startling, not to mention educational.

“People don’t realize the United States didn’t win the Revolutionary War,” Eustace casually says. “They let us think we won, but it never really happened.”

Jaws usually drop considerably at that line. Summoning my meager knowledge of America’s war for independence, I began to babble on about Alexander Hamilton, the guy on the $10 bill, as being one of the key figures preventing America’s independence from Britain and the international bankers. I brought up a name familiar to Eustace, the respected Jewish economic historian Emanuel Josephson, who was Mullins’ close friend when they both lived in the same New York City neighborhood a half century ago.

Josephson wrote that Hamilton was half black and half Jewish, went to Hebrew school in London, and later prevented the fledgling colonies from financial freedom by reserving the printing of paper money to the banks, rather than the government, despite what the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution appears to say.

“That kind of reminds me of Abraham Lincoln,” Eustace retorted. “Lincoln’s mother was a slave and his father was a Jew. Did you know that Lincoln’s wife went mad and spent the later part of her life in an insane asylum, and that both of Lincoln’s sons committed suicide?”

He continued. “Lincoln was put in place by the bankers, too. That whole greenbacks thing was just a smokescreen.”

As I said, jaw dropping.

After a pause, Eustace went on. “Did you know that for two whole years, Averill Harriman was the leader of Russia?”

Harriman, member of an infamously rich American family comparable and in league with the Bushes, was sent to Russia by the Rockefellers right after Hitler invaded in 1941, because when that happened, Stalin had a nervous breakdown which lasted two years. Harriman later returned to the U.S. and ran for vice president in 1948.

Perhaps with Eustace Mullins rather than any other single author, you can really get a feel for how deep the rabbithole goes. Among Mullins’ more astounding publications are both whole books of commentary on the Jewish question, including a mammoth tome titled “Mullins’ New History of the Jews,” and small booklets containing the riveting essays “Jewish War Against the Western World,” “Sigmund Freud: Anti-Christ Devil,” “There’s a Gulag in Your Future,” and “The Biological Jew,” plus scores of other essays and short works with similar titles and the same subject. So it seemed natural to suggest my own observations for his scrutiny, and when I did, was I surprised.

“So, Eustace,” I queried, “who really runs the world?”

“The Queen,” he answered quickly.

“You mean it’s not the Sanhedrin!?” I exclaimed, flabbergasted. “Are you sure it’s not the Sanhedrin that runs the Queen?”

“No, it’s Queen Elizabeth who runs the Sanhedrin and everything else — most definitely.”

As I said, with Eustace Mullins, both with reading his works and listening to him, prepare to be astounded. Prepare to learn the real history that has been concealed from us by the people who own the media, who just happen to be the same people who own the banks and the government.

As I said before, since 1988 I’d been hearing secondhand stories about Eustace and about how numerous charlatans would make their way to his modest Staunton, Virginia home to try to steal the rights to Eustace’s books. Many times I pondered how the only thing that could really save Eustace from the ravages of time and inattention was a guardian angel.

For decades, said angel never appeared, and Eustace’s health rapidly went down the tubes. Then suddenly, right after filmmaker Randy Atkins made the video “The Neo-Zionist World Order,” which consisted of an extensive interview with Mullins, the latest team of these charlatans spirited Eustace out of the Virginia nursing home where he had been living to another nursing home in Texas. Two criminals named Blackburn and Spencer were all set to commit Mullins to a Texas state institution, where it would have been all but impossible to get him out. During this dangerous episode, Spencer actually reprinted one of Mullins’ works, carefully removing all instances of the word “Jew,” and pocketing all the profits for himself.

As Eustace recalls it, “Spencer told me that if I took the word out of all my books, we could make a million dollars.” That Eustace remembered what G. Edward Griffin did. “He totally plagiarized my ‘Secrets of the Federal Reserve’ and made two million dollars.”

Just as Mullins was to be committed to a Texas state institution, along comes Jesse Lee, son of a Baptist preacher, who perceived the unjust horror of the situation. Jesse snatched Eustace from the clutches of money-grubbing opportunists and the poisoned nursing home, and drove him off to Maine for a 40-day raw vegetable fast.

And that’s what saved Eustace’s life.

Since then Eustace and Jesse have lived a nomadic life, going from friend to friend, all over the U.S., spreading the real history of the United States and waking people up in the friendliest of ways.

Jesse Lee, you may know, looks just like Santa Claus (well, much thinner). While on a previous fast in the mountains of Colorado, Jesse took a Nazarite vow to never again cut his hair as a sign he was a servant of the Lord, and the task he adopted as his life’s work was to resuscitate and renourish Eustace. So far this mission, a tremendous amount of work since Mullins is essentially not able to sustain himself without significant care, has been a complete success. And a great gift to those they choose to visit.

Jesse’s goal for the future, suggested by Atkins, is to reacquire the old Mullins homestead in Staunton, also buy the house next door, and turn them both into the Eustace Mullins Ezra Pound Institute for Civilization, sell books and protect the works of Mullins, Pound and other authors who have been blacklisted by the authorities who control people’s thoughts. That plan at this point is only a dream.

“We’re not out to sell books,” Jesse stresses. “We just want to spread the word.”

Lately I’ve noticed something that I’ve never noticed before. I guess it’s one of the perks of getting older.

I’ve noticed that a lot of the best people — not the ones who are trying to make lots of money or assume positions of power after they steal them from whomever possesses them at the moment — exude a certain kind of light about them.

Jesse has asked me if I was a Christian, and I said no, but added that Jesus was a close personal friend of mine.

Jesse didn’t know that I am one of the most trenchant and persistent critics of organized religion in the world. Or at least that’s what I like to think.

But lately I’ve noticed that the people who say and do the best things are all driven by a CERTAIN faith in God, and are made happy by it, regardless of whatever historical anomalies that I might hold in such high and incriminating regard, and regardless of whichever creed — except for that horrible one we’ve been talking about — that espouses veneration of a highest power with an emphasis on love, charity and service . . . you know, that highest power that has given us our lives. I’ve seen it just as strongly in Catholics, Muslims, Baptists and Buddhists. Sorry to say I don’t know any Hindus, but I’m sure they have it, too.

It’s the light of faith that shows through in good works for the highest purposes, and it is the most beautiful thing in the world.

Lately I feel this light rising in myself, the light of safety, and I don’t know what do about it, trenchant critic of psyop religions that I pretend to be.

A thought crosses my mind: What if all the believers in the world united against the nonbelievers? I’m not talking lockstep Hageeism here. I’m talking about understanding we all have shared goals and shared beliefs, but some agency in the world somehow exacerbates our differences instead of emphasizing our commonalities. They foment conflict for the purpose of exploiting both sides. As a direct result, society is in chaos while the mindlocked government works to mass murder as many people as possible so the rich can have less crowded playgrounds.

What if all the believers in the world found their commonality and exposed and neutralized the one group of nonbelievers that controls everything for a purpose that can only be described as selfish and evil?

Well, it’s just a dream. A dream that could be made possible if everyone understood everything that Eustace Mullins has ever said, and put those thoughts into action.

The phone rings. It’s Randy, supposedly the next stop for Eustace and Jesse. “They’re not here yet.” I get on the phone. “Jesse, where are you?” “Oh, we stopped at Mia’s. Don’t know how long we’ll be here, but we’re having a great time.”

Join in if you like. You’ll never regret it.

Ed and Elaine Brown: Victims of Tyranny

This article was written 16 days ago by "STAFF AND WIRE REPORT". This piece appears in UnionLeader.

It's a biased article and I will not be reposting all of it. I'll just be pasting a few of my favorite selections from the article that I will challenge.

Tax evaders Ed and Elaine Brown were convicted Thursday of amassing weapons, explosives and booby traps and plotting to kill federal agents during a nine-month standoff in 2007 at their fort-like home in Plainfield.

Really? Because I thought they were convicted for "evading" taxes. Ed and Elaine Brown had the right to fear their government. After all, this was the same government who in the 90s murdered the family members of Randy Weaver and performed a Jewish holocaust-style execution on David Koresh and his branch Davidian congregation.

The couple, who do not recognize the federal government's authority to tax its citizens, held hands and looked straight ahead as the verdict was read. They refused to stand when the jury and judge left the courtroom.

A fine piece of biased reporting. The federal government does not have any taxing authority that it can levy on private citizens of the 50 states of the union. This is INDISPUTABLE FACT no matter how much government and its hired propagandists want us to think. The federal government only has jurisdiction over itself and what it creates. Unless you have a federally-connected job, you do not owe a federal income tax. This is also what the FairTaxers don't understand. For a more full-bodied explanation of what I'm talking about consult Peter Eric Hendrickson, author of the book Cracking the Code: The Fascinating Truth About Taxation in America.

For an understanding of our court system, read The Rape of Justice by Eustace Mullins. Here's a hint: our courtrooms are nothing but Freemasonic lodges where Talmudic law reigns supreme by black-robed deities who enforce oriental despotism upon a Free People.

Ed and Elaine Brown are sovereign citizens who are being terrorized by communist thugs because they didn't follow the argued proper legal protocol of filing with the IRS, the private collection agency of America's Third Central Bank, the Federal Reserve System.

During the standoff, the Browns welcomed a parade of anti-tax, anti-government sympathizers, four of whom have been convicted of helping them stockpile weapons and sent to prison. One visitor was Randy Weaver, whose wife and son were killed along with a deputy U.S. marshal at a 1992 shootout in Ruby Ridge, Idaho.

Sigh. It is not anti-tax, anti-government to oppose that ruthless extortion racket, the Internal Revenue Service. It is, however, traitorous to even suggest that such an organization should exist in this country.

Loni Horiuchi was the madman psychopath who lead both the Ruby Ridge incident and the one down in Waco, Texas that involved the Branch Davidians. In either case, no one has been charged with these crimes.

In one media interview, Ed Brown, 66, said: "The chief should know, along with the U.S. marshals, along with the local county sheriff -- especially the county sheriff, local police and local state police -- if they come in here to do us in, they kill my wife, myself or both or try to arrest us, I said the chief of police in this town, the sheriff, the sheriff himself will die. This is war now, folks."

I like how the media interview they refer to isn't cited. So how do I know this statement was ever made? I haven't been following the Browns story too closely as I should have been. I know that Peter Hendrickson has made some statements about the Browns not following through with the proper protocol of filing. And if he did say these things, why should he not have said these things? He suspected that the government would kill him so he had to defend his right to live.

The two were arrested in October 2007 -- no shots fired -- by U.S. marshals pretending to be supporters who pounced on the couple while sharing pizza with them on their front porch.

Nice. Entrapment. The Browns should prosecute.

During the trial, Ed Brown testified the weapons were for self-defense, saying he believed the government planned to kill him and his wife. He said he didn't start building the bombs until after federal agents made a failed attempt to arrest him. Prosecutors said many weapons were there already. He also said the property was booby trapped to scare intruders, not harm them.

Counted among the charges against the Browns were many counts of conspiracy. What about the conspiracy the Federal Government, in concert with the Federal Reserve and the IRS, is engaged in against the private sector sovereign citizens of the several states? It must be nice to be able to stand behind the law.

What I enjoy most are the comments posted below the article. Reading these comments, you get a sense of how dumbed-down Americans have become and how willing they are to believe their media outlets as if the journalists who write for them are the disciples of Christ.

I'm not going to pollute my post with their utter nonsese but please do read them for a light laugh if your pity for them doesn't keep you from enjoying their ignorance. As for some of the posters.... couldn't we just execute them for treason?

The Aldrich Plan

I haven't continued my "debunking Federal Reserve debunkers" series since March and I sincerely apologize. It seems I'm making apologies alot.

But better late than never right?

If you haven't read my first blog article, The Jekyll Island Hunt Club, on the Federal Reserve Conspiracy, you can read it here.

Let's review. B.C. Forbes wrote an article on the Jekyll Island meeting ten months before the Magazine was established in 1917. This was six years after the Jekyll Island meeting occurred which means that it was never read during the time it could have had a crucial impact on the turnout of what became the Federal Reserve.

The gestation period lasted between its conception period (1908) to the birth of the Fed (1913). After his European trip to learn about banking reform there is no evidence that Aldrich ever made a report on the results of his trip, nor had he offered any plan of banking reform. It was a waste of money at the taxpayers expense.

The first mention of the Jekyll Island meeting appeared in Nathaniel Wright Stephenson's biography on Aldrich, Chapter XXIV, "Jekyll Island", which was written in 1930. T.W. Lamont three years later stated in Harper that Henry P. Davison was the arbitrator of the Jekyll Island meeting. This was exactly 20 years after the Federal Reserve came into being, 23 years after the meeting itself.

Jekyll Island was chosen for its isolation and privacy as well as being the property of the very same millionaires who frequented the island for recreational purposes. In these instances when the island wasn't being used for hunting, the club's members were asked to not appear, so this became a conventional method of choice and was ideal for the preservation of secrecy that was needed in drafting the plan.

The agreement was made by the participants of this meeting to refer to each other by their first names only because their last names were too well known. The meeting lasted for two weeks with the "new servants brought in from the mainland for this occasion who did not know the names of any of those present," and was to be a one-time only outing because a second meeting would've raised public suspicion.

Paul Warburg created the title of the bank to conceal the reality of it being a privately-owned banking cartel that had control over the general direction of the economy, meaning that it could cause the stock market to rise and fall at whim.

Warburg established a Federal Reserve Board of Governors whose members would be appointed by the President but the real work would be handled by the Federal Advisory Council who would meet with the Board of Governors. The members of the Federal Advisory Council itself would be chosen by the directors of the twelve Federal Reserve banks.

Next, Warburg introduced the illusion that the Federal Reserve System wouldn't be dominated by the New York money markets by setting up the regional reserve system. As Mullins said in his book:

Few people outside the banking world would realize that the existing concentration of the nation's money and credit structure in New York made the proposal of a regional reserve system a delusion.

His most nefarious idea came last. The proposal that the bank should be subjected to executive approval by the President.

This meant the Federal Reserve was unconstitutional from its very inception. Ed Winston asks "Since when is the Federal Reserve Act unconstitutional?" Because Ed, it was drafted by a banker, Paul Warburg, when the constitution expresses that a bill originates in the house and is drawn up by a Congressman. Senator Aldrich shouldn't even have been in the meeting. Secondly it removes Congressianal control by subjecting the banks to the executive approval by the President. This deprived Congress of its sovereignty and destroyed the checks and balances of power set up by Thomas Jefferson.

Refer to Article 1, Sec. 8, Par. 5 of the Constitution. It says "coin", not "print".

Warburg never once made a mention of Jekyll Island in his 1,750 page length tome on the Federal Reserve.

Warburg however did admit on page 60 of his tome: The results of the conference were entirely confidential. Even the fact there had been a meeting was not permitted to become public.

On May 7th, 1910, Harper's Weekly noted:

Finance and the tariff are reserved by Nelson Aldrich as falling within his sole purview and jurisdiction. Mr. Aldrich is endeavoring to devise, through the National Monetary Commission, a banking and currency law. A great many hundred thousand persons are firmly of the opinion that Mr. Aldrich sums up in his personality the greatest and most sinister menace to the popular welfare of the United States. Ernest Newman recently said, 'What the South visits on the Negro in a political way, Aldrich would mete out to the mudsills of the North, if he could devise a safe and practical way to accomplish it.'

The participants in the Jekyll Island conference returned to New York to direct a nationwide propaganda campaign in favor of the "Aldrich Plan". Three of the leading universities, Princeton, Harvard, and the University of Chicago, were used as the rallying points for this propaganda, and national banks had to contribute to a fund of five million dollars to persuade the American public that this central bank plan should be enacted into law by Congress.

Woodrow Wilson, governor of New Jersey and former president of Princeton University, was enlisted as a spokesman for the Aldrich Plan. During the Panic of 1907, Wilson had declared:

All this trouble could be averted if we appointed a committee of six or seven public-spirited men like J.P. Morgan to handle the affairs of our country.

In his biography of Nelson Aldrich in 1930, Stephenson says:

A pamphlet was issued January 16, 1911, 'Suggested Plan for Monetary Legislation', by Hon. Nelson Aldrich, based on Jekyll Island conclusions.

Stephenson says on page 388:

An organization for financial progress has been formed. Mr. Warburg introduced a resolution authorizing the establishment of the Citizens' League, later the National Citizens League . . . Professor Laughlin of the University of Chicago was given charge of the League's propaganda.

It is notable that Stephenson characterizes the work of the National Citizens League as "propaganda", in line with Seligman's exposition of Warburg's work as "the education of the country" and "to break down prejudices".

Much of the five million dollars of the bankers slush fund was spent under the auspices of the National Citizens' League, which was made up of college professors. The two most tireless propagandists for the Aldrich Plan were Professor O.M. Sprague of Harvard, and J. Laurence Laughlin of the University of Chicago.

Congressman Charles A. Lindbergh, Sr. notes:

J. Laurence Laughlin, Chairman of the Executive Committee of the National Citizens' League since its organization, has returned to his position as professor of political economics in the University of Chicago. In June, 1911, Professor Laughlin was given a year's leave from the university, that he might give all of his time to the campaign of education undertaken by the League . . . He has worked indefatigably, and it is largely due to his efforts and his persistence that the campaign enters the final stage with flattering prospects of a successful outcome . . . The reader knows that the University of Chicago is an institution endowed by John D. Rockefeller, with nearly fifty million dollars.

In his biography of Nelson Aldrich, Stephenson reveals that the Citizens' League was also a Jekyll Island product. In chapter 24 we find that:

The Aldrich Plan was represented to Congress as the result of three years of work, study and travel by members of the National Monetary Commission, with expenditures of more than three hundred thousand dollars.

In 1911, the Aldrich Plan became part of the official platform of the Republican Party.

Testifying before the Committee on Rules, December 15, 1911, after the Aldrich plan had been introduced in Congress, Congressman Lindbergh stated:

Our financial system is a false one and a huge burden on the people . . . I have alleged that there is a Money Trust. The Aldrich plan is a scheme plainly in the interest of the Trust . . . Why does the Money Trust press so hard for the Aldrich Plan now, before the people know what the money trust has been doing?

Lindbergh continued his speech:

The Aldrich Plan is the Wall Street Plan. It is a broad challenge to the Government by the champion of the Money Trust. It means another panic, if necessary, to intimidate the people. Aldrich, paid by the Government to represent the people, proposes a plan for the trusts instead. It was by a very clever move that the National Monetary Commission was created. In 1907, nature responded most beautifully and gave this country the most bountiful crop it had ever had. Other industries were busy too, and from a natural standpoint all the conditions were right for a most prosperous year. Instead, a panic entailed enormous losses upon us.

Wall Street knew the American people were demanding a remedy against the recurrence of such a ridiculously unnatural condition. Most Senators and Representatives fell into the Wall Street trap and passed the Aldrich Vreeland Emergency Currency Bill. But the real purpose was to get a monetary commission which would frame a proposition for amendments to our currency and banking laws which would suit the Money Trust. The interests are now busy everywhere educating the people in favor of the Aldrich Plan. It is reported that a large sum of money has been raised for this purpose. Wall Street speculation brought on the Panic of 1907. The depositors' funds were loaned to gamblers and anybody the Money Trust wanted to favour. Then when the depositors wanted their money, the banks did not have it. That made the panic.

Edward Vreeland, co-author of the bill, wrote in the August 25, 1910 Independent (which was owned by Aldrich):

Under the proposed monetary plan of Senator Aldrich, monopolies will disappear, because they will not be able to make more than four percent interest and monopolies cannot continue at such a low rate. Also, this will mark the disappearance of the Government from the banking business.

Edward Vreeland's fantastic claims were typical of the propaganda flood unleashed to pass the Aldrich Plan. Monopolies would disappear, the Government would disappear from the banking business. Pie in the sky.

Nation Magazine, January 19, 1911, noted:

The name of Central Bank is carefully avoided, but the 'Federal Reserve Association', the name given to the proposed central organization, is endowed with the usual powers and responsibilities of a European Central Bank.

After the National Monetary Commission had returned from Europe, it held no official meetings for nearly two years. No records or minutes were ever presented showing who had authored the Aldrich Plan. Since they held no official meetings, the members of the commission could hardly claim the Plan as their own. The sole tangible result of the Commission's three hundred thousand dollar expenditure was a library of thirty massive volumes on European banking.

Typical of these works is a thousand page history of the Reichsbank, the central bank which controlled money and credit in Germany, and whose principal stockholders were the Rothschilds and Paul Warburg's family banking house of M.M. Warburg Company. The Commission's records show that it never functioned as a deliberative body. Indeed, its only "meeting" was the secret conference held at Jekyll Island, and this conference is not mentioned in any publication of the Commission. Senator Cummins passed a resolution in Congress ordering the Commission to report on January 8, 1912, and show some constructive results of its three years' work. In the face of this challenge, the National Monetary Commission ceased to exist.

With their five million dollars as a war chest, the Aldrich Plan propagandists waged a no-holds barred war against their opposition. Andrew Frame testified before the House Banking and Currency Committee of the American Bankers Association. He represented a group of Western bankers who opposed the Aldrich Plan:

CHAIRMAN CARTER GLASS: Why didn't the Western bankers make themselves heard when the American Bankers Association gave its unqualified and, we are assured, unanimous approval of the scheme proposed by the National Monetary Commission?

ANDREW FRAME: I'm glad you called my attention to that. When that monetary bill was given to the country, it was but a few days previous to the meeting of the American Bankers Association in New Orleans in 1911. There was not one banker in a hundred who had read that bill. We had twelve addresses in favor of it. General Hamby of Austin, Texas, wrote a letter to President Watts asking for a hearing against the bill. He did not get a very courteous answer. I refused to vote on it, and a great many other bankers did likewise.

MR. BULKLEY: Do you mean that no member of the Association could be heard in opposition to the bill?

ANDREW FRAME: They throttled all argument.

MR. KINDRED: But the report was given out that it was practically unanimous.

ANDREW FRAME: The bill had already been prepared by Senator Aldrich and presented to the executive council of the American Bankers Association in May, 1911. As a member of that council, I received a copy the day before they acted upon it. When the bill came in at New Orleans, the bankers of the United States had not read it.

MR. KINDRED: Did the presiding officer simply rule out those who wanted to discuss it negatively?

ANDREW FRAME: They would not allow anyone on the program who was not in favor of the bill.

CHAIRMAN GLASS: What significance has the fact that at the next annual meeting of the American Bankers Association held at Detroit in 1912, the Association did not reiterate its endorsement of the plan of the National Monetary Commission, known as the Aldrich scheme?

ANDREW FRAME: It did not reiterate the endorsement for the simple fact that the backers of the Aldrich Plan knew that the Association would not endorse it. We were ready for them, but they did not bring it up.

Andrew Frame exposed the collusion which in 1911 procured an endorsement of the Aldrich Plan from the American Bankers Association but which in 1912 did not even dare to repeat its endorsement, for fear of an honest and open discussion of the merits of the plan.

Chairman Glass then called as witness one of the ten most powerful bankers in the United States, George Blumenthal, partner of the international banking house of Lazard Freres and brother-in-law of Eugene Meyer, Jr.. Carter Glass effusively welcomed Blumenthal, stating that "Senator O'Gorman of New York was kind enough to suggest your name to us." A year later, O'Gorman prevented a Senate Committee from asking his master, Paul Warburg, any embarrassing questions before approving his nomination as the first Governor of the Federal Reserve Board.

George Blumenthal stated, "Since 1893 my firm of Lazard Freres has been foremost in importations and exportations of gold and has thereby come into contact with everybody who had anything to do with it."

Congressman Taylor asked, "Have you a statement there as to the part you have had in the importation of gold into the United States?" Taylor asked this because the Panic of 1893 is known to economists as a classic example of a money panic caused by gold movements.

"No," replied George Blumenthal, "I have nothing at all on that, because it is not bearing on the question."

A banker from Philadelphia, Leslie Shaw, dissented with other witnesses at these hearings, criticizing the much vaunted "decentralization" of the System. He said:

Under the Aldrich Plan the bankers are to have local associations and district associations, and when you have a local organization, the centered control is assured. Suppose we have a local association in Indianapolis; can you not name the three men who will dominate that association? And then can you not name the one man everywhere else. When you have hooked the banks together, they can have the biggest influence of anything in this country, with the exception of the newspapers.

To promote the Democratic currency bill, Carter Glass made public the sorry record of the Republican efforts of Senator Aldrich's National Monetary Commission. His House Report in 1913 said:

Senator MacVeagh fixes the cost of the National Monetary Commission to May 12, 1911 at $207,130. They have since spent another hundred thousand dollars of the taxpayer's money. The work done at such cost cannot be ignored, but, having examined the extensive literature published by the Commission, the Banking and Currency Committee finds little that bears upon the present state of the credit market of the United States. We object to the Aldrich Bill on the following points:

Its entire lack of adequate government or public control of the banking mechanism it sets up.

Its tendency to throw voting control into the hands of the large banks of the system.

The extreme danger of inflation of currency inherent in the system.

The insincerity of the bond-funding plan provided for by the measure, there being a barefaced pretense that this system was to cost the government nothing.

The dangerous monopolistic aspects of the bill.

Our Committee at the outset of its work was met by a well-defined sentiment in favor of a central bank which was the manifest outgrowth of the work that had been done by the National Monetary Commission.

Glass's denunciation of the Aldrich Bill as a central bank plan ignored the fact that his own Federal Reserve Act would fulfill all the functions of a central bank. Its stock would be owned by private stockholders who could use the credit of the Government for their own profit; it would have control of the nation's money and credit resources; and it would be a bank of issue which would finance the government by "mobilizing" credit in time of war. In "The Rationale of Central Banking," Vera C. Smith (Committee for Monetary Research and Education, June, 1981) writes:

The primary definition of a central bank is a banking system in which a single bank has either a complete or residuary monopoly in the note issue. A central bank is not a natural product of banking development. It is imposed from outside or comes into being as the result of Government favors.

Thus a central bank attains its commanding position from its government granted monopoly of the note issue. This is the key to its power. Also, the act of establishing a central bank has a direct inflationary impact because of the fractional reserve system, which allows the creation of book-entry loans, and thereby money, a number of times [greater than] the actual "money" which the bank has in its deposits or reserves.

The Aldrich Plan never came to a vote in Congress, because the Republicans lost control of the House in 1910, and subsequently lost the Senate and the Presidency in 1912.

End the Fed Forums

A great website! Join up and participate in the discussions! I've joined the forums and you can find me by the same name I post here under: Mister Goldbug.

End the Fed Forums

Great Red Dragon

I'm adding yet another website called Great Red Dragon to our catalog of Sites We Like.

Taken from the About the Site page:

With fore-knowledge, we can defend ourselves against those whose misguided self-interest is to dominate and destroy others in futile attempts to satisfy their egos. I prefer to call them "psychopaths with attaches," and they do more damage, more injury, to more people, than "psychopaths with guns." These "psychopaths" have had one goal in mind for over 300 years, and that is to "own the earth in fee simple." Call it whatever you want; Globalization, Authoritarian Free Enterprise, or New World Order. It matters not. But age-old patterns are now showing up in amazing coincidences, and with the use of computers and the Internet, this may just be the final end-game for us against the "psychopaths."

The goal of this web site is to assist you in recognizing age-old patterns that you might not have seen before, and correlate them with what you see occuring now. Then you might have a chance to defend yourself, your family, and others that are important to you.

Please note that Edward Ulysses Cate is a pen name under which I chose to make this information available on the Internet. So don't go bothering people who happen to be named Ed U. Cate. I sincerely hope this web site will accomplish it's only goal, which is to "EdUCate." The message is important, not the messenger.

This web site is purely a singular and self-funded effort. If you feel that you derived benefits from my efforts and wish to help keep this site available for others, then simply tell others you respect about the "GreatRedDragon.com" site. Any email correspondence will be kept strictly confidential and personal.

This site IS NOT associated with any political, religious, state, or ethnic group or organization. I have NO affiliations with any group or interest, and have no personal agenda, other than to make this information available, free of charge, with the sincere hope that our children will at least be able to enjoy planet Earth as we have, and that we (or they) do not make our world worst in our attempts to make it "better."

Personally, I'm of the opinion that 99% of any group of people, at any place in our world, just wish to make the best living they can, raise children (if desired) and enjoy their lives the best they can without directly hurting or interfering with anyone else. I also feel that each member of this same group generally gets off (that is, feels good inside) when helping another person.

But there's a 1% (or less) group of folks that must have some sort of genetic or mental defect, because they get off making others miserable. If they didn't, why would they work so hard at it? Do we not call such actions "evil?" We all are aware of someone like that, right? We try to stay away from them, and try to keep them from adversely affecting us. And usually they're relatively harmless because they are NOT normally financially rewarded for their not-so-good behavior. They're usually out-numbered and identifiable.

In fact, a 2005 book has been published about this very subject. Martha Stout, PhD, wrote "The Sociopath Next Door." The subtitle is "The Ruthless Versus The Rest of Us." The book's cover states "1 in 25 ordinary Americans secretly has no conscience and can do anything at all without feeling guilty. Who is the devil you know?" Jonathan Kellerman states, on the cover, that this book is "A chillingly accurate portrayal of evil -- the decent person's guide to indecency."
Another book published earlier about this subject is by Paul Babiak and Robert D. Hare, who have written "Snakes in Suits." The subtitle is "When Psychopaths Go to Work." A Publisher's Weekly review states "Psychopaths are described as incapable of empathy, guilt, or loyalty to anyone but themselves; still, spotting a psychopath isn't easy. Babiak, an industrial and organizational psychologist, and Hare (Without Conscience), creator of the standard tool for diagnosing psychopathology, present a study of the psychopath in the corporate landscape...."

More resources on conscience.

Now consider the consequences if such people were financed on a global scale and generally able to conceal their identity. How much more "evil" work, damage, or influence, could they accomplish? And what if they were financed on such a scale that enabled them to pay many others to join them in their mis-deeds, on a ever-growing basis? Not a pleasant thought! But I'm certain that this is how economic, military and other types of problems flare up in our world.

Consider that one percent of just the American population is about 3 million people. Whoa, that's certainly not a small number. So it's up to the 99% in every group of people to keep those one percents of their own group from dividing all of us into smaller groups, messing up our lives, and threatening the future of our children and our planet.

You ever wonder what could happen if 99% of white folks got together with 99% of black folks, combined with 99% of other races, and challenged all those 1%'ers trying to divide and control us? If you can picture that, then you know why those one-percents work so hard at keeping us mentally (and physically) separated into smaller, more managable and controllable groups.

Thus the goal of this site is to show that even over 115 years ago, such evil economic influences were at work and were even recognized by some. How could Woolfolk have even known that as he published his book in 1889, that a Hitler was being born? I'm sure he didn't, but he knew that something evil was taking place, had a good idea of where it was coming from and dared to write about it.

We have the luxury of knowing exactly what took place after this book was published in 1889. So history can be our filter, helping to separate the author's good ideas and principles to keep, and allowing us to recognize and discard erroneous ones.

Do we not progress by separating facts from misunderstandings and trying not to make the same mistakes again and again?

© 2006 by Edward Ulysses Cate

The Jekyll Island Hunt Club

Be warned, reader. Long post.

Before I get started, I'd like to explain that Eustace Mullins wrote the first book on the Federal Reserve, so anyone who wrote a book on the Federal Reserve afterwards had to rely on his penetrating exposé.

Something I'd like to clear out the way before I move any further into this are a few things that Ed Winston has stated on his website. Btw, this post has not been in any way created to defend Peter Joseph, as previously expressed in another post. Peter Joseph made two different documentaries. Zeitgeist and Zeitgeist: Addendum. Ed has dedicated his website to debunking Peter Joseph and all that he promotes. However, in Joseph's second documentary, the uninitiated researcher is led into the slaughterhouse like a lamb by presenting the Venus Project as a solution, and since Joseph is a self-professed technocrat, he feels that the credibility of Technocracy, Inc has been compromised by its association with Peter Joseph. We comiserate with you, Ed.

Ed makes a very revealing statement in his introduction to debunking Zeitgeist: Addendum. Relieving himself of the duty of addressing the Venus Project brought up by Joseph, Ed makes this very insightful admonition. Pay attention class.

Firstly, untried economic and political ideas are essentially opinions and anyone, from any side, can debunk anything else from any opposing side -- so it's a waste of time; you can find a million free marketers, libertarians, anarcho-capitalists, and so forth that will disprove technocracy with what they believe to be evidence -- but when it comes to politics and economics, it's really a severe waste of time to debunk anything.

Yes, Ed, it really is a severe waste of time to debunk anything when it comes to politics and economics. Too bad you didn't think of this before you created your website. You could've saved yourself a lot of time and effort. You seem to have forgotten, though, that's what arguing conspiracy theories are all about: politicking. Do try and let Pat of Screw Loose Change be aware of this most insightful wisdom.

I'll give Joseph the benefit of the doubt, though I shouldn't. Documentaries like these are produced for a wide target audience range. Keeping this in mind, the filmmakers have to think about timing and pace so that the audience doesn't lose interest in the subject matter.

In debunking Zeitgeist, Ed makes the following argument:

The film claims it was "bankers, not lawmakers", when the first two, or at least the first, would be considered as such. It makes perfect sense as well, considering as I already talked about, the whole idea was Nelson Aldrich's and he wanted help drafting a plan. That is, the help of people who knew about Banks and the help of the Treasury Department to set up the plan for a central bank in the US.

Mr. Winston inaccurately argues that "the whole idea was Nelson Aldrich's" implying that Aldrich wrote the Federal Reserve Act. Ironic to note, he cites for this argument, the Griffin book. Griffin acknowledges the Federal Reserve Act was written by Paul Warburg. In fact, former 2008 presidential candidate Congressman Ron Paul recommends the book in a reading list in his book The Revolution: A Manifesto.

Mr. Winston continues:

The whole mystery of it can be attributed to Forbes magazine, who published an article several years later of a bunch of bankers skipping town in the middle of the night to some island -- sounds more like some horrible John Grisham rip-off, rather than what actually happened. What's next? Are you going to tell me they were speeding away from Jekyll Island in a speed boat with monocles, bags of money with dollar signs, and their canes propped up against stacks of property deeds while they stroke their mustaches mincingly?

Addressing the issue of the secrecy of the Jekyll Island meeting, Mr. Winston argues that it couldn't have been too secretive because we know who the atttendants were and then he lists them. He forgets to mention, or perhaps doesn't care to mention, that the list he gives was compiled from the research Eustace Mullins did in 1948 when he was researching the topic for his book. The identities of the meeting weren't disclosed until his book was published.

Another glaring mistake Winston makes is attributing "the whole mystery" to an article published by Forbes magazine. Forbes Magazine wasn't established until September 15th, 1917. The article Mr. Winston is referring to was published in Current Opinion in December of 1916 on page 382, almost ten months earlier!!!

Let's look at what the first chapter of Mullins' book has to say about the Jekyll Island meeting. It follows in bold.

On the night of November 22, 1910, a group of newspaper reporters stood disconsolately in the railway station at Hoboken, New Jersey. They had just watched a delegation of the nation's leading financiers leave the station on a secret mission. It would be years before they discovered what that mission was, and even then they would not understand that the history of the United States underwent a drastic change after that night in Hoboken.

The delegation had left in a sealed railway car, with blinds drawn, for an undisclosed destination. They were led by Senator Nelson Aldrich, head of the National Monetary Commission. President Theodore Roosevelt had signed into law the bill creating the National Monetary Commission in 1908, after the tragic Panic of 1907 had resulted in a public outcry that the nation's monetary system be stabilized. Aldrich had led the members of the Commission on a two-year tour of Europe, spending some three hundred thousand dollars of public money. He had not yet made a report on the results of this trip, nor had he offered any plan for banking reform.

Accompanying Senator Aldrich at the Hoboken station were his private secretary, Shelton; A. Piatt Andrew, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, and Special Assistant of the National Monetary Commission; Frank Vanderlip, president of the National City Bank of New York; Henry P. Davison, senior partner of J.P. Morgan Company, and generally regarded as Morgan's personal emissary; and Charles D. Norton, president of the Morgan-dominated First National Bank of New York. Joining the group just before the train left the station were Benjamin Strong, also known as a lieutenant of J.P. Morgan; and Paul Warburg, a recent immigrant from Germany who had joined the banking house of Kuhn, Loeb

Six years later, a financial writer named Bertie Charles Forbes who later founded the Forbes Magazine wrote:

Picture a party of the nation's greatest bankers stealing out of New York on a private railroad car under cover of darkness, stealthily hieing hundred of miles South, embarking on a mysterious launch, sneaking onto an island deserted by all but a few servants, living there a full week under such rigid secrecy that the names of not one of them was once mentioned lest the servants learn the identity and disclose to the world this strangest, most secret expedition in the history of American finance. I am not romancing; I am giving to the world, for the first time, the real story of how the famous Aldrich currency report, the foundation of our new currency system, was written . . . .

The utmost secrecy was enjoined upon all. The public must not glean a hint of what was to be done. Senator Aldrich notified each one to go quietly into a private car of which the railroad had received orders to draw up on an unfrequented platform. Off the party set. New York's ubiquitous reporters had been foiled . . . Nelson (Aldrich) had confided to Henry, Frank, Paul and Piatt that he was to keep them locked up at Jekyll Island, out of the rest of the world, until they had evolved and compiled a scientific currency system for the United States, the real birth of the present Federal Reserve System, the plan done on Jekyll Island in the conference with Paul, Frank and Henry . . . . Warburg is the link that binds the Aldrich system and the present system together. He more than any one man has made the system possible as a working reality.

The official biography of Senator Nelson Aldrich states:

In the autumn of 1910, six men went out to shoot ducks, Aldrich, his secretary Shelton, Andrews, Davison, Vanderlip and Warburg. Reporters were waiting at the Brunswick (Georgia) station. Mr. Davison went out and talked to them. The reporters dispersed and the secret of the strange journey was not divulged. Mr. Aldrich asked him how he had managed it and he did not volunteer the information.

Davison had an excellent reputation as the person who could conciliate warring factions, a role he had performed for J.P. Morgan during the settling of the Money Panic of 1907. Another Morgan partner, T.W. Lamont, says: "Henry P. Davison served as arbitrator of the Jekyll Island expedition."

I'm interrupting here because it's important to cite the quote about Davison: T.W. Lamont, Henry P. Davison, Harper, 1933. Continue on.

From these references, it is possible to piece together the story. Aldrich's private car, which had left Hoboken station with its shades drawn, had taken the financiers to Jekyll Island, Georgia. Some years earlier, a very exclusive group of millionaires, led by J.P. Morgan, had purchased the island as a winter retreat. They called themselves the Jekyll Island Hunt Club, and at first the island was used only for hunting expeditions until the millionaires realized that its pleasant climate offered a warm retreat from the rigors of winters in New York, and began to build splendid mansions which they called "cottages" for their families' winter vacations. The club building itself, being quite isolated, was sometimes in demand for stag parties and other pursuits unrelated to hunting. On such occasions, the club members who were not invited to these specific outings were asked not to appear there for a certain number of days. Before Nelson Aldrich's party had left New York, the club's members had been notified that the club would be occupied for the next two weeks.

The Jekyll Island Club was chosen as the place to draft the plan for control of the money and credit of the people of the United States, not only because of its isolation, but also because it was the private preserve of the people who were drafting the plan. The New York Times later noted, on May 3, 1931, in commenting on the death of George F. Baker, one of J.P. Morgan's closest associates, that "Jekyll Island Club has lost one of its most distinguished members. One-sixth of the total wealth of the world was represented by the members of the Jekyll Island Club." Membership was by inheritance only.

The Aldrich group had no interest in hunting. Jekyll Island was chosen for the site of the preparation of the central bank because it offered complete privacy, and because there was not a journalist within fifty miles. Such was the need for secrecy that the members of the party agreed, before arriving at Jekyll Island, that no last names would be used at any time during their two week stay. The group later referred to themselves as the "First Name Club", as the last names of Warburg, Strong, Vanderlip and the others were prohibited during their stay. The customary attendants had been given two week vacations from the club, and new servants brought in from the mainland for this occasion who did not know the names of any of those present. Even if they had been interrogated after the Aldrich party went back to New York, they could not have given the names. This arrangement proved to be so satisfactory that the members, limited to those who had actually been present at Jekyll Island, later had a number of informal get-togethers in New York.

Why all this secrecy? Why this thousand mile trip in a closed railway car to a remote hunting club? Ostensibly, it was to carry out a program of public service, to prepare banking reform which would be a boon to the people of the United States, which had been ordered by the National Monetary Commission. The participants were no strangers to public benefactions. Usually, their names were inscribed on brass plaques, or on the exteriors of buildings which they had donated. This was not the procedure which they followed at Jekyll Island. No brass plaque was ever erected to mark the selfless actions of those who met at their private hunt club in 1910 to improve the lot of every citizen of the United States.

In fact, no benefaction took place at Jekyll Island. The Aldrich group journeyed there in private to write the banking and currency legislation which the National Monetary Commission had been ordered to prepare in public. At stake was the future control of the money and credit of the United States. If any genuine monetary reform had been prepared and presented to Congress, it would have ended the power of the elitist one world money creators. Jekyll Island ensured that a central bank would be established in the United States which would give these bankers everything they had always wanted.

As the most technically proficient of those present, Paul Warburg was charged with doing most of the drafting of the plan. His work would then be discussed and gone over by the rest of the group. Senator Nelson Aldrich was there to see that the completed plan would come out in a form which he could get passed by Congress, and the other bankers were there to include whatever details would be needed to be certain that they got everything they wanted, in a finished draft composed during a onetime stay. After they returned to New York, there could be no second get together to rework their plan. They could not hope to obtain such secrecy for their work on a second journey.

The Jekyll Island group remained at the club for nine days, working furiously to complete their task. Despite the common interests of those present, the work did not proceed without friction. Senator Aldrich, always a domineering person, considered himself the chosen leader of the group and could not help ordering everyone else about. Aldrich also felt somewhat out of place as the only member who was not a professional banker. He had had substantial banking interests throughout his career, but only as a person who profited from his ownership of bank stock. He knew little about the technical aspects of financial operations. His opposite number, Paul Warburg believed that every question raised by the group demanded, not merely an answer, but a lecture. He rarely lost an opportunity to give the members a long discourse designed to impress them with the extent of his knowledge of banking. This was resented by the others, and often drew barbed remarks from Aldrich. The natural diplomacy of Henry P. Davison proved to be the catalyst which kept them at their work. Warburg's thick alien accent grated on them, and constantly reminded them that they had to accept his presence if a central bank plan was to be devised which would guarantee them their future profits. Warburg made little effort to smooth over their prejudices, and contested them on every possible occasion on technical banking questions, which he considered his private preserve.

Another citation appears in his book. "In all conspiracies there must be great secrecy." [Clarendon, Hist. Reb. 1647]

The "monetary reform" plan prepared at Jekyll Island was to be presented to Congress as the completed work of the National Monetary Commission. It was imperative that the real authors of the bill remain hidden. So great was popular resentment against bankers since the Panic of 1907 that no Congressman would dare to vote for a bill bearing the Wall Street taint, no matter who had contributed to his campaign expenses. The Jekyll Island plan was a central bank plan, and in this country there was a long tradition of struggle against inflicting a central bank on the American people.

It had begun with Thomas Jefferson's fight against Alexander Hamilton's scheme for the First Bank of the United States, backed by James Rothschild. It had continued with President Andrew Jackson's successful war against Alexander Hamilton's scheme for the Second Bank of the United States, in which Nicholas Biddle was acting as the agent for James Rothschild of Paris.

The result of that struggle was the creation of the Independent Sub-Treasury System, which supposedly had served to keep the funds of the United States out of the hands of the financiers. A study of the panics of 1873, 1893, and 1907 indicates that these panics were the result of the international bankers' operations in London. The public was demanding in 1908 that Congress enact legislation to prevent the recurrence of artificially induced money panics. Such monetary reform now seemed inevitable. It was to head off and control such reform that the National Monetary Commission had been set up with Nelson Aldrich at its head, since he was majority leader of the Senate.

The main problem, as Paul Warburg informed his colleagues, was to avoid the name "Central Bank". For that reason, he had decided upon the designation of "Federal Reserve System". This would deceive the people into thinking it was not a central bank. However, the Jekyll Island plan would be a central bank plan, fulfilling the main functions of a central bank; it would be owned by private individuals who would profit from ownership of shares. As a bank of issue, it would control the nation's money and credit.

In the chapter on Jekyll Island in his biography of Aldrich, Stephenson writes of the conference:

How was the Reserve Bank to be controlled? It must be controlled by Congress. The government was to be represented in the board of directors, it was to have full knowledge of all the Bank's affairs, but a majority of the directors were to be chosen, directly or indirectly, by the banks of the association.

Thus the proposed Federal Reserve Bank was to be "controlled by Congress" and answerable to the government, but the majority of the directors were to be chosen, "directly or indirectly" by the banks of the association. In the final refinement of Warburg's plan, the Federal Reserve Board of Governors would be appointed by the President of the United States, but the real work of the Board would be controlled by a Federal Advisory Council, meeting with the Governors. The Council would be chosen by the directors of the twelve Federal Reserve Banks, and would remain unknown to the public.

The next consideration was to conceal the fact that the proposed "Federal Reserve System" would be dominated by the masters of the New York money market. The Congressmen from the South and the West could not survive if they voted for a Wall Street plan. Farmers and small businessmen in those areas had suffered most from the money panics. There had been great popular resentment against the Eastern bankers, which during the nineteenth century became a political movement known as "populism". The private papers of Nicholas Biddle, not released until more than a century after his death, show that quite early on the Eastern bankers were fully aware of the widespread public opposition to them.
Paul Warburg advanced at Jekyll Island the primary deception which would prevent the citizens from recognizing that his plan set up a central bank. This was the regional reserve system. He proposed a system of four (later twelve) branch reserve banks located in different sections of the country. Few people outside the banking world would realize that the existing concentration of the nation's money and credit structure in New York made the proposal of a regional reserve system a delusion.

Another proposal advanced by Paul Warburg at Jekyll Island was the manner of selection of administrators for the proposed regional reserve system. Senator Nelson Aldrich had insisted that the officials should be appointive, not elected, and that Congress should have no role in their selection. His Capitol Hill experience had taught him that congressional opinion would often be inimical to the Wall Street interests, as Congressmen from the West and South might wish to demonstrate to their constituents that they were protecting them against the Eastern bankers.

Warburg responded that the administrators of the proposed central banks should be subject to executive approval by the President. This patent removal of the system from Congressional control meant that the Federal Reserve proposal was unconstitutional from its inception, because the Federal Reserve System was to be a bank of issue. Article 1, Sec. 8, Par. 5 of the Constitution expressly charges Congress with "the power to coin money and regulate the value thereof.". Warburg's plan would deprive Congress of its sovereignty, and the systems of checks and balances of power set up by Thomas Jefferson in the Constitution would now be destroyed. Administrators of the proposed system would control the nation's money and credit, and would themselves be approved by the executive department of the government. The judicial department (the Supreme Court, etc.) was already virtually controlled by the executive department through presidential appointment to the bench.

Paul Warburg later wrote a massive exposition of his plan, "The Federal Reserve System, Its Origin and Growth" of some 1750 pages, but the name "Jekyll Island" appears nowhere in this text. He does state (vol. 1, p. 58):

But then the conference closed, after a week of earnest deliberation, the rough draft of what later became the Aldrich Bill had been agreed upon, and a plan had been outlined which provided for a "National Reserve Association", meaning a central reserve organization with an elastic note issue based on gold and commercial paper.

On page 60, Warburg writes,

The results of the conference were entirely confidential. Even the fact there had been a meeting was not permitted to become public.

He adds in a footnote,

Though eighteen [sic] years have since gone by, I do not feel free to give a description of this most interesting conference concerning which Senator Aldrich pledged all participants to secrecy.

B.C. Forbes' revelation of the secret expedition to Jekyll Island, had had surprisingly little impact. It did not appear in print until two years after the Federal Reserve Act had been passed by Congress, hence it was never read during the period when it could have had an effect -- that is, during the Congressional debate on the bill. Forbes' story was also dismissed, by those "in the know," as preposterous and a mere invention. Stephenson mentions this on page 484 of his book about Aldrich:

This curious episode of Jekyll Island has been generally regarded as a myth. B.C. Forbes got some information from one of the reporters. It told in vague outline the Jekyll Island story, but made no impression and was generally regarded as a mere yarn.

The coverup of the Jekyll Island conference proceeded along two lines, both of which were successful. The first, as Stephenson mentions, was to dismiss the entire story as a romantic concoction which never actually took place. Although there were brief references to Jekyll Island in later books concerning the Federal Reserve System, these also attracted little public attention. As we have noted, Warburg's massive and supposedly definite work on the Federal Reserve System does not mention Jekyll Island at all, although he does admit that a conference took place. In none of his voluminous speeches or writings do the words "Jekyll Island" appear, with a single notable exception. He agreed to Professor Stephenson's request that he prepare a brief statement for the Aldrich biography. This appears on page 485 as part of "The Warburg Memorandum". In this excerpt, Warburg writes, "The matter of a uniform discount rate was discussed and settled at Jekyll Island."

Another member of the "First Name Club" was less reticent. Frank Vanderlip later published a few brief references to the conference. In the Saturday Evening Post, February 9, 1935, p. 25, Vanderlip wrote:

Despite my views about the value to society of greater publicity for the affairs of corporations, there was an occasion near the close of 1910, when I was as secretive, indeed, as furtive, as any conspirator. . . . Since it would have been fatal to Senator Aldrich's plan to have it known that he was calling on anybody from Wall Street to help him in preparing his bill, precautions were taken that would have delighted the heart of James Stillman (a colorful and secretive banker who was President of the National City Bank during the Spanish-American War, and who was thought to have been involved in getting us into that war) . . . I do not feel it is any exaggeration to speak of our secret expedition to Jekyll Island as the occasion of the actual conception of what eventually became the Federal Reserve System.

In a Travel feature in The Washington Post, March 27, 1983, "Follow The Rich to Jekyll Island", Roy Hoopes writes:

In 1910, when Aldrich and four financial experts wanted a place to meet in secret to reform the country's banking system, they faked a hunting trip to Jekyll [Island] and for 10 days holed up in the Clubhouse, where they made plans for what eventually would become the Federal Reserve Bank.

Vanderlip later wrote in his autobiography, "From Farmboy to Financier":

Our secret expedition to Jekyll Island was the occasion of the actual conception of what eventually became the Federal Reserve System. The essential points of the Aldrich Plan were all contained in the Federal Reserve Act as it was passed.

Professor E.R.A. Seligman, a member of the international banking family of J. & W. Seligman, and head of the Department of Economics at Columbia University, wrote in an essay published by the Academy of Political Science, Proceedings, v. 4, No. 4, p. 387-90:

It is known to a very few how great is the indebtedness of the United States to Mr. Warburg. For it may be said without fear of contradiction that in its fundamental features the Federal Reserve Act is the work of Mr. Warburg more than any other man in the country. The existence of a Federal Reserve Board creates, in everything but in name, a real central bank. In the two fundamentals of command of reserves and of a discount policy, the Federal Reserve Act has frankly accepted the principle of the Aldrich Bill, and these principles, as has been stated, were the creation of Mr. Warburg and Mr. Warburg alone.

It must not be forgotten that Mr. Warburg had a practical object in view. In formulating his plans and in advancing in them slightly varying suggestions from time to time, it was incumbent on him to remember that the education of the country must be gradual and that a large part of the task was to break down prejudices and remove suspicion. His plans therefore contained all sorts of elaborate suggestions designed to guard the public against fancied dangers and to persuade the country that the general scheme was at all practicable. It was the hope of Mr. Warburg that with the lapse of time it might be possible to eliminate from the law a few clauses which were inserted largely at his suggestion for educational purposes.

Now that the public debt of the United States has passed a trillion dollars, we may indeed admit "how great is the indebtedness of the United States to Mr. Warburg." At the time he wrote the Federal Reserve Act, the public debt was almost nonexistent.

Professor Seligman points out Warburg's remarkable prescience that the real task of the members of the Jekyll Island conference was to prepare a banking plan which would gradually "educate the country" and "break down prejudices and remove suspicion". The campaign to enact the plan into law succeeded in doing just that.

Winston is wrong in thinking the Jekyll Island Conference was common knowledge, but in the documentary Joseph didn't do too much to explain this. As documented in the first chapter of Mullins's book, Warburg named the location of the conference in "The Warburg Memorandum" which appeared in Stephenson's biography on Aldrich. Warburg even admitted in his own book on the Federal Reserve that the fact that there had been a meeting taken place to conceptualize what would later become the Fed had been kept from reaching the public. Critics of this conspiracy will argue that the press itself had talked about Jekyll as evidenced in Mullins's book, but as Mullins has argued the mention of Jekyll Island was too infrequent to have had any effect.

Addressing Zeitgeist. By Way of Deception, Thou Shalt Do War

In preparing my response to the counterargument made by Edward L Winston and Pat @ Screw Loose Change about the Federal Reserve System, I wanted to clarify my position on the documentary Zeitgeist that is the subject of the debunking.

Zeitgeist, as a source for information, is not to be trusted. Peter Joseph is a fraud who has been attacked even by Alex Jones, a frequent victim himself of attacks by people like the blog authors of SLC.

My biggest gripe with Joseph, aside from him being the vassal for the Venus Project, an anarcho-communist program which delivers the world into the hands of the Illuminati by advertising them as the saviors of the world, is the source he uses for his argument against the Federal Reserve. The Fed whose currency ironically funded the production of this documentary.

Be careful, debunkers, I didn't say the Federal Reserve financed the film. I said its currency did.

In his source list, Peter Joseph used for his film a rip-off book written by establishment journalist William Greider who wrote for Rolling Stone. The book is called Secrets of the Temple: How the Federal Reserve Runs the Country.

In an interview with Tom Valentine, Mullins discredited Greider as a source to be trusted. Mullins revealed:

when Simon and Schuster put out a rip-off of my book called Secrets of the Temple: The Federal Reserve, they even stole my title. And they sold 300,000 of 'em. And Forbes magazine reviewed it and said, "This book has no secrets." William Greider, who was a Washington editor of Rolling Stone, an establishment journalist, actually wrote this book. And he "pooh-poohed" any conspiratorial notion that there had ever been a meeting at all.

Another citation in Joseph's sources is another book on the Fed, but strangely not the one Mullins wrote. This one is The Creature From Jekyll Island written by child actor G. Edward Griffin. Mullins has argued that as punishment for drawing back the curtain that reveals who the conspirators are, the World Order financed countless plagiarizations. Coming from Mullins, this isn't an extreme argument. He was followed relentlessly by the FBI -- spied on -- for 33 years. Mullins documents this in his book A Writ for Martys. The cross dressing homosexual, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, revealed in Mullins' book, ordered the government to abduct Mullins and place him in a mental ward where he would remain in perpetuity. Thankfully, their terror campaign launched against this aging patriot never achieved success.

Peter Joseph is a disinformation agent. There's no other conclusion to draw. If he was honest he wouldn't have mucked up the Federal Reserve argument by associating it with ecumenicalism and humanism. He provides enough truth to lure the gullible in and then snatches the observer away into the World Order. And what truths he does provide are made in very weak arguments.

Always remember the Motto of the Mossad: By Way of Deception, Thou Shalt Do War.

Search Querries Yield Attempts to Debunk the Federal Reserve Conspiracy

Everyone by now who has read this blog faithfully knows I have a fascination with the Federal Reserve System and its relative topics (i.e. 16th Amendment, tax law, IRS, the Constitution, Ron Paul, Eustace Mullins, etc). Because I am so fascinated with the topic and have clearly voiced my informed opinions about the Federal Reserve Conspiracy, I am also well aware there are those who try to debunk the claims. These people fail miserably. Their arguments are laughable.

Recently I've been paying attention to Screw Loose Change: The Blogspot. The authors of this blogspot pride themselves in debunking the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories, so I wanted to know if they covered anything beyond that. My field of interest is, of course, the Federal Reserve System. I did a search: "Eustace Mullins" "Federal Reserve" "Ron Paul". Not surprisingly, the search querries yielded the typical tired warn out arguments that keep popping up like the puppets in a game of Whack-A-Mole! Once you knock down one of their arguments, another one pops up. When this fails them, they resort to name calling and deliberate misrepresentation.

I don't endorse her because she's an excuser of the crimes committed by the Bush Administration, but before you talk to these types of people consider some of the valuable lessons in Ann Coulter's instruction manuel (How to Talk to A Liberal (If You Must). ) and apply your arguments accordingly. Her one redeeming feature is her defense of Senator McCarthy, possibly the greatest Republican Senator that ever lived.

The "Federal Reserve" search querry yielded Pat's recommendation to read Conspiracy Science's Dissertation on why critics of the Federal Reserve are wrong. The kind of flawed logic-cum-flawed arguments is prevelent in the Anti-American Party.

I'm going to catch a lot of hellfire for the term "Anti-American" but when I scroll down to read another post related to the search querry I find the following:

By no means do all believers in either the “Illuminati” or demonized “bankers” hate Jews. Many do not. Some are even Jews themselves. However, these ideologies are historically intertwined with and closely parallel classic Jew-hating myths. For example, some anti-Illuminists have claimed that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a notorious anti-Jewish forgery, is entirely true and accurate if you just substitute “Illuminati” for “Jews.” And a lot of the rhetoric we’ve been hearing in the alternative media about the Federal Reserve System is derived from writings such as Secrets of the Federal Reserve by Eustace Mullins, a notorious Jew-hater who also believed that Jews ritually kill Christian children. Speaking of ritual murder, there’s also the “Satanic Ritual Abuse” scare, which often goes hand-in-hand with anti-Illuminism.

I emboldened parts of the quote shown above because I wanted to ask a few questions. 1) If the Protocols of the Elders of Zion are a forgery, then what happened to the original copy that the plagiarized copy is committing forgery against? and 2) does calling Eustace Mullins a Jew-hater constitute character assassination since the term carries a deliberately negative connotation? Because if so then I think Mullins should bring a libel suit against this NYCActivist. He's brought lawsuits against the United States government so many times he's probably scheduled to appear in court tomorrow.

My final comment is this: the opposite of anti-Illuminism is pro-Illuminism. The use of this word here insinuates we should be supporting the Illuminati, a traitorous suggestion to anyone who believes in America and the Constitution. And yes, there have been Jews who believe in the Illuminati. Myron Fagan, anyone? Fagan was Eustace's earliest supporter.

Benjamin Freedman is also another Jew -- sorry Ben -- "former Jew" as Freedman referred to himself as. Freedman and Mullins shared a really close friendship. Mullins even lived with Freedman. Guido Roeder is also another Jew who used his own money to promote the work of Eustace Mullins.

I'll be debunking the Federal Reserve "debunkers" in another post. Their arguments are too ridiculous to patronize here.

Happy Birthday Eustace!

Born March 9th 1923, Eustace Mullins is 86 today!!

Happy Birthday Eustace!!!

New York Times Falsifies History of Federal Reserve

http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/new_york_times_falsifies_169.html

By Michael Collins Piper

The New York Times published a flat-out untruth on Feb. 7 about the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. And the untruth came from the pen of a distinguished American academic who is author of many much-touted works of history.

In a commentary in the Times, entitled “The Value of Other People’s Money,” Dr. Melvin I. Urofsky, a professor at Virginia Commonwealth University, reflected on the origins of the congressional measure that created the Federal Reserve System. He said that the measure “allowed Congress to take away banks’ control over currency.” In fact, nothing could be further from the truth.

Dr. Urofsky was dead wrong. The New York Times was guilty of perpetrating a falsehood, something which should come as no surprise, considering the fact that The New York Times—which fancies itself America’s newspaper of record—has long been the daily media voice in the United States of the international banking dynasties that control the American money system through their domination of the Fed.

The truth about the nature of the Fed is no secret to Americans who have access to independent newspapers such as AMERICAN FREE PRESS, historical journals such as THE BARNES REVIEW and radio outlets such as Republic Broadcasting (which can be found on the Internet at republicbroadcasting.org).

In fact, as far back as the 1920s, the great American industrialist Henry Ford was warning Americans of the venal nature of the Fed and the plutocratic money masters who created the Fed and who controlled it then as they do today. Ford wrote:

What the people of the United States do not understand and never have understood is that while the Federal Reserve Act was governmental, the whole Federal Reserve System is private. It is an officially created private banking system.

Examine the first 1,000 people you meet on the street, and 999 of them will tell you that the Federal Reserve System is a device whereby the United States government went into the banking business for the benefit of the people. They have an idea that like the Post Office and the Custom House the Federal Reserve is part of the government’s official machinery. . . .

Take up the standard encyclopedias and while you will find no misstatements of fact in them, you will find no statement that the Federal Reserve System is a private banking system; the impression carried away by the lay reader is that it is a part of the government.

The Federal Reserve System is a system of private banks, the creation of a banking aristocracy within an already existing system of aristocracy, whereby a great proportion of banking independence was lost, and whereby it was made possible for speculative financiers to centralize great sums of money for their own purposes, beneficial [to the people of the United States] or not.

In addition, while there has been much written on the Federal Reserve and the reality of what it constitutes— a privately owned and privately controlled money monopoly in the hands of banking institutions—the fact that the Rothschild family of Europe was, ultimately, the primary force behind the establishment of the system on American soil, is not something that is fully understood.

For example, because there were no people named “Rothschild” at the famous meeting off the coast of Georgia at Jekyll Island where the framework for the Federal Reserve was put forth and where the planning for the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 established the Fed, there are those who would divorce the Rothschild family altogether from the circumstances. However, the fine hand of Rothschild was indeed on the scene, represented by Paul Warburg of the New York-based Kuhn, Loeb Company, which was under the control of longtime Rothschild associate Jacob Schiff.

Despite all of this very clear history—which has been outlined by numerous authors such as Wyckliffe Vennard, Eustace Mullins, and Dr. Martin Larson, the preeminent among them—modern-day media propagandists (and we must include the aforementioned Dr. Melvin I. Urofsky among them)—continue to present the Fed as precisely the opposite of what it really is. That Urofsky is assisting in the perpetration of the fraud is particularly egregious in light of the fact that he is a much-published author of such volumes as:

� American Zionism from Herzl to the Holocaust;
�We are One!: American Jewry and Israel;
� Commonwealth and Community: The Jewish Experience in Virginia;
� Documents of American Constitutional and Legal History; and
� A March of Liberty: A Constitutional History of the United States.

And these are just a few of the works to which Urofsky has added his name. Those who wish to contact Urofsky and provide him factual information about the Federal Reserve System (of which he is apparently unaware) may contact him by email at murofsky@vcu.edu or write: Dr. Melvin Urof sky, 919 W. Franklin Street, Richmond, Va. 23220.