I think I have to try to check the Federal Reserve Bank System issue: so many conspiracy theoreticians claim that FED is the tool by which the Rothschild family still controls the world. I am no economist, so I am very unfamiliar with this topic, but I can promise to take a look at this issue as a fairly intelligent layman and not to cheat in anything.
The Rothschild family was the leading banking family in the 19th century. Since that time they have been less prominent, but there still are the Rothschild banks of London, so theoretically they could still be players in the game. But let us see in order.
The first article I found from the internet was written by Dr. Edward Flaherty and entitled “Who owns and controls the Federal Reserve” in
The article intends to debunk the claims of Eustace Mullins (1983) and Gary Kah (1991) that foreigners, notably Rothschild banks of London, own the FED. So, he is a debunker of these conspiracy claims. That is a good starting point. I prefer to make the argument using facts that debunkers of some conspiracy theory have admitted, because those facts we can agree on for the sake of the argument. That does not mean that I necessarily accept the fact as true, only that for the time being I agree with it.
The first odd thing with the FED is that the list of shareholders is secret. Considering that the FED has considerable power in the USA and the USA is supposed to be a democracy lead by chosen representatives of the people, it is strange that the owners of one important sector are secret. Why should they be secret?
Flaherty initially agrees that the main shareholders of the New York FED very probably are the ones listed by Mullins. These shareholders are banks in the New York district. All banks in one district are required to own shares of the local FED, so the main banks must be the main shareholders of the New York FED. This is logical, so Mullins is likely to be correct. But then Flaherty goes on to investigate if foreigners own the large New York banks. These banks are enlisted in the stock market and because of that the names of individuals who own over 5% of the bank are not secret. Flaherty concludes that there are no foreign individuals who own over 5% of these banks and because of that the banks are not owned by foreigners. I think this argument is faulty: the ownership does not need to be direct. We are talking of who has the ruling power, not who directly owns shares. Then Flaherty continues to the list Kah gave and notices that it is different from the list in Mullins. From this he concludes that at least one of the lists must be wrong and the shareholders in Kah’s list, being foreign banks, cannot be the main shareholders of the New York FED. This way he discards Kah. I think Flaherty’s argument is clearly false: Kah may give the actual rulers of the New York banks, which directly own the shares of the New York FED, but the ownership is not direct. So, Flaherty’s arguments did not convince me concerning this claim, but I will ignore the ownership for the time being. The ownership is not known and it is strange that it should be secret.
What interested me in his article was this section from Flaherty’s text:
“The Federal Reserve System certainly makes large profits. According to the Board’s 1995 Annual Report, the System had net income totaling $23.9 billion, which, if it were a single firm, would qualify it as one of the most profitable companies in the world. How were these profits distributed? By an agreement between the Board of Governors and the Treasury, nearly all of the Fed’s annual profits are paid to the federal government. Accordingly, a lion’s share of $23.4 billion, which represents 97.9 percent of the Federal Reserve’s net income, was transferred to the Treasury. The Federal Reserve Banks kept $283 million, and the remaining $231 million was paid to its stockholders as dividends.”
Apparently Israel has a very similar central banking system. We remember the role the Rothschild family had with the creation of Israel.
What is interesing in this text is that it reminded me of what has recently happened in Finland. The Bank of Finland has since 2015 been bying debts of the Finnish State and it currently owns about 20% of the debts of Finland. In 2014 The Bank of Finland did not own Finnish debts. The state pays interest from these debts and the Bank of Finland gets this money as profits, but it returns the profits to the State of Finland.
https://www.is.fi/taloussanomat/porssiuutiset/art-2000005331711.html
So, it is a very similar system as in the US FED. For some strange reason Finnish politicians and the government have been very silent of this issue. It has leaked to the news, but for some reason it is not discussed.
Central banks in the EURO area of the EU have since 2015 been buying debts of their own state. They are the asset purchase programmes of the European Central Bank. The EU banks were buying debts for 60 milliars euro per month. In 2018 the sum was cut to 30 milliard euro, but is is still quite much.
https://www.ecb.europa.eu/mopo/implement/omt/html/index.en.html
What is the idea in this?
Firstly, the EU Constitution explicitly forbids a state to finance its budget through its central bank, and this is exactly what is happening. The German constitutional tribune is investigating if asset purchases of the German Central Bank are unconstitutional.
Secondly, if such asset purchases are made, why does the central bank not simply nullify these debts so that the state does not pay interests, the bank does not make profits and the state does not get back the same money it paid in interests? I guess it would make more sense to do so. It would be simpler, but they do not do so.
What is different in the solution that the bank owns the debts is that it is the creditor. As a creditor it has at least theoretically power over the debtor. It can demand that the debtor to do something. So, who has the power in the Bank of Finland? the head of the bank is currently a former Finnish politician. Probably he is not any conspirator of the New World Order. But the Bank of Finland is a part of the European Central Bank. The head of the European Central Bank is an Italian economist, who is a member of the Group of 30. This Group of 30 is a private lobbying organization. Its chairman is the head of Israel central bank. That is a bit strange as the other members of the Group of 30 are from economically leading countries, to which Italy belongs, but Israel does not.
I will investigate this further, but it may well be that there is something in the FED conspiracy: there is a mechanism where banks, which do not have elected leaders, are given power by moving taxpayers money from the state to the central bank in interests and back as profits, or the state takes debts from its own central bank. It looks very fishy. To be continued…
14 Comments
I’ve always wanted to see the ownership of all commercial, central and reserve banks as well as their shareholders in an easily digestible and observable format.
You have people on alt-right sites like UNZ and elsewhere claiming “it’s the Jews,” as if it is Jews as a whole. That doesn’t seem to be the case at all. Commercial bank ownership like Goldman Sachs can be easily found but the larger banks and their shareholders are harder to pinpoint.
It does seem like many of the largest bank owners are connected to various international think tanks.
Paul Wolfowitz was a member of PNAC and various other conspiratorial think tanks. The destruction his doctrine caused in the middle east would surely have gotten him barred from holding ownership of a bank?
That’s not the case. He was the head of the World Bank shorty after.
I agree, it is not the Jews as a whole. Jews in Europe, before the Polish Commonwealth was divided, acted as a nation in a nation and advanced their own goals (monopol in alcohol trade, usury, and so on). That caused them to be disliked, but that is not the conspiracy. That was just a minority trying to gain on locals and make their living. One should not do this kind of thing. One should assimilate with the local population, one should intermarry them, should not use strange clothes and a different language. If one does so, it tells that they are another species, outsiders. Then one should expect that there is tension between the locals and a strangely behaving and dressing minority. But this is not the conspiracy I have been trying to track.
The conspiracy, the New World order, was real and basically a Masonic plan with the backing of some very rich bankers. New World meant the USA and the New World Order meant the new social order (democracy, later communism) that Freemasons wanted to set to the world. Most of Freemasonry was not revolutionary, but there was the revolutionary core, the real reason for the existence of the Brotherhood. Revolutionary Freemasonry (Cagliostro’s Egyptian Freemasonry, later Mizraim and Memphis) was from the beginning Cabbalistic and had the goals of restoring Jews to Palestine and gaining world power. Today one can forget Freemasons, but the banks are still there. There is some group of people, a conspiracy. It has not disappeared and it is not the Jews as whole.
Surely, an alcohol trade monopolization and usurious practices on the local populace would engender a dislike for the ethnic group deemed most responsible. In imperial Russia’s case, it was the Jews, who have a history of imposing usury on others.
That is one of, if not the most notorious reasons for why Jews have been kicked out of hundreds of different countries. Are all Jews to blame? No, certainly not. We see many kings kicking Jews out of the countries they ruled in good faith or bad for imposing usury on the population or in many cases indebting the King, or monarcy itself. Did not the Vatican just recently pay back their Rothschild loan?
The IMF, World Bank and The Bank for International Settlements, do impose considerable debt via interest on countries by member banks. Are these banks all Jewish owned? Who owns them?
The thing is we do SEE elitist persons who identify themselves as Jews in high positions of banking and media. Espeically in the US, there is no doubting this. Are they overrepresented in these positions of power? It is hard to say, but I can faithfully say by observation alone, most notably in media, yes, they are.
But there’s an entire banking international paradise, filled with all kinds of people who most certainly aren’t Jews. So, to blame one ethnic or religious group on the woes
of the world is a shot in the dark.
When one looks at the so-called Babylonian woe ; the Babylonian people were in financial distress ; we read the tablets and ancient writings ; we observe the same burden that strickens the majority of people today.
David Astle’s book : The Babylonian Woe is a book worth reading. He hypothesizes since the time of Babylon and possibly before, there are and is today a group of occulted people who wish to create a one world government, under a one world financial system.
Presently, the idea that multilateralism is not considered a NWO is worrying. It most certainly should be.
Because the Rockefeller’s, Think Tank book ‘Prospects for America’, which can be bought for a considerable price, provides insight into the hegelian dialectic we see today.
The document providies clear evidence that the so called NWO of unipolarism via spreading so-called western democracy eastward was never the intended new economic order of the internationalists, or globalists, whoever they are, had in mind.
The goal was ALWAYS to impose a multilateral new economic order. Of course that doesn’t mean the US would lose its spot in the G20, G7 or whatever. They clearly are playing a part in this dialectic.
So, basically, the goal is for China, Russia and the BRICs alliance to become the new economic order, or NWO. The website UNZ has many people and many articles praising Putin as if he’s some sort of hero. Despite, he himself having egregious human rights violations. I see many so-called alt-rightists and white nationalists promoting multilateralism, why? Is it not odd that these alt-right frontman ALL voted for Trump who seems to be wanting to pull out of NATO and the middle east?
Despite my utter condemnation for war or for troop stalemate in foreign lands; pulling out of South West Asia would simply provide an avenue for the expansionist strategy of multilateralism. Russia, in fact, will completely dominate Europes energy market, and this is laid out in the Rockefeller document. And with Israel, China, Russia, Syria, and even Iran working and having a stake in the Belt Road Initiative, it becomes apparent that multilateralism is the new order of things to come. Hence, the dedollarization we see all around the world.
If you have not realized this yet, the alt-right was termed by Richard Spencer. He himself is playing a role, as are most of the alt-right pundits. They are mostly Jewish, not a shocker, but they play the roles of white nationalists or so-called white preservationalists. For example, Spencer, was pictured with the Bush family well before he became the alt-right pundit he is today. He claims he is a socialist and that the alt-right is the NEW LEFT? What could this mean? Well, Spencer calls himself in multiple podcasts and videos a NATIONAL BOLSHEVIK. Yup, a bolshevik, playing the role of a white nationalist.
Considering the alt-right frontman, Milo, also considers himself a white nationalist and calls Trump his daddy, could he too be playing a role? Considering the media terms these alt-right pundits Nazis, as if National German Workers Party members are still around ; it seems, a dialectic is being played here. Milo, in this case is, like Spencer an actor. Milo has a black boyfriend and is gay, so he is likely not a white supremacist or nazi. Same goes to Trump. What I can say for sure is that all of them promote Zionism.
The point is, the alt-right has something in common with Trump, that the media on the left refuses to talk about. That is that thr alt-rightists are mostly Duginists. Alexander Dugin was an aid to Putin. He is a crowleyist and practiced, or is still practicing the Thelma religion. You can look up a video of Dugin reading a Crowley book saying some occult oath. He is also a geopolitical analysts and promotes something called eurasianism, the 4th political theory and multilateralism. Whatever the case may be, it is clear that these alt-right frontman promote Zionism, Trump, Dugin and multilateralism. Dugin was also pictured with Zbreinski or however you spell his name. He was the NSA director under Jimmy Carter.
Nevertheless, in the US we see a dialectic playing out. The faux alternative media praises Putin and Russia. There is no doubting this. Look at cointelpro Alex Jones. He for the longest time played the role of a 9/11 truth activist. He know promotes Trump, who has connection with many of the 9/11 perpetrators and also praised Putin on numerous occasions. This isn’t a coincidence. The goal is some sort of multilateral NWO. Dropping the ball. Bringing down the old unipolar system for a new multilateral BRIC alliance system of internationalism.
They are consciously pushing truth seekers to willingly accept multilateralism by using agents in the Truth movement. Just like into Rockefeller’s Prospects for America and Multilateralism.
That has always been the goal. To create a welfare system in the US, and have a multilateral system take over. Are Freemasons involved? Probably. Are Jews, Catholics, Orthodox Christians in Russia, KGB agents, Bankers, the IMF SDR campaign, and Duginists? Probably also.
They don’t really hide the push towards a multilateral world order anymore.
Good points. I have many doubts of The Unz Review commenters, and of the real goals of the site. Some commenters there are fine, but there is some strange agenda just like you say.
Thanks for your opinions. I have not yet understood what the NWO is today as I started looking at what it was in the past. It was easier to understand in the past. You cay multilateral. In the past it was not power of one country, it was power of cabal, a secret society, only loosely connected with the UK or the USA. It played countries against each other, so it was multilateral in a sense, but a cabal in another sense. But today, I am not sure what it is.
Cagliostro’s Egyptian Freemasonry, later Mizraim and Memphis
I’m going to have to research these orders. Thanks. Very interesting.
Surely, an alcohol trade monopolization and usurious practices on the local populace would engender a dislike for the ethnic group deemed most responsible. In imperial Russia’s case, it was the Jews, who have a history of imposing usury on others.
That is one of, if not the most notorious reasons for why Jews have been kicked out of hundreds of different countries. Are all Jews to blame? No, certainly not. We see many kings kicking Jews out of the countries they ruled in good faith or bad for imposing usury on the population or in many cases indebting the King, or monarcy itself. Did not the Vatican just recently pay back their Rothschild loan?
The IMF, World Bank and The Bank for International Settlements, do impose considerable debt via interest on countries by member banks. Are these banks all Jewish owned? Who owns them?
The thing is we do SEE elitist persons who identify themselves as Jews in high positions of banking and media. Espeically in the US, there is no doubting this. Are they overrepresented in these positions of power? It is hard to say, but I can faithfully say by observation alone, most notably in media, yes, they are.
But there’s an entire banking international paradise, filled with all kinds of people who most certainly aren’t Jews. So, to blame one ethnic or religious group on the woes
of the world is a shot in the dark.
When one looks at the so-called Babylonian woe ; the Babylonian people were in financial distress ; we read the tablets and ancient writings ; we observe the same burden that strickens the majority of people today.
There is a cabal with an agenda of a world order. And there is the Jewish community trying to advance their goals. These are not the same, but both have interest in Israel.
David Astle’s book : The Babylonian Woe is a book worth reading. He hypothesizes since the time of Babylon and possibly before, there are and is today a group of occulted people who wish to create a one world government, under a one world financial system.
Presently, the idea that multilateralism is not considered a NWO is worrying. It most certainly should be.
Because the Rockefeller’s, Think Tank book ‘Prospects for America’, which can be bought for a considerable price, provides insight into the hegelian dialectic we see today.
The document providies clear evidence that the so called NWO of unipolarism via spreading so-called western democracy eastward was never the intended new economic order of the internationalists, or globalists, whoever they are, had in mind.
The goal was ALWAYS to impose a multilateral new economic order. Of course that doesn’t mean the US would lose its spot in the G20, G7 or whatever. They clearly are playing a part in this dialectic.
So, basically, the goal is for China, Russia and the BRICs alliance to become the new economic order, or NWO. The website UNZ has many people and many articles praising Putin as if he’s some sort of hero. Despite, he himself having egregious human rights violations. I see many so-called alt-rightists and white nationalists promoting multilateralism, why? Is it not odd that these alt-right frontman ALL voted for Trump who seems to be wanting to pull out of NATO and the middle east?
Despite my utter condemnation for war or for troop stalemate in foreign lands; pulling out of South West Asia would simply provide an avenue for the expansionist strategy of multilateralism. Russia, in fact, will completely dominate Europes energy market, and this is laid out in the Rockefeller document. And with Israel, China, Russia, Syria, and even Iran working and having a stake in the Belt Road Initiative, it becomes apparent that multilateralism is the new order of things to come. Hence, the dedollarization we see all around the world.
If you have not realized this yet, the alt-right was termed by Richard Spencer. He himself is playing a role, as are most of the alt-right pundits. They are mostly Jewish, not a shocker, but they play the roles of white nationalists or so-called white preservationalists. For example, Spencer, was pictured with the Bush family well before he became the alt-right pundit he is today. He claims he is a socialist and that the alt-right is the NEW LEFT? What could this mean? Well, Spencer calls himself in multiple podcasts and videos a NATIONAL BOLSHEVIK. Yup, a bolshevik, playing the role of a white nationalist.
Considering the alt-right frontman, Milo, also considers himself a white nationalist and calls Trump his daddy, could he too be playing a role? Considering the media terms these alt-right pundits Nazis, as if National German Workers Party members are still around ; it seems, a dialectic is being played here. Milo, in this case is, like Spencer an actor. Milo has a black boyfriend and is gay, so he is likely not a white supremacist or nazi. Same goes to Trump. What I can say for sure is that all of them promote Zionism.
The point is, the alt-right has something in common with Trump, that the media on the left refuses to talk about. That is that thr alt-rightists are mostly Duginists. Alexander Dugin was an aid to Putin. He is a crowleyist and practiced, or is still practicing the Thelma religion. You can look up a video of Dugin reading a Crowley book saying some occult oath. He is also a geopolitical analysts and promotes something called eurasianism, the 4th political theory and multilateralism. Whatever the case may be, it is clear that these alt-right frontman promote Zionism, Trump, Dugin and multilateralism. Dugin was also pictured with Zbreinski or however you spell his name. He was the NSA director under Jimmy Carter.
I will have to look at this. Is Thelema still alive? I though those temples died in 1980s.
Nevertheless, in the US we see a dialectic playing out. The faux alternative media praises Putin and Russia. There is no doubting this. Look at cointelpro Alex Jones. He for the longest time played the role of a 9/11 truth activist. He know promotes Trump, who has connection with many of the 9/11 perpetrators and also praised Putin on numerous occasions. This isn’t a coincidence. The goal is some sort of multilateral NWO. Dropping the ball. Bringing down the old unipolar system for a new multilateral BRIC alliance system of internationalism.
They are consciously pushing truth seekers to willingly accept multilateralism by using agents in the Truth movement. Just like into Rockefeller’s Prospects for America and Multilateralism.
That has always been the goal. To create a welfare system in the US, and have a multilateral system take over. Are Freemasons involved? Probably. Are Jews, Catholics, Orthodox Christians in Russia, KGB agents, Bankers, the IMF SDR campaign, and Duginists? Probably also.
They don’t really hide the push towards a multilateral world order anymore.
I was surprised that the Federal Reserve ownership was a secret. I do not know of ethnic composition of these people, but there is some group driving globalization. I think they are corrected with certain banks, and I do not think they are a good thing for the world.
Hi Jorma,
Just wanted to let you know that not all Central Banks in Europe are 100 % owned by private stakeholders. In Belgium for instance the National Bank’s authorized capital is 10 million euros (based on a law of february 22d 1998); 50 % of the shares is owned by the Belgium state and the other 50 % by shares traded on Euronext Brussels. The shares, with the exception of those belonging to the State, may be converted at the discretion of the owner, free of charge, into registered shares or into dematerialized shares.
https://www.nbb.be/en/about-national-bank/administration-and-control/other-actors-bank/general-meeting/past-general-5
Don’t know if it makes much difference though. I’m a layman in those matters.
Thanks for this information. I myself am completely ignorant of those economic issues. I have always thought that the Bank of Finland was 100% state owned, but when writing the post I noticed that it makes no difference as all central banks of EU are in fact parts of the European Central Bank, so they are not independent in any sense. And the next shock to me was to find out that the people who run the European Central Bank are not necessarily the people who should run it.