Topic: Media
When Ron Paul called the monetary system fraudulent, CNN closed any debate - its time to open it In November 2007, Ron Paul, on CNN, called the monetary system fraudulent. The international credit crisis presents CNN an opportunity to redeem John Roberts' error and complain to the FBI, a government authority responsible for investigating fraudby Multimediamonitor
(libertarian)
Monday, February 2, 2009
A few definitions
As anyone who has watched television in recent months is aware, money and credit are different things. In fact each noun has several meanings so lets be sure we agree which meanings we are using here. The first [Encarta Dictionary] meaning of money is: "a medium of exchange issued by a government or other public authority in the form of coins of gold, silver, or other metal, or paper banknotes, used as the measure of the value of goods and services". That is good enough for us for now. The first [Encarta Dictionary] meaning of credit is: "an arrangement by which a buyer can take possession of something now and pay for it later or over time", which is also good enough for now. How could anyone, least of all bankers, confuse the two? For convenience another useful [Encarta Dictionary] definition is that of fraud: "the crime of obtaining money or some other benefit by deliberate deception".
How the fraud is concealed from the public
To my knowledge the only US politician to publicly allege such a fraud is Congressman Ron Paul. What is more, when he did so on live television his host John Roberts on CNN switched subjects! During "American Morning" on October 24, 2007 Ron Paul said: "government does have a responsibility to deal with fraud, but the monetary system is fraudulent. Instead of perpetuating fraud in the monetary system they should be dealing with real fraud. ", Roberts responded: "Well, regardless of what we talk about this morning, the Dow is going to go off a cliff again today so let me turn to politics if I could." Why did he dodge opening a debate that could have only boosted CNN's public reputation and audience. All he needed to do was ask Paul if he had complained to the government authority responsible for investigating fraud by bankers. I think it is the FBI.
How the fraud works
Having read this far I hope readers are now open to understanding how the fraud works. How does the confusion lead to the crime of obtaining money by deliberate deception that [on evidence so far] has deceived all 44 US Presidents, and by now literally billions of adults? To make it interesting, I'll try to obtain money by deliberate deception just by giving each reader credit [for a while]!
When I give you credit, we are entering "an arrangement by which you, as a [prospective] buyer, can take possession of my land now and pay for it later or over time". Before I give you that much credit, I will ask for proof that you have the means and creditworthiness to meet the payment schedule. I will also demand collateral in the form of a mortgage [probably on the land I am offering for sale].
If I am a fractional reserve banker
Once I have your duly signed and witnessed signature on the necessary documents, I have evidence of your "debt" to me. If I was a fractional reserve banker I would simply record your debt as an asset. As you pay off the debt with media of exchange [coins of gold, silver, and/or paper banknotes], I would obtain money by deliberate deception. That is the fraud. It has been going on for centuries. It is commonly called making money "out of thin air".
What if I am not a fractional reserve banker
Because I am not a fractional reserve banker, I would need to take your documents to a banker. If he was satisfied with the validity of the documents he would offer to buy it for a price calculated by discounting the payment schedule. Once I had received the medium of exchange, my crime of obtaining money by deliberate deception would be almost complete! Rather than hand you keys and the title to the land, I would get back to you with the news that your application for credit had been rejected.
In due course the fractional reserve banker would send a default notice to you at the address you had provided. You should inform him that your application for credit had been rejected so his business was with whoever had provided him the necessary documents [me!].
If you do not inform him that your application had been rejected, you could eventually find yourself summoned to court like Jerome Daly in Credit River in 1968. That court did not examine the confusion of money and credit, but still recognised the fraud.
Why Jerome Daly's 1968 victory was not appealed
Jerome refused to grant possession to his property to the First National Bank of Montgomery, Minnesota. It was a civil case, not criminal but the judge and jury had no doubt, when the banker testified [under cross-examination] about the creating of money "out of thin air," and admitted that this was standard banking practice, that the practice was fraud. The bank of course had the right to appeal but forfeited this when Justice Mahoney denied the bank use of Federal Reserve Notes, from being used to pay for the appeal.
What criminal proceedings after unanimous civil verdict?
We can only wonder if criminal proceedings were instigated against bank officers once the civil jury declared its unanimous verdict. If they were, what was the result? If criminal proceedings were not instigated, who stopped them? It's another case that for more than 40 years has been suppressed and misrepresented in the mass media. The FBI should have something in its files.
Time for CNN to boost its international reputation and audience
What ever caused John Roberts to evade debate last October, there's still time for CNN open a debate, starting with a dictionary or two and the definitions I used to open this report. The panel should include Ron Paul, Alan Greenspan plus a couple of the people now busy trying to fix the latest crisis. If President Obama is busy, he could send a delegate. Would Ben Bernacke find time, or send a colleague from "The Fed"? The FBI , as a government authority responsible for investigating fraud by bankers, should be invited to send an agent.
By inviting a few key International leaders [Putin comes first to mind, then an Arab oil sheik], CNN's international audience could [with a bit of marketing] beat the Beijing Olympics opening ceremony!
By setting up audience feedback after the debate CNN could [like it did of its audience for the GOP candidates debate on Nov 29, 2007] ask questions like: "Who of the panel, should face criminal proceedings?"
Convincing CNN to resist the fear and favour it can expect once invitations are sent
Apart from CNN asking the FBI to investigate suspicious contacts with its people, I don't know what would overcome CNN's understandable hesitation. Some readers can at least add their demands and offer or pursue other actions
It would be great if someone at CNN wants to talk to me about this article. They will learn how if a reader or readers can get this message through to John Roberts, one of his colleagues or to the FBI.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 63 thumbs so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of Multimediamonitor only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Multimediamonitor is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
I don't think there was anything sinister in John Roberts' segue. Show hosts get a stream of messages in their earphone about time constraints and there was probably a recommendation to go to a video feed from the NYSE. I don't think I could possibly juggle all of the simultaneous messages these hosts and anchorpeople have to process on the fly.
To CNN's credit, they've at least been attentive to Dr. Paul's message, having him on American Morning several times. He's gotten much fairer treatment on CNN than on the truly unprofessional CBS and MSNBC. ABC occasionally features him as a "curiosity" story and Fox News has been trying to backpedal a bit from their abysmal treatment of him during the presidential campaign. Too late, Fox... it's going to take a lot of work for you to mend your credibility gap with many of us now.
Darryl, IMHO your comment about Fox's credibility was a bit understated. While all of the networks are propaganda machines, Fox attempts to propagandize the "partially informed" which I find most disgusting. I'd watch the blank screen on my unplugged television before I'd ever watch Fox... for anything.
There's something wrong with the CNN link. It goes to Fox!
As for Darryl's nothing sinister inference, he may be right but its was more than a year ago and its more than 40 years since the judge and jury declared the fraud.
The point of the article is its time to publicly confront bankers like Ben Bernacke with the evidence that by confusing money and credit his banks practice fraud!.
I recall hearing one of our nation's wealth guru's (Kiyosaki) answering the question, "What is money?" with this reply: "Money is whatever we agree it is."
Th enormity of the bailout and stimulus package/s, despite the fact that we are bankrupt, has resulted in many of us no longer agreeing on this fundamental definition. If that is the case, it would seem very realistic that the dollar will indeed collapse.
Yes, Freedom4America, I am serious about getting the FBI to see the evidence both in this article and implied by my evidence that John Roberts and reporters of Jerome Daly's case failed to follow up or report the facts. The implications are much as Carlo C said.
CNN is not owned by Bankers but CNN could not have grown so successfuly if its owners did not comply with its Bankers explicit and implicit loan conditions. Yet as the evidence shows, CNN [like all the victims of bankers fraud] never received loans. It paid, and presumably still pays its Bankers in the belief it had received loans from them.
When Ted Turner sees the evidence, he should [after getting legal advice] complain to the FBI and thentake my advice to ask the FBI to investigate suspicious contacts with his people.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
