Zeitgeist, The Movie – Remastered / Final Edition

Zeitgeist: Addendum

On Thursday, November 19, 2009, after several hours of heated debate, the Paul-Grayson “Audit the Fed” amendment passed 43-26 in the House Financial Services Committee. The amendment calls for a comprehensive audit of the Federal Reserve and replaces the opposing “placebo” amendment proposed by Mel Watt.

Why Audit The Federal Reserve?

Ron Paul’s legislation is aimed at pulling back the curtain from a secretive and unaccountable Federal Reserve. Congress and the American people have minimal, if any, oversight over trillions of dollars that the Fed controls.

With recent bailouts and spending decisions shining a spotlight on the actions of the Federal Reserve, more and more pressure is bearing down on Congress to take action and demand accountability and transparency.

Auditing the Fed is only the first step towards exposing this antiquated insider-run creature to the powerful forces of free-market competition. Once there are viable alternatives to the monopolistic fiat dollar, the Federal Reserve will have to become honest and transparent if it wants to remain in business.

http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/audit-the-federal-reserve-hr-1207/

The biggest liars are the ones making the most money on our planet

Lewis v. United States, 680 F.2d 1239 (1982)

John L. Lewis, Plaintiff/Appellant,

v.

United States of America, Defendant/Appellee.



The court ruled that the Federal Reserve Banks are "independent, privately
owned and locally controlled corporations", and there is not sufficient
"federal government control over 'detailed physical performance' and 'day to day
operation'" of the Federal Reserve Bank for it to be considered a federal
agency:





Federal reserve banks are not federal instrumentalities for purposes of a
Federal Tort Claims Act, but are independent, privately owned and locally
controlled corporations in light of fact that direct supervision and control of
each bank is exercised by board of directors, federal reserve banks, though
heavily regulated, are locally controlled by their member banks, banks are
listed neither as "wholly owned" government corporations nor as "mixed
ownership" corporations; federal reserve banks receive no appropriated funds
from Congress and the banks are empowered to sue and be sued in their own names.
. . .

 

“I am very, very confident that the message of freedom and limited government and non-interventionist foreign policy is the right way to go, and I think people like to hear that,” Paul said.

A retired obstetrician, Paul practices what he preaches.
He refuses his
congressional pension and didn’t allow his five children to take federal student
loans.

Transparency a must for Federal Reserve

Jon Kovaciny, Mankato

I strongly urge our senators, Al Franken and Amy Klobuchar, to follow the lead of Rep. Tim Walz in co-sponsoring a bill requiring more transparency for the Federal Reserve, our nation’s central bank.

The Fed, under chairman Ben Bernanke, played a significant role in engineering and executing the bailouts. Hundreds of billions of dollars were created and doled out to various banks, financial firms, and even foreign central banks, yet we have no legal way of seeing who or how much. The Fed also creates new money to secretly purchase assets on the open market.

This remarkable power is not something that one would expect to find in a representative government; indeed, the Federal Reserve is technically not part of government but rather a private banking cartel given special powers by Congress in 1913, under pressure from the banking industry. In its 96-year history, the Federal Reserve has never been subjected to a full audit of its operations.

Last May, Walz co-sponsored H.R. 1207, the Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2009. Since that time, support for the bill has grown to include 73 percent of the House. A recent Rasmussen poll found that 79 percent of Americans support a full audit. It is time for Franken and Klobuchar to co-sponsor the Senate version of the bill, S. 604.

Among the Fed’s stated goals are economic and monetary stability. Under the Fed, we’ve endured more than a dozen recessions and the Great Depression, and today’s dollar has less than a 20th of a 1913 dollar’s purchasing power. For an institution with so much unchecked power and such a dismal record, transparency is a must.

Contact the white house, your Congressmen and Senators!

Tell our elected representatives in Washington DC to stop spending our future away liking drunken sailors!

Tell them we want Full Accountability from the Federal Reserve, Where have trillions of our tax dollars gone and why?

Tell Them we are done paying billions of dollars per year to the Federal Reserve banking cartel in interest on our own damn money!!!

U.S. federal reserve chief Benjamin Bernanke has declared war on the dollar.

"The U.S. government has a technology, called a printing press (or, today, its electronic equivalent), that allows it to produce as many U.S. dollars as it wishes at essentially no cost."

— Benjamin S. Bernanke,
Chairman, U.S. Federal Reserve

It is primarily the FED (and government) who got us in this mess, and make no mistake it's going to get much worse. The lengths people go to defend the FED is just pathetic. The notion that the people don't have the right to know where their hard earned money goes is an indefensible stand to take. It defies reason. Most people who take this stand either don't understand the FED or have an agenda.

Man-made global warming fraud highlights:

1. Prominent environmental scientists organize a boycott of scientific journals if those journals publish scholarly material from global warming dissidents.

2. The scientists then orchestrate attacks on the dissidents because of their lack of scholarly material published in scientific journals.

3. The scientists block from the UN’s report on global warming evidence that is harmful to the anthropogenic global warming consensus.

4. The scientists, when faced with a freedom of information act request for their correspondence and data, delete the correspondence and data lest it be used against them.

5. The scientists fabricate data when their data fails to prove the earth is warming. In fact, in more than one case, scientists engaged in lengthy emails on how to insert additional made up data that would in turn cause their claims to stand out as legitimate.

We’re dealing with fabricated and deleted data, and an orchestrated effort to undermine global warming dissidents. Faked data in particular is a big deal: many politicians are using eco-alarmism based on fear of global warming to assault American freedoms.

What does it mean for America if it turns out that a few scientists at the
top were actively involved in scientific fraud to promote their own agendas?

"There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth."

"Climategate" investigation, the stakes in the e-mail controversy are significant, "as it appears that the basis of federal programs, pending EPA rule makings and cap and trade legislation was contrived and fabricated."

12 of the 26 scientists who wrote the relevant section of a U.N. global warming report are "up to their necks in ClimateGate."

The professional association for physicists APS is facing internal pressure from some of its most distinguished members, who say the burgeoning ClimateGate scandal means the group should rescind its 2007 statement declaring that global warming represents a dire international emergency.

"By now everyone has heard of what has come to be known as ClimateGate, which was and is an international scientific fraud, the worst any of us have seen...

Public awareness reached a new high in the summer of 2006 with the publicity around Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth.”

The Pew Center for People and the Press conducted a telephone survey of 1,501 adults between June 14 and June 19, 2006, a period timed to coincide with the high point of the media’s interest in Gore’s movie. By far the biggest finding was that the movie had done virtually nothing to increase the saliency of global warming among voters.

Pew researchers noted that “out of a list of 19 issues, Republicans rank global warming 19th and Democrats and Independents rank it 13th.” By January 2007, global warming’s relative importance actually declined to 21st out of 21 issues for Republicans, 17th out of 21 issues for Democrats, and 19th out of 21 issues for independents.

Three Things You Absolutely Must Know About Climategate!

They’re calling it “Climategate.” The scandal that the suffix –gate implies is the state of climate science over the past decade or so revealed by a thousand or so emails, documents, and computer code sets between various prominent scientists released following a leak from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia in the UK.

This may seem obscure, but the science involved is being used to justify the diversion of literally trillions of dollars of the world’s wealth in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by phasing out fossil fuels. The CRU is the Pentagon of global warming science, and these documents are its Pentagon Papers.
Here are three things everyone should know about the Climategate Papers. Links are provided so that the full context of every quote can be seen by anyone interested.

First, the scientists discuss manipulating data to get their preferred results.

Secondly, scientists on several occasions discussed methods of subverting the scientific peer review process to ensure that skeptical papers had no access to publication.

Finally, the scientists worked to circumvent the Freedom of Information process of the United Kingdom.

Data fabrication and algorithm manipulation are not the only important issues here.

The travesty is that they were peer-reviewing each other's work! They had control of their own process. It was a closed-loop system comprised of several dozen researchers in an incestuous, self-affirming academic relationship.

Embarrassing isn't it?

Show us a single piece of evidence that man's CO2 is causing warming.

Give us the page number in the IPCC reports that give such evidence.

Climategate will go down as unmasking the biggest science scandal of this century.

There are many pressing pollution problems that are real issues that should be solved first.

Isn’t it also true that there were equally dire predictions of global cooling only 35 years ago?

Isn’t it further true that these all-knowing climatologists can’t predict a season of hurricanes, drought, or snowstorms, or for that matter an accurate weather forecast for more than 10 days, except in a Southern California summer?

After all, climatology is little more than a soft-science duded up in jargon, self-made computer wizardry, and political pomp?

No, the science is not settled. What is settled is the AGW blind adherence to a very unscientific approach to natural phenomena. Since when are scientific principles and conclusions settled by consensus?

If these self-important Wizards continue their path, they will be routed out and forced into an honest living selling pencils & begging for spare change on the corner. Their hot air is the problem.

The last thing America needs is misguided legislation that will raise
taxes and cost jobs — particularly when the push for such legislation rests on agenda-driven science.

Without trustworthy science and with so much at stake,
Americans should be wary about what comes out of this politicized conference.



--
Sarah Palin

Here are the words of the elites, admitting they contrived this:

On manipulating America with environmental issues:
“The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. …The real enemy then is humanity itself. Democracy is no longer well suited for the tasks ahead.”

– Richard Haass, Club of Rome Document, 1991 p. 71,75 1993

Global Sea Ice

Antarctic Sea Ice Video

The Climategate e-mail release is a watershed moment in the history of hoaxes. But while it reveals just the tip of the fraudulent climate change iceberg, it is also at long last a victory for those who wish to be good stewards of the planet's environment without crippling human productivity.

It is time for a constructive debate about how to maintain the global economy in a responsible way that honors the planet and the needs of the people who live on it.

In late 2009, the credibility of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) took a serious hit when email exchanges between some of its senior authors and editors revealed deliberate efforts to falsify data and silence dissenting scientists. The IPCC's reputation was already waning in the wake of scandals concerning Michael Mann's "hockey stick" temperature diagram and the role of government officials and environmental activists in its so-called "peer review" process. The IPCC Email Scandal of November 2009 meant the IPCC could no longer claim to represent the "scientific consensus" on global warming.

Emails exchanged by Phil Jones and other leading scientists who edit and control the content of the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reveal a conspiracy to falsify the actual temperature record and silence so-called "skeptics." Anyone who continues to cite the IPCC as representing the "consensus" on global warming is wrong. The IPCC has been totally discredited.

It is not the responsibility of ‘climate realist’ scientists to prove that dangerous human-caused climate change is not happening. Rather, it is those who propose that it is, and promote the allocation of massive investments to solve the supposed ‘problem’, who have the obligation to convincingly demonstrate that recent climate change is not of mostly natural origin and, if we do nothing, catastrophic change will ensue. To date, this they have utterly failed to do.