1913 Federal Reserve Act was Illegal. Here is proof. What legal recourse do we have?

Consider The Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890

U.S. Code › Title 15 › Chapter 1 › § 1 15 U.S. Code § 1 - Trusts, etc., in restraint of trade illegal; penalty

Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal. Every person who shall make any contract or engage in any combination or conspiracy hereby declared to be illegal shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $100,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $1,000,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding 10 years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.

or 15 U.S. Code Chapter 1 - MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE

15 U.S. Code § 2 - Monopolizing trade a felony; penalty

Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $100,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $1,000,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding 10 years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.

Original text of the Sherman Antitrust Act

18 U.S. Code § 208 - Acts affecting a personal financial interest

Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $100,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $1,000,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding 10 years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.

Is it possible to sue the members of the Jekyll Island club in civil court, as well as heirs of the later Senator Aldrich (Father in law of John Rockefeller Jr.) who introduced and helped pass the Aldrich-Vreeland Act which led to the Federal Reserve Act of 1913? Furthermore if a law is passed that is later to be found illegal, is it possible to have it rescinded? What is the procedure for dealing with this matter within the constraints of the law and the constitution? How can we take back the power to issue our currency, a right the constitution placed firmly in the hands of the people, or Congress in other words? The constitution does not give congress the right to transfer this power to a private interest, especially a shadowy trust like the Jekyll Island club, any more than it gives the congress the right to transfer any of the powers entrusted it derived from the just consent of the governed.

The inherent systematized indebtedness that follows from the failed Keynesian economic of the early-mid 20th century threatens our national sovereignty, security, dignity, and the rights of man.

Consider the findings of the Pujo Committee:

For those who wish to understand the true nature of our current financial system, the Pujo Committee’s 1912-1913 investigation of the “Money Trust” is essential reading. The Committee identified a concentrated group of Wall Street bankers who operated a sophisticated financial network unified by 341 interlocking directorships held in 112 corporations valued at more than $22 billion in resources and capitalization exerting significant control and influence over the U.S. economy and monetary system. The companies and individuals comprising this network were primarily agents of the Morgan and Rockefeller banking empires which dominated U.S. finance following the “Industrial Revolution”. The Committee names a number of prominent banking institutions as participating in this system including J.P. Morgan & Co., First National Bank of New York, Kuhn Loeb & Co. and individuals such as Paul Warburg, Jacob H. Schiff, Felix M. Warburg, Frank E. Peabody, William Rockefeller and Benjamin Strong, Jr. Understanding this system of overlapping financial networks and how those networks were used to dominate utilities, railroads, banking and the U.S. financial infrastructure throughout much of the twentieth century is key to the proper analysis of our current economic situation and the influence that the “Money Power” wields over global politics.

to be continued...

reply to post by mrphilosophias


It is certainly possible to sue, but you would need to be prepared for it to spin out for years to come.

One thing to find out is if the The Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 was still on the Statute Books when the Act of 1913 was signed off. If it was, you have one foundation for your case there.

I would happily support such a venture in any way I could. It would be intersting to see if the very "legal system" that supports the Act of 1913 would also abolish it, or at least award a payout.

If you are going to go ahead, let us know. I for one would help out.

I suggest reading The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve. This book explains the events leading up to the making of the Federal Reserve Act, How the creators (J.P. Morgan, Rothschild, etc.) were able to get the bill past congress and how it became a law. It also goes very in-depth into it including the way it works and how it affects us. Very great book also

StayAware
I suggest reading The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve. This book explains the events leading up to the making of the Federal Reserve Act, How the creators (J.P. Morgan, Rothschild, etc.) were able to get the bill past congress and how it became a law. It also goes very in-depth into it including the way it works and how it affects us. Very great book also

edit on th30pm14PM0pmSun, 06 Apr 2014 20:35:27 -0500America/Chicago by StayAware because: (no reason given)

Funny you mention it. I just sent Mr. Griffin an e-mail requesting his contributions here, and to share any historical evidences he has gathered pertaining to the alleged meeting at Jekyll Island.

dampnickers
reply to post by mrphilosophias

 

It is certainly possible to sue, but you would need to be prepared for it to spin out for years to come.

One thing to find out is if the The Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 was still on the Statute Books when the Act of 1913 was signed off. If it was, you have one foundation for your case there.

I would happily support such a venture in any way I could. It would be intersting to see if the very "legal system" that supports the Act of 1913 would also abolish it, or at least award a payout.

If you are going to go ahead, let us know. I for one would help out.

Should I forward this information to my congressmen? What networks are in place throughout all 50 states for others to do the same? How can we ensure that congress considers this issue? The White House, as a matter of policy, responds to any petitions with more than 250,000 signatures. Does congress have any similar requirements?

reply to post by mrphilosophias


If you are able to do what you are questioning then I beg you to link the petition here. I'm all for exposing a federal lie that's been swept under the rug for 60+ years

StayAware
reply to post by mrphilosophias

 

If you are able to do what you are questioning then I beg you to link the petition here. I'm all for exposing a federal lie that's been swept under the rug for 60+ years

It's a far more insidious problem then most are aware of. The Gold confiscation, 16th and 17th amendments, the Nixon Shock, and of course rampant internationalism, are all inextricably connected to this one Act. It is a fundamental problem. It is precisely what is meant by "a long train of abuses all invariably pursuing the same design..." I'd like to pull the carpet out from under their feet-LORD willing. I think the law is on my side. I'm familiar with the western political philosophies that form a pillar of this nation, and what passes for the status quo these days is a far cry from truth and justice, in respect for the Human dignity that flows forth from our Creator, as clearly and distinctly apparent if one reflects even briefly upon the natural law.

Has anyone looked at the events that surrounded Rothschilds Anaconda Copper, and the corruption and conflicts of interest that preceded the Bank Panic of 1907 which was the cause of the Aldrich-Vreeland Act, and the Federal Reserve Act? This is a shadowy conspiracy right from the pits of hell as far as I can discern. Have you ever read about the conversation Pope Leo XIII overheard between Jesus and the Devil? It is fascinating to say the least.

1Hear, therefore, kings, and understand;a learn, you magistrates of the earth’s expanse!
2Give ear, you who have power over multitudes and lord it over throngs of peoples!
3Because authority was given you by the Lord and sovereignty by the Most High, who shall probe your works and scrutinize your counsels!b 4Because, though you were ministers of his kingdom, you did not judge rightly, and did not keep the law, nor walk according to the will of God,
5Terribly and swiftly he shall come against you, because severe judgment awaits the exalted—
6For the lowly may be pardoned out of mercyc but the mighty shall be mightily put to the test.
7For the Ruler of all shows no partiality, nor does he fear greatness, Because he himself made the great as well as the small, and provides for all alike; 8but for those in power a rigorous scrutiny impends.
9To you, therefore, O princes, are my words addressed that you may learn wisdom and that you may not fall away.
10For those who keep the holy precepts hallowed will be found holy, and those learned in them will have ready a response.
11Desire therefore my words; long for them and you will be instructed.
12Resplendent and unfading is Wisdom, and she is readily perceived by those who love her, and found by those who seek her.f 13She hastens to make herself known to those who desire her;
14one who watches for her at dawn will not be disappointed, for she will be found sitting at the gate.
15For setting your heart on her is the perfection of prudence, and whoever keeps vigil for her is quickly free from care;
16Because she makes her rounds, seeking those worthy of her, and graciously appears to them on the way, and goes to meet them with full attention.
17 For the first step toward Wisdom is an earnest desire for discipline;
18then, care for discipline is love of her; love means the keeping of her laws; To observe her laws is the basis for incorruptibility;
19and incorruptibility makes one close to God;
20thus the desire for Wisdom leads to a kingdom.
21If, then, you find pleasure in throne and scepter, you princes of peoples, honor Wisdom, that you may reign as kings forever.

mrphilosophias


Should I forward this information to my congressmen? What networks are in place throughout all 50 states for others to do the same? How can we ensure that congress considers this issue? The White House is required by law to officially respond to any petitions with more than 250,000 signatures. Does congress have any similar requirements?

Some very good questions.

I cannot claim to have all the answers, but I can certainly make some suggestions I'll number each, and give you a response. By all means let me know what you think, or ask more if you neeed to.

1) Should you forward the information? Of course! I wish to respond with a question though (how very political of me, I know):The question I would ask you, is how would you structure this so that the information is easily recieved, understood and acted upon? Do you want to limit yourself to just the men and women in Congress? What about news stations, radio stations, newspapers, alternative media outlets, social groups, and so on?

2) What networks are in place? Well there are too many to answer. Simply sharing any methodology here on ATS is one method. Others can then see what you've done (including this discussion) and replecate it, or modify it and carry it off under their own steam.

3) How can we ensure it is considered? That's a tought question to answer. You can't guarantee any action from Congress. If they want an issue buried it will be buried, make no mistake about that. However, by spreading this information far and wide, in an easily digestible manner, will help to ensure that many, many people see it, and act upon it.

4) Does Congress have simliar requirement to the White House with responses to petitions? There are a number of ways of answering this, and whilst I could spend some time giving a long and convoluted answer, I will, for the sake of brevity, give you this... You have the Right to Petition Congress. See here: www.ask.com...

Feel free to ask anything more.

reply to post by dampnickers


Somehow I fail to see a possibility of a payout, I mean the beast is eating its own tail!

The only way you will ever redress these fundamental issues is to give The Tree of Liberty a really good soaking.

There is no other way, the Courts are not 'Your' courts they are 'Their' courts.

P

reply to post by mrphilosophias


I would do everything in your power to expose this without letting "them" get you in their cross-hairs. Martin Luther King Jr. and JFK are perfect examples of people who were out to change the world for the better when they were assassinated for doing just that. Both of those cases were proven to involve the CIA and other powers most Americans think protect us. Too bad the government has a grip on the media so this wasn't made public.

reply to post by mrphilosophias

shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $100,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $1,000,000,

They would just pay the penalty out of petty cash and then point to the originators of most of these corporations as long dead. A $100 million is nothing to these corporations. The banks are paying small percentage fines for wrongdoing in the billions of dollars nowadays. Cost of doing business to them.

You could sue I suppose, maybe some lawyers would take a contingency fee if you win. Good luck.

reply to post by minkmouse


I totally agree with you. However, that does not preclude the possibility that something good could come of this, even if it was a Court somewhere making a "payout" of somekind - it would still be a victory, even if a small one.

But as another contributor has already stated the Courts are "theirs", not "ours".

mrphilosophias
The White House is required by law to officially respond to any petitions with more than 250,000 signatures.

Exactly what law is that?

minkmouse
reply to post by dampnickers

 

Somehow I fail to see a possibility of a payout, I mean the beast is eating its own tail!

The penalty is right in the law $100,000,000 for corporations; $1,000,000 for individuals. Adjusted for inflation since 1913 it is approximately $2.3 Billion dollars per violation. Furthermore if it can be shown, for example, that gold from the gold confiscation act was transferred to these bankers (as collateral against our debt), perhaps we can get our gold back too and reestablish a gold standard. This is definitely a pipe dream. Redress of grievances on the other hand is certainly not beyond the realm of possibility.

Gentlemen, I have had men watching you for a long time and I am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter, I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves. You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out, and by the grace of the Eternal God, will rout you out.

Attributed to Andrew Jackson

The only thing that can be done is elect a president that is willing to change it. I believe Andrew Jackson was the last one to do it and Kennedy was the last one to try.

hellobruce

mrphilosophias
The White House is required by law to officially respond to any petitions with more than 250,000 signatures.

Exactly what law is that?

Maybe I exagerated. Thanks for the correction. It is a matter of policy I suppose, and not exactly as phrased in the law. I have edited the original post.

petitions.whitehouse.gov...

Bassago
reply to post by mrphilosophias

 

shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $100,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $1,000,000,

They would just pay the penalty out of petty cash and then point to the originators of most of these corporations as long dead. A $100 million is nothing to these corporations. The banks are paying small percentage fines for wrongdoing in the billions of dollars nowadays. Cost of doing business to them.

You could sue I suppose, maybe some lawyers would take a contingency fee if you win. Good luck.

The originators are dead, but the persons (corporations) involved are not. As a matter of justice the law was clearly illegal when passed and needs to be reversed.

I'm not sure how the penalties work but adjusted for inflation from 1913 it's approximately 2.3 billion per violation.

reply to post by mrphilosophias


And good luck collecting. I'm no economist but if you rip the federal reserve out of the mix right now, the whole illusion pops. This may be a good thing but a stable environment within which to enact global trade may be a long way down the pike following such actions.
"Are you ready for that?"

Why worry about "legal" recourse?

They're not following their own rules so I see no reason why the rest of us should.

We're not going to win playing by their rules. Throw legality out. It's useless.