« Ripping Apart The October Federal Reserve Report | Main | The Euro Is Too Rich For Europe »



From the article cited by Elaine: It's the thrid act, and Risky takes the stage:

Wall Street's money machine breaks down

The moral is clear. When Wall Street appears in genius mode, raking in huge profits on mysterious products and complex trades, the secret isn't genius at all. It's that hubris is running wild, and so is risk. And whether it's tomorrow or five years hence, risk will jump from the shadows, knife in hand, to cut genius down to size.


Yep we finally got rid of that george dubya lovin jackboot johnny howard!!! thank god!


About time, mate!


and his policies of exclusion!!! in areas of health, education, social conscience/justice ......a bush clone, any bloke that bush calls a mate must be a prick!!!!!!!


Just to correct you slightly: Australia hasn't experienced anywhere near the housing correction of the US or the UK. In fact, we are still talking about "mortgage stress" here (high mortgage payments as a proportion of income due to still very high house prices). We desperately need a bursting of the housing "bubble" but it hasn't happened (yet) due to continued low interest rates and the traditional Aussie practice of buying property. No-doc home loans have infected our market too with predictable results - speculative purchases of investment properties. Whilst the new government may be welcomed for other reasons, some (ironically) welcome the possibility of substantially higher interest rates, as the only solution to the housing "crisis" we have here.


Hi Elaine, congratulations on the blog, not sure you are right about the housing bubble in Australia, I sold my house here recently due to fears about a bubble, but prices continue to rise. One buffer against a bubble on the coast here is that there is very limited new development and there just arent any home sitting around waiting for people to fill them. Rental vacancies are only a couple of percent and 50 people will line up to look through an apartment in Sydney. So there is little chance of excess supply, even a 5% "correction" over one year would be a huge movement if the "bubble" burst.

Blunt Force Trauma

Greg said....

"Yep we finally got rid of that george dubya lovin jackboot johnny howard!!!"

Now we should follow suit here in Canada and get rid of our Prime Minstrel, Stephen Harper, who is also a "George Dubya Lovin' Jackboot" to the nines! Harper needs a good dick punch as he echoes most of what Bushco flings upon U.S. citizens.


Next year the American citizens have a chance to turn things around. His name is Ron Paul and if Dr. Paul is elected the NWO and North American Union plans will be dealt a deadly blow. We can only hope!

Elaine Meinel Supkis

I didn't say the Aussie bubble has burst, it EXISTS. And alas, will burst the same as England. Australia is right behind all of us more reckless economies. There is a property bubble in China, too, as well as Russia, of all places.

Everywhere but Germany, it seems.

Anyway, congratulations, OZ!


You know, I am tired already of this "let's elect Ron Paul" stuff. He has no real solution to the problem that vexes us. If you think that he will get away with banishing the Federal Reserve, then you need to read about what happened to JFK when he did the same thing.

He was assassinated in a brutal manner on live television.

As soon as Ron Paul signs any document that terminates the Federal Reserve or its money making powers, he will have only days to live.

I have not heard him talk about how he intends to prevent that from happening. When he openly acknowledges it and puts forth a plan to prevent it, then I will listen to what he has to say.

I believe Hitler once said: "There you stand with your books, and here I stand with my bayonets. We shall see who prevails."

The bayonets prevailed in all cases for many years. Fortunately, we had more bayonets than the Germans had at that time, but this will not always be so. Even Mao understood this.

When the Federal Reserve and those it serves realize that Ron Paul will sign a document eliminating their monopoly to create money and thus control all of mankind, what do think they will do? We already know from the past what they will do.

What is Ron Paul's plan to deal with this?


I second the motion by DeVaul.

It's interesting to watch what's happening in Venezuela, and the mainstream media's consistent attacks on Hugo Chavez.

Even Keith Olbermann is spouting the rhetoric that he is ruining the country and he is a madman.

Venezuela is an experiment funded by oil, which has wealth redistribution, empowerment of the people, healthcare, and education at its core.

Now, if you look at Chavez and think about the powers he wants to have, and ask would you give them to Bush/Cheney, the answer is a resounding NO. Why?

Because Bush has and will continue to abuse the powers he has and it is dangerous to give him more...actually he needs less.

But...if you looked at Kucinich as President and say...here have the same powers as Chavez.. I would say..sure. Why?

Kucinich and Chavez need the increased power to affect positive change. The rich who have had a strangle hold over Venezuela are not happy with this, and so they try to buy off, cheat, steal, lie, manipulate the media to try to keep what they have.

The only real issue I have with Chavez, is his militarist bent. But then again, realistically he has more to worry about than mainland U.S....and look at how much we spend on the military.

Progressives in this country need someone like Chavez...not the man...but someone to really shake things up. ( and not get shot in the process).


I wasn't aware of Sarbanes-Oxley being repealed, but perhaps it has. However, that only came into existence after the 2000 crash. I believe it was Glass Stegall that was enacted at the same time as the SEC was created, in the wake of the 1929 crash, and repealed in 1999?


And don't forget that Ron Paul is a social conservative.

The definition is here:



And BTW, DeVaul, I'm going right now to sign the delegate petition for Ron Paul in my state.

EFF the monitary elite.


So...... what's the plan, John?

Assuming, for the sake of argument, he is elected in a landslide. He signs a document allowing the US Treasury to print its own money and NOT charge interest on it to the American people.

Of course, the Federal Reserve will then be out of business, unless something happens to the good doctor. After that "something" happens, what then?

Yes, there will be weeping and wailing and maybe even a slow train ride for his coffin from DC to Texas and lots of sympathy for his poor wife and his loyal followers, etc. But what of it?

Ron Paul is old. He lives in a fantasy world that claims that the late 1800's were a Golden Era in America and that returning to the original constitution will solve all our problems (let's just ignore the Civil War for now). He has nothing to lose and might even relish the idea of being remembered as some kind of "martyr" for the Republic.

That is not enough for me to drag my ass to the polling booth. I am not interested in more of the same, no matter how spectacular it will appear on TV.

At some point, we must all throw our lot in with someone whether we like it or not. That is the way life is. I will wait for someone who at least has a plan to take us where we need to be now and not 200 years ago.


Well said Devaul


As for Kucinich, he withdrew from the race. His statement that he saw a UFO or whatever was his way of ensuring that he would not be considered a viable candidate.

Why did he do this? Who knows? Maybe he woke up and found a dead horse head in his bed. We will find out in about 50 years.

Now, Ron Paul, to his credit, would not be afraid of a dead horse head. He would probably mount it on the wall and invite everyone to come see it. But this is irrelevant.

Our ancestors did not stand in an open field shoulder to shoulder against British Regulars so that they could have another king. They were fighting for a whole NEW GOVERNMENT.

One that would exclude all kings, aristocrats, bankers and moneylenders. It would also be decentralized, having three separate branches that could veto the excesses of the others.

That government failed and was replaced by the current system, so what is Ron Paul's plan?


I will write in Kucinich precisely because he said he saw a UFO. I've never seen one, but I like the UFO concept. It's very popular at the moment!


Seeing an unidentified flying object isn't exactly like seeing green aliens. The question was meant to embarrass Kucinich, and summarily discount his positions and ACTUAL PLANS to improve human life in this country.

Of course , if they asked Ron Paul or any other candidate:

Do you believe in virgin births, or dead people rising from the grave, or healing by touch?

The answer would be yes and credible. Ha.

Kucinich cannot get elected because he looks like Kucinich and he would attack the owners of this country if elected. His policies, however, embrace humanity and aim to repair what has been lost over the years.

This UFO thing is red-herring. For budding constitutionalists out there, they should spend their effort helping to uphold the constitution by supporting Kucinich's call to impeach the criminals in office now.



The Europeans are thinking of imposing currency controls - check out this article:


Will Europe impose exchange controls to head off disaster? Posted by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard

Euro dollar is buckling..


Big re: Chavez
I agree with your comments regarding Chavez. Among the many things not getting a lot of coverage here, he only wants to extend his rule for another year, a 7th. what seems to be upsetting the Venezuelan upper classes more than the term extension is the delegation of a lot of the decision making process to the municipality level.

Hakan with the reindeers

Dear Elaine, do not ever stop your blogging, 'nuf said.

Have you read this great article by Antal E Fekete: http://www.professorfekete.com/articles%5CAEFTheShadowPyramid.pdf

"Derivatives made easy.

We have the Chinese puzzle wrapped in mystery inside of an enigma to solve. I would certainly count the Chinese among not just the biggest, but the shrewdest and most skillful bond speculators ever, backed up by their unprecedented kitty of well over one trillion dollars in T-bonds. I would even go so far as suggesting that a large part of this kitty has originated, not so much in trade surplus but, rather, in bond speculation. After all, the Chinese have been active players at the blackjack table where the chips are U.S. bonds, since the early 1980s. They have played their hand quite adroitly. It would be out of character if they all of a sudden turned into dummies."

Take care



The wealthy don't like true representative democracy, and they surely don't like worker's rights.

It's tough to know what's happening on the ground..but will all of the news brushing aside the true dictatorship of Pakistan ( nuclear weapons and all), they choose to focus on Venezuela...and leave out the positive things that have happened since Chavez came to power.

One of the biggest things that irks me is when the wealthy own all of land, preventing the population from farming, so they have to import expensive food from other countries. Venezuela was a prime example. A naturally rich country, with extremely poor population.

Elaine Supkis

Thanks for all the links, everyone. And yes, the Chinese have been playing FX games for a while, after all, they figured out international money exchanges right in front of me. I watched the process with fascination. Once they figured out the post-Bretton Woods II game, they loved it.

This is why everyone yaps at them about the yuan but the battle between them and Japan over the yen/yuan values is so amusing and horrible at the same time.

About the Glass-Stegall Act: you are CORRECT, John! 100%. I goofed. But the other act has been repealed, too, just this last month! I wrote about it. They removed it just in time for everything to collapse. The wretches.


devaul: You seem to think you have the answers. What would your plan be? Dr. Paul isn't perfect but he is infinitely better than anyone else in the hunt. Who are you behind in this race?



Please do not make assumptions about me. If you do not like me, then say so, but do not attack me from behind.

I have said before and I will again: I do not know the solution, and I am NOT the only person who has said this. While I do not know the solution, I do know that traveling the same road again is pointless. We will find nothing new on that road, so why not try a different road?

As for me not being the only person who wondered if there even was a solution, I give you Exhibit A: Johnny Silver Bear. The man who runs the Silver Bear Cafe.

He stated, and I quote: "What purpose would a revolution serve? Who among us has a solution?"

That was several years ago, but it appears now from his website that he has found his man: Dr. Ron Paul. I find this to be a major cop-out. The question asked was pertinant -- extremely so. To then grab at something like Ron Paul's campaign and propose this as a "revolution" of some kind is just ridiculous. We have been down this road before, and we know where it ends.

Here is something to ponder, Ragman. After the Russian revolution had swept away the old aristocracy and the Czar and the white Russians, Lenin, the intellectual leader of this revolution, asked a simple question: "Was tun?" (What to do?)

If Lenin can ask questions like that and not be ridiculed for it, then so can I.


I did not know Sarbanes-Oxley had been repealed. We still get books and publications on that here in the library. I am very surprised by this. That was a major law. Things really are moving fast (assuming this news is true).


devaul: I'm not attacking anyone "from behind". It is really none of my business what you stand for, everyone is entitled to a n opinion, which I may or may not agree with. I respect your opinion even if I disagree with it, which I do. None of us know what a Ron Paul administration will do. Neither you nor anyone else can predict what will happen five minutes from now, let alone a year or two into a new administration. However, I do firmly believe that in the context of this election Ron Paul is the best choice for a CHANGE. I'm willing to give the man a chance.

Elaine Supkis

In our present landscape, Ron Paul IS a 'revolution.' Let's not misunderstand this simple fact. I disagree with a lot of his positions. He doesn't take into account things like my husband, hurt at work and unable to be a professional photographer due to brain injury caused by chemical poisoning (this was before electronic cameras, alas).

He thinks everyone should sink or swim. Well, the Pentagon has been hammering soldiers with obvious brain injuries as 'not disabled' even as they are unable to work. The price people pay who are at the forefront of the work/war force is considerable. Doctors like Paul may make sacrifices, etc. But he didn't have his hand hacked off or brain battered while delivering babies unless the wails of the babies in Congress has caused him some brain damage.

But he does cut to the chase here and few are doing this. Certainly, the top candidates being pushed by the media are not telling us anything at all. The presumption is, they will maintain this status quo.

Both I and Ron Paul say, this is no longer possible. Kucinich is a good candidate who will never see the light of day and he is busy so he can't push very hard and the left is, unlike the libertarian right, totally disorganized and demoralized.

For much of the left wants the STATUS QUO. Ergo: Ron Paul really is a 'revolutionary.' Or 'reactionary' since unlike me, he wants a mythical past. One that he barely understands.

As a lady who lived an actual Victorian lifestyle with horses, oxen, kerosene lamps and no electricity. Cooking on a wood stove, by god, I'll tell you, those years were HARD WORK. Try carrying pails of water or boiling down snow for water! For years and years!

Heh. Ouch.

Anyway, the past may be our future but right now, few Americans want this .



Your statement: "None of us know what a Ron Paul administration will do." is the very problem that I have with Ron Paul.

What point is there in voting for someone who will not say what they will do once in office? This has been our system for years now, ever since I was born. It must stop.

If Ron Paul were to say the following:

"I will move quickly to abolish the Federal Reserve and all its member banks, arrest their officers, and arrest all other bankers who used this system to make money off of American taxpayers for 100 years and incarcerate them in a private cell and then toss the keys into the sea," I would vote for him, for this is the first step towards a lasting "solution" to our current problems.

If his platform is to sign some papers and then get his head blown off like Kennedy did... well, I think I will just pass.

The last piece of the puzzle fell into place for me the other day. It was not here, but that does not matter. I can see the whole picture now thanks to Elaine and others who did so much in-depth research.

Unless the Fed is torn to shreds and eradicated along with all its supporters and clients, there is no solution that will work in this country -- mythical or otherwise.

There. That would be the first step in "my plan", if I had one. If it is not Ron Paul's first step, then I will not vote for him.


DeVaul: I'm kinda new to Elaine's website. She is one incredible writer! She has certainly opened my eyes on a lot of topics. I'll try to find a reference on Ron Paul and the fed. I know he has said in the past that he would abolish it. I was in High School when Kennedy was shot. The point you make linking his death with issuing notes directly from the Treasury is spot on. Our Masters will attempt to preserve the status quo at all costs.


I learned about this information recently from an article on the Silver Bear Cafe, which is the only other website I visit besides Elaine's. Of all the conspiracy theories I have heard during my lifetime, this was the only one that made sense. It was a long time coming and it also has a long precedent in America.

Andrew Jackson, one of the first presidents after the Founding Father generation, was brutally attacked by the media even though a majority of the population supported him. His crime? He opposed the establishment of a national bank with powers to print money (i.e. bills of credit). He survived, but he and his wife were traumatized for life.

A judge in Alabama ruled that the Federal Reserve was unconstitutional because it emited bills of credit without giving consideration in return for such. He was assassinated two weeks later. His ruling was then overturned with little comment.

JFK was the last president to oppose the moneymakers. He signed an order granting the US Treasury the right to print its own money and not charge the American people interest on it. It would be backed by the silver and gold holdings of the US Treasury.

He was shot dead sometime later, the huge silver holdings were sold off completely over time, and the gold was sold off as well until Nixon put a stop to it. We all know what happened to him after that.

Robert Kennedy advocated a return to silver certificates and the reintroduction of silver coinage. He was assassinated, again on live TV.

It would not surprise me one bit to learn that Martin Luther King was murdered because of some threat he posed to the moneymakers, and the same goes for the attempt on Reagan's life by someone who, again, had no connection whatsoever to the intended target. Notice the assassins are all considered to be "crazy" and when not, they are assassinated themselves.

The Secret Service no longer protects presidents from assassination, it spends its time tracking down counterfeiters.

Are there any more dots to connect?

The silver is all gone, so there is no possibility of returning to silver coinage. The gold will soon be gone also, so there is no possibility of a gold back currency. That leaves only the moneymakers and their complicated moneymaking machine.

Many people have found out their names, their various organizations (Illuminati, Counsel on Foreign Relations, Masons, Fabions, etc.), the fact that they are all interrelated by marriage and business ties, but these things are not the link that holds them together. These links are tenuous at best.

What holds them together and allows them to fight as one entity is their desire to preserve their hard won right to create money and wealth out of thin air, using only a pen and a piece of paper. By this mechanism they do not need to work or produce anything, they need only rule those who do.

If you had achieved the power to buy anything in the world, using only a pen and a piece of paper, and someone was demanding that this power be taken away from you, what would you do?

Who has a solution to this problem and a plan to implement it?


Elaine Supkis

Very good, De Vaul.

The ruling elites rule via the sword. Justice holds the sword as well as the scales.

The elites try to get along. Note that Gore went to the White House to visit our dictator this week. And so it goes: everyone gets along even as they contest over the steering wheel of our Good Ship Even Keel and as it lurches into a terrible typhoon, they squabble with each other but all don't care if the guys in the hold shoveling coal into the blast furnace drown.

And this is why we have history: when the working masses begin to do something or follow some leader, we see actual violence. King was assassinated because he was supporting a municipal worker's strike when some garbage collectors were crushed to death during a storm when their bosses, who were white, locked them out of the office because they were black. So they took shelter in a dump truck rear and when it was started, it crushed them.

I once witnessed such an accident years ago. It was horrible. The man was cut in two. This started a strike, King went there to force the media to see what was happening and then he was shot.

I was in Germany at the time and things were very tense on the military bases there as black soldiers were very angry. The military base in the American sector shut down.


DeVaul&Elaine: If they continue to "create money" out of thin air ad infinitum, won't this creation ultimately result in a dollar that is worth ZERO? Then what? Maybe too many questions without answers.


Dr King was a great man. You can read his speeches, and he knew exactly what was going on in the world. Race relations, US foreign policy. Other civil rights leaders cautioned him on his opposition to the war, knowing the Dem leaders were tolerant of civil rights activism but not Dr King's antiwar stance. His death, his murder, was a terrible loss.

Elaine Supkis

Quite right, Al.


It is a simple matter that banks are reluctant to lend to one another because people cannot make mortgage repayments which the banks use in turn to profit from selling on and re-lending to private customers. But this means they have no money to honour savings accounts. Then there is money tied up in property that cannot be easily sold, which is equivalent to taking money out of circulation. One may think that this is anti-inflationary, but because of increases in oil prices and staple food supplies, this cites supplementary inflation. The answer to the main question of financial market instability lies with oil and gold. Let America be less selfish and contribute to world oil production, then this would stabilize oil prices. If governments were to invest in gold and use the returns to support the banking system short term, this too would be a stabilization factor. Stable oil prices would mean guaranteed customs revenue from petroleum products; consumers would feel far better if they are to suffer from financial insecurity via duties rather than from taxes at source. Why not use the most demanded commodities to support world economies? It is possible; the wealth is out there - we should not be thinking a myriad of home repossessions and extension of hardship - the whole of the oil and gold markets are open to buyers and investors; there is no restriction.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad