LibertyMaryland

The Isle of Jekyll - where a handful of the richest men in existence secretly plotted the creation of the Federal Reserve

What’s the Federal Reserve?  Most folks will tell you it’s a large, complex, central banking system headed by a small group of elite economists and bankers that control every aspect of the United States money system. 

But most folks probably don’t know how it got started. 

I found out when I made a recent business trip to Jekyll Island - a small island off the coast of Georgia.  It’s a remarkable place with lots of natural beauty, a great golf course and huge Golden-Age era mansions.  They filmed “The Legend of Bagger Vance” there to give you an idea.

I played a few games of tennis on the best clay courts I’ve ever laid eyes on. 

During the conference, my coworkers and I were treated to elegant multi-course meals, complimentary cigars and more single-cask bourbon than I would care to remember.

We stayed at the Jekyll Island Clubhouse, the original building where 7 men (one Senator and the 6 richest men on the planet) met - in secret, with fake names, no less - to lay out plans for the Federal Reserve.

Rational thinkers can disagree on the legitimacy of the Federal Reserve as it stands - whether it is “good” to have such an economic construct to regulate money supply by setting interest rates and governing financial policy. 

Then there’s also the rational question of whether such a construct should be left to the whims of a strict democracy, or if its officers should be elected by a republican house and senate - or whether these officers should be appointed by the executive branch and then confirmed by the senate, or whether their names should be drawn from a national lottery. 

In any event - the Federal Reserve Bank exists, and it doesn’t appear to be going anywhere, no matter how bad of a job it does.  It’s THE bank in charge of economic policy.  We don’t have any other banks waiting to take over. 

The real problem, is that the matter of creation of this bank was completely illegitimate.

That’s a couched statement for most people, but one that even Frank Vanderlip - one of the framers of the Federal Reserve - agrees with. 

He wrote an article 22 years after the fact, saying:

“If it were to be exposed publicly that our particular group had gotten together and written a banking bill, that bill would have no chance whatever of passage by Congress.”

At the meeting, it’s said that 1/4 of the world’s wealth was concentrated in one tiny room. 

I ate breakfast in that room several times, and it’s quite unremarkable - very reminiscent of any breakfast nook at any decent hotel in the world. 

It’s amazing to think that the very central bank responsible for printing our money was started in secret, by the Federal Government by the world’s richest men, who would then be in charge of that central bank.

I’m not even going to try to come to any specific conclusions, because it’s such a mind blowing event that 99% of people probably don’t even know about. 

 However, it seems to me that this Government supported monopoly should be on the top of the list for any progressive movement that seeks “change” in government. 

Alcohol and Other Drugs

Alcohol was prohibited at the federal level for fourteen years. However unsuccessful the government agents were, in stopping drinking, they did succeed in suppressing civil liberties. The Prohibition Era has been credited with wiretapping, and warrantless searches of private homes. When the American people got fed up with their rights being trampled, they organized and supported candidates who pledged to erase the Prohibition Amendment from the Constitution. When they succeeded, most states legalized the distribution and sale of liquor, and criminal gangs dominating the trade went out of business. The repeal of a bad law accomplished what the indiscriminate use of force and tax money could never do: the end of criminal trade in liquor.

When misused, alcohol is still a deadly drug, and human weakness and disease enable alcohol to destroy families. We live in a society though, that strives to be free with minimal local regulations. The federal prohibition against alcohol became a prohibition against liberty.

Illegal drugs, or our government’s attempt to solve the problems resulting from these substances has affected many Americans. These substances known as “drugs” are not all equally dangerous. In the late 1960’s the anti-war, anti-government mentality was endemic, resulting in a popular anti-establishment statement of marijuana use. Medical marijuana is the easiest example of how liberty and common sense blend. Full drug legalization though, is the tough question. Drug laws against physically addictive substances may be necessary, but at the federal level? Constitutionally, the federal government does not seem to have this power.

As a father of four, and a grandfather of two, I understand the fear associated with raising families in this culture. Having practiced dentistry twenty-five years in Baltimore City, I have witnessed patients merely existing from one drug program to another. Any substance that disassociates someone from truth, whether it is alcohol or some other drug, is counterproductive. But, is it the Federal Government’s role to declare war on it, and is the war working? I would call for a study of how to transition from a federal war on drugs, to a system that would support liberties, protect our citizens, and encourage a sober populace. This should be a State matter, not Federal.

Free Talk Live

Free Talk Live is a liberty oriented talk show syndicated out of New Hampshire. The hosts Ian and Mark are members of the Free State Project, a project with the goal of moving thousands of liberty activist to one state to better affect the politics of that state. The show is not broadcast in this area but you can listen to it via live stream and podcast. I have enjoyed listening to the show for the past few months and I thought I would pass along the recommendation to you.

One interesting topic on the show recently was a civil disobedience event that they were planning along with the Free State Project activists. To protest hypocritical New Hampshire state laws against gambling they are going to hold an open poker game out side in a public area. This is intended to be a challenge to the local authorities to see if they will arrest the participants. They intend to challenge in court the laws against allowing members of the public to take wagers with each other, while simultaneously allowing the public to take wagers with the state in the form of the lottery. Even if they are not successful in court, they hope to point out the hypocrisy of the situation to the general public with any media coverage they may garner.

I applaud these Free State Activist in these activities. Seeing as we in Maryland live in the state that has as its actual official motto “The Free State”, is this a type of activity that we could emulate? What public civil disobedience type event might the liberty community suggest? Please comment below.

The Iranian Problem

With Iran being presented much the same way Iraq and Saddam Hussein were in the past, and with it receiving so much attention in the 2008 presidential campaign, reason needs to be presented to counter our march to unnecessary war. You won’t hear reason from any of the media-loved Republicans on this issue (Romney, Huckabee, Giuliani, or McCain) , nor will you hear it from the media-chosen Democrats (Clinton, Obama etc).

America’s policy on nuclear proliferation in Iran specifically, and Iran’s influence in the middle east in general, brings out the worst of American imperialist politics. First, America needs to step back from “pre-emption“. That is, the policy of invading or taking military action against a country we “think” might be planning to harm our “interests”. Pre-emption is a code word for imperialism. It means that we can attack anyone we think might be looking at us funny, as “interests” are so loosely defined as to make anything permissible. The only acceptable cause for using military force is to defend life or property of our citizens. Anything else opens up the slippery slope we have too often slid down, to our own peril and harm.

When a politician is asked, “Will you allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons if you are president?”, it would be refreshing and give hope for peace and freedom if the politician would answer “it is not my place, or the place of our country to decide who can have what weapons”. Unless we are currently at war with another country, we are overstepping our rights as human beings, when we presume to tell them how they can defend themselves. We are setting ourselves at a higher position, that of demi-gods or imperials lords, when we attempt to control others in such a manner. This is bad for freedom, bad for human dignity, and bad for our own souls.

Further, if one studies history, and understands why Iran and the United States are at odds today, one can see that the problem may not be intractable. Indeed, all the arguments made by our mainstream politicians regarding the sanity of the Iranian government and religious leaders totally ignores the fact that China, and Russia, and plenty of other countries are not terrified by that Iranian government. Continue reading The Iranian Problem…

The Second Amendment

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” — Second Amendment of the United States Constitution

This to me is a very simply explained concept and well written amendment.

In order to secure liberty it could be necessary for the people to defend it with arms from an enemy, foreign or domestic. In addition to the security realities of the day, I believe that the intent of the founders was to create the ultimate of the many checks and balances in the Constitution via this amendment.

There are of course many reasons for a free person to desire to own a firearm. Hunting is the cherished past time of many regions and families. Marksmanship is a sport of Olympic stature. Great enjoyment is found by those who collect and care for firearms. Of course protection of one’s home and the safety of one’s family is of paramount concern to many gun owners. All of the issues I listed are enough to convince me that our Constitution’s position on arms is correct. Free people, in the exercise of their liberty, should be able to do any activity so long as that activity does not conflict with another person’s exercise of their own liberty.

However, what is actually the substantive point of this issue and this cherished amendment, is that by allowing the citizens to remain armed this preserves their right to give consent to be governed. Without the clearly defined rights in the Second Amendment, the people lose the ability to rebel and therefore lose their ability to consent to be governed. Reductions of the strength of the Second Amendment via legislation is contrary to the revolutionary spirit of our nation’s founding. I feel those who signed the Declaration of Independence would look on with scorn at those who attempt to cheapen the significance of these concerns.

I am anxious to read the Supreme Court’s opinion in District of Columbia vs. Heller. Regardless of that opinion and its affect on the regulations of the states, I will not vote for any additional Federal regulation of firearms if elected to Congress and will work to rescind the majority of those on the books.

- Richard Matthews

Originally posted February 8th, 2008

Republican Matthews calls for troops to come home in 2009

Baltimore, MD – Republican candidate for Congress Richard Matthews calls for a safe and swift withdraw of U.S. Forces stationed in the Middle East in 2009. Matthews states as a campaign promise, “If I gain the trust of the voters of Maryland to serve in 2009, I will not vote for any bill that extends the presence of the U.S. military in Iraq. Any bill that includes spending for the continuation of U.S. military operations in Iraq, I will commit myself to vote against.”

Candidate Matthews thinks that the mission(s) in Iraq have been accomplished. “We have verified that there are no weapons that are threatening the security of the United States, we have toppled a dictator, and now is the time for us to step out of the way and let Iraq become a sovereign, independent nation.”

The Matthews campaign feels that the Democratic incumbent in Maryland’s Second District C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger can be commended for voting against the “surge” in Iraq in early 2007. However, his stated position of a “Perimeter Plan” does not help protect the security of the United States. Continue reading Republican Matthews calls for troops to come home in 2009…

Babbula endorses James in MD 4 CD

Today the Peter James’ Congressional campaign in Maryland’s 4th district received the endorsement of Micheal Babbula the 3rd place finisher in the CD 4 democratic race.

I gave a talk and showed the “Money as Debt” video to Dr. Babbula’s economics class tonight.

In Liberty,

Peter

First Post

This is our first post. Stay tuned…