http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve
Mon Jul 4, 2005 17:31
64.140.158.13
Who owns the Federal Reserve?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve
The Federal Reserve claims that nobody owns it – that it is an “independent entity within the government.” The Federal Reserve is subject to laws such as the Freedom of Information Act and the Privacy Act which cover Federal agencies but not private corporations; yet Congress gave the Federal Reserve the autonomy to carry out its responsibilities insulated from political pressure. Each of the Federal Reserve's three parts – the Board of Governors, the regional Reserve banks and the Federal Open Market Committee – operates independently of the federal government to carry out the Federal Reserve's core responsibilities. Once a member of the Board of Governors is appointed, he or she can be as independent as a U.S. Supreme Court judge, though the term is shorter.
In the 1982 case, Lewis v. United States, the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals stated that the "Federal reserve banks are not federal instrumentalities for purposes of a Federal Torts Claims Act, but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations.". The opinion also went on to state that "The Reserve Banks have properly been held to be federal instrumentalities for some purposes."
[edit]
Influence of Government
As the nation's central bank, the Federal Reserve derives its authority from the US Congress. It is considered an independent central bank because its decisions do not have to be ratified by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branch of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by the Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms. The Federal Reserve's financial independence arises because it is hugely profitable, among others, due to its ownership of government bonds. It returns billions of dollars to the government each year. However, the Federal Reserve is subject to oversight by the Congress, which periodically reviews its activities and can alter its responsibilities by statute. Also, the Federal Reserve must work within the framework of the overall objectives of economic and financial policy established by the government.
[edit]
Money creation and fractional reserve banking
FULL REPORT:>>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve
========================
Patriotism and recent U.S. history
CLICK FOR LINKS:
Magnets on automobiles became a popular way to display patriotism in the United States around the time of the 2004 presidential election.
Many believe that the surge in patriotism enabled a number of major changes in national policy. The (significantly named) USA PATRIOT Act, which was signed into law on October 26, 2001, was designed to combat terrorism but is considered by many to constitute a harmful assault on civil liberties. It is also possible that the patriotic surge created a political climate under which it was possible for the Bush Administration to launch wars first in Afghanistan and then (far more controversially) in Iraq.
Like almost all wars, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq appear to have increased patriotic feeling. As casualties have mounted and opposition to the war has increased, a pattern seen earlier in the Vietnam War has reemerged: those in favor of war consider that those who oppose it are unpatriotic, or even outright traitors. Several conservative commentators have indicated they feel that news that paints the US in a negative light is giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Since war opponents understandably resent such accusations, the political debate has taken place in an atmosphere of increasing anger.
The Texas A&M Band on September 22, 2001 forms a giant "USA" on the field while the stadium crowd is dressed in red, white, or blue in honor of those who died on September 11, 2001
While there was a groundswell of international outrage and support for the US public after the September 11, 2001 attacks, the link between the war on terrorism, the 2003 Iraq War and US patriotism has been difficult for some outside the US. Modern Western Europeans, particularly in the United Kingdom (perhaps due to its imperial history) and Germany have tended to view any ostentatious display of flags and national symbols as small-minded, jingoistic or, what is worse, racist—they have also been associated with Football Hooliganism (see Nationalism for more discussion on this topic). While patriotic statements appear to have played well to the US domestic audience, they necessarily exclude foreigners. Further, many abroad feel that the attributes described as typically or exclusively American—such as freedom and democracy—are not only found in the United States, and to claim so is inflammatory.
It has been claimed that patriotic fervor has decreased the ability of Americans to obtain objective information about the world situation. In particular, the journal Political Science Quarterly published research showing that those who obtained their news from outlets that appear to make a concerted effort to be patriotic were more likely to have factual misconceptions about the Iraq war. These misperceptions were: that weapons of mass destruction had been found, that evidence linked Saddam Hussein to al Qaeda, and that world public opinion favored the war. Respondents that received their news from public broadcasting, conversely, were far less likely to hold these perceptions.
It has also been claimed that liberal Democrats opposed to the war in Iraq are not patriotic Americans. Hollywood was also at the brunt of America's new patriotic feelings post 9-11, and many artists were snubbed by the American public as a result of their opposition to the war.
[edit]
See also
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriotism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve
The Federal Reserve claims that nobody owns it – that it is an “independent entity within the government.” The Federal Reserve is subject to laws such as the Freedom of Information Act and the Privacy Act which cover Federal agencies but not private corporations; yet Congress gave the Federal Reserve the autonomy to carry out its responsibilities insulated from political pressure. Each of the Federal Reserve's three parts – the Board of Governors, the regional Reserve banks and the Federal Open Market Committee – operates independently of the federal government to carry out the Federal Reserve's core responsibilities. Once a member of the Board of Governors is appointed, he or she can be as independent as a U.S. Supreme Court judge, though the term is shorter.
In the 1982 case, Lewis v. United States, the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals stated that the "Federal reserve banks are not federal instrumentalities for purposes of a Federal Torts Claims Act, but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations.". The opinion also went on to state that "The Reserve Banks have properly been held to be federal instrumentalities for some purposes."
[edit]
Influence of Government
As the nation's central bank, the Federal Reserve derives its authority from the US Congress. It is considered an independent central bank because its decisions do not have to be ratified by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branch of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by the Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms. The Federal Reserve's financial independence arises because it is hugely profitable, among others, due to its ownership of government bonds. It returns billions of dollars to the government each year. However, the Federal Reserve is subject to oversight by the Congress, which periodically reviews its activities and can alter its responsibilities by statute. Also, the Federal Reserve must work within the framework of the overall objectives of economic and financial policy established by the government.
[edit]
Money creation and fractional reserve banking
FULL REPORT:>>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve
========================
Patriotism and recent U.S. history
CLICK FOR LINKS:
Magnets on automobiles became a popular way to display patriotism in the United States around the time of the 2004 presidential election.
Many believe that the surge in patriotism enabled a number of major changes in national policy. The (significantly named) USA PATRIOT Act, which was signed into law on October 26, 2001, was designed to combat terrorism but is considered by many to constitute a harmful assault on civil liberties. It is also possible that the patriotic surge created a political climate under which it was possible for the Bush Administration to launch wars first in Afghanistan and then (far more controversially) in Iraq.
Like almost all wars, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq appear to have increased patriotic feeling. As casualties have mounted and opposition to the war has increased, a pattern seen earlier in the Vietnam War has reemerged: those in favor of war consider that those who oppose it are unpatriotic, or even outright traitors. Several conservative commentators have indicated they feel that news that paints the US in a negative light is giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Since war opponents understandably resent such accusations, the political debate has taken place in an atmosphere of increasing anger.
The Texas A&M Band on September 22, 2001 forms a giant "USA" on the field while the stadium crowd is dressed in red, white, or blue in honor of those who died on September 11, 2001
While there was a groundswell of international outrage and support for the US public after the September 11, 2001 attacks, the link between the war on terrorism, the 2003 Iraq War and US patriotism has been difficult for some outside the US. Modern Western Europeans, particularly in the United Kingdom (perhaps due to its imperial history) and Germany have tended to view any ostentatious display of flags and national symbols as small-minded, jingoistic or, what is worse, racist—they have also been associated with Football Hooliganism (see Nationalism for more discussion on this topic). While patriotic statements appear to have played well to the US domestic audience, they necessarily exclude foreigners. Further, many abroad feel that the attributes described as typically or exclusively American—such as freedom and democracy—are not only found in the United States, and to claim so is inflammatory.
It has been claimed that patriotic fervor has decreased the ability of Americans to obtain objective information about the world situation. In particular, the journal Political Science Quarterly published research showing that those who obtained their news from outlets that appear to make a concerted effort to be patriotic were more likely to have factual misconceptions about the Iraq war. These misperceptions were: that weapons of mass destruction had been found, that evidence linked Saddam Hussein to al Qaeda, and that world public opinion favored the war. Respondents that received their news from public broadcasting, conversely, were far less likely to hold these perceptions.
It has also been claimed that liberal Democrats opposed to the war in Iraq are not patriotic Americans. Hollywood was also at the brunt of America's new patriotic feelings post 9-11, and many artists were snubbed by the American public as a result of their opposition to the war.
[edit]
See also
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriotism
Message Board by American Patriot Friends Network [APFN]
