Comment: ok ...if you want to go there

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Ellen Brown is a historian (see in situ)

ok ...if you want to go there

You would think what would be most important to you is whether you are a “Statist” or not, I mean you are on a site calling for Liberty, but I guess being “right” and the fact that you put so much work in to a “conspiracy kook site” just means you are no better than the people you think you are fighting against.

http://www.yamaguchy.com/

I mean really man this is some scary shit here, do you even live in this country, because not to many Americans can muster up this much hate.

Ellen Brown is a joke!

Gary North, a personal friend of Ron Paul rips this wack job apart.

Ellen Brown's Historical Errors
Gary North

Ellen Brown's book, The Web of Debt, contains numerous historical errors. Chapter after chapter contains one or more bogus quotations. Gary North survey these errors in this subdepartment of Ellen Brown vs. Gold.

Gary North has a Ph.D. in history. Gary North can say in confidence that Ms. Brown should have had someone with training in history edit her manuscript. The Web of Debt would have been a much shorter book.

http://www.garynorth.com/public/department142.cfm

Ellen Brown's Web of Debt Is an Anti-Gold Currency, Pro-Fiat Money, Greenback, Keynesian Tract. Here, He Takes It Apart, Error by Error.

Gary North
Ellen Brown has thrown in the towel. She is no longer willing to argue with me. I finished my critique of her on November 17, 2010. On November 20, she publicly switched sides. She came out in favor of Bernanke, the Federal Reserve System, and quantitative easing.

http://www.garynorth.com/public/department141.cfm

“End the Fed.” With these words, Congressman Ron Paul has mobilized
a small army of political activists who did not know what the Federal
Reserve System was in 200⒌ This three-word slogan is the culmination of Austrian School economist Murray Rothbard’s work, which began in the 1950s. People who had never heard of central banking in 2005 now know that the Fed has been at the heart of the Federal government’s attempt to save the big banks. They do not approve. I certainly share their antipathy.

All of this has increased the demand for Austrian School economics
materials as never before. The Mises Institute has benefited greatly.
But the Mises Institute is not the only beneficiary. Unbeknownst to
the vast majority of people who now call themselves conservatives another movement has benefited. It also has been critical of actional reserve banking. It also has been critical of the Federal Reserve System. It also has published books against the Fed—books that extend back to the days before the Fed was created by Federal law in 19⒔ This movement is an extension of nineteenth-century Populism, which itself was an extension of an earlier movement devoted to the creation of a system of pure fiat money, a system run by the Federal government. This movement had its own political party in the 1880s: the Greenback Party, also known as the Greenback Labor Party. In 1890, this party merged with the newly formed People’s Party, known as the Populist Party, three years later the Populist Party came into existence. Congressman James Weaver, the Greenback Party’s leader, was the Populist Party’s first nominee for President in 189⒉ He carried four states. The most famous spokesman for
Populist Party ideals was the far-le, anti-gold standard politician William Jennings Bryan, who received the Populists’ nomination in 1896, the year that he first received the Democrats’ nomination. The Populist Party ended aer 1908, the year of Bryan’s third loss as a nominee.

The anti-Fed campaign has helped the sales of a book written by a
lawyer, Ellen Brown: The Web of Debt (2006). It has gone into multiple printings. Brown is forthrightly a Populist and Greenbacker. Hers is the fiat-money economics of neo-Populism. This is the culmination of at least half a century of sporadic attempts by Greenbackers to infiltrate almost every right-wing movement in this country.
I first began monitoring them in 196⒈ I began collecting Greenback
books. I had a large enough collection in 1962 to enter a library collection contest at UCLA as an undergraduate.1 I have written about them for 45 years. They have operated under the radar inside American conservatism.
Ellen Brown’s book is the first one to have gotten traction within the wider conservative movement. I have called these people false-flag infiltrators.
Over the past six decades, a series of tiny publishing houses and self published authors have produced books comparable to Web of Debt. These have been written by authors like Wycliffe B. Vennard, H. S. Kenan, Congressman McFadden, Whitney Slocum, Frederick Soddy, R. McNair Wilson, A. N. Field, Arthur Kitson. In the 1930s, the Greenbackers’most famous promoter was Father Charles Coughlin, who had initially been a supporter of the New Deal, but who turned on Roosevelt and built a national audience on the radio. His anti-bank, anti-Semitic broadcasts gained millions of listeners. His book, Money! Questions and Answers, was pure Greenbackism. The Greenbackers’ most famous representative in Congress was Wright Patman, who om 1963 to 1975 was the Chairman of the House Banking Committee. A long-forgotten ally of Patman’s in the early 1940s was Congressman Jerry Voorhis, who was defeated by Richard Nixon in 1946 in Nixon’s first campaign. Voorhis was a political
lefist.

Until the publication of Web of Debt in 2006, Gertrude Coogan was
quoted as ofen as any of them, so I have selected her work as representative.

Brown’s theory of money and her theory of Abraham Lincoln as the representative figure of Greenbackism are found in Coogan’s two books. If Coogan was wrong, Brown is equally wrong.
The Greenback movement is tied to the old Populist hatred of the “International Banking Conspiracy.” This equently dris into antisemitism, since the “International Jewish Banking Conspiracy” is always just around the corner. Roman Catholics (Coogan, Coughlin, Father Denis Fahey) have been prominent in the movement, although Protestant fundamentalists are just as numerous, but they are seldom the “intellectual” leaders.