Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
markinspain

Time To Create Our Own Money.

Recommended Posts

IMO this needs a thread of its own. Many thanks to BENEFIT SPONGER for the original link. You don't have to watch it all at once, but it explains why we are in such a mess which is completely unnecessary!

http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/ind...0411&st=387

or direct

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=...h&plindex=0

Any one fancy doing some grafity outside the Bank of England? Spray the name plate to Bank of Rothschild

and then take a photo/video of it and put on Youtube?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I´m gonna bump this one again.

It explains why your taxes are used to pay interest to private banks instead of the NHS, schools, and other public services etc. The Bank of England, although supposedly nationalsed, is actually in private hands and so is the Federal Reserve!

Please watch and talk to your friends about it.

The only thing which worries me about this site is that we´re preaching to the converted!

Anyone got any ideas how to spread the word?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is there anyone here who hasn't seen Money Masters yet?

Watch it.

I hadn't seen it. I've just watched about 20 minutes of it.

I would like to present a quick critique:

1) it looks like it cost about 50p to make.

2) I got as far as the history of Rome bit and could go no further as I was laughing too much. "Painfully inaccurate" doesn't do it justice.

3) a quick Google shows its fanbase is largely composed of people in Montana who keep guns as pets.

4) the denizens of Stormfront and certain Islamic websites are also big fans.

5) I think I'm detecting a theme here...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I hadn't seen it. I've just watched about 20 minutes of it.

I would like to present a quick critique:

1) it looks like it cost about 50p to make.

2) I got as far as the history of Rome bit and could go no further as I was laughing too much. "Painfully inaccurate" doesn't do it justice.

3) a quick Google shows its fanbase is largely composed of people in Montana who keep guns as pets.

4) the denizens of Stormfront and certain Islamic websites are also big fans.

5) I think I'm detecting a theme here...

What part is painfully inaccurate?

You are obviously related to the Rothschild family or benefit from the fractional reserve system in some way then ;)

Look at the ´money as debt´ video instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What part is painfully inaccurate?

You are obviously related to the Rothschild family or benefit from the fractional reserve system in some way then ;)

Look at the ´money as debt´ video instead.

Well *deep breath* it starts with the claim that in 200BC two Roman Emperors (there were no Emperors in 200BC- Augustus was the first,from around 27BC) attempted to change the law on property holdings. This is probably a hamfisted reference to the Gracchus brothers, who were around at the time of the Republic, though more like 130BC (and were definitely not Emperors).

It then claims that Julius Caesar "took back the power to coin money from the money changers" in 48BC (he didn't do anything of the sort and he spent most of that year fighting Pompey). Next it implies that he used his newly minted cash to build the Colosseum and the Vatican (he didn't).

30 seconds later "Rome plunged into the Dark Ages" for reasons that are entirely spurious (and ignoring the fact that the Western Empire survived for another 400+ years and the Eastern half was only finished off in 1453.

Trouble is, when you hear something as hopelessly wrong as that, it casts a bit of doubt on the rest of it. The fanbase is more worrying, mind.

ps, I'm not Jewish, so you can still talk to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well *deep breath* it starts with the claim that in 200BC two Roman Emperors (there were no Emperors in 200BC- Augustus was the first,from around 27BC) attempted to change the law on property holdings. This is probably a hamfisted reference to the Gracchus brothers, who were around at the time of the Republic, though more like 130BC (and were definitely not Emperors).

It then claims that Julius Caesar "took back the power to coin money from the money changers" in 48BC (he didn't do anything of the sort and he spent most of that year fighting Pompey). Next it implies that he used his newly minted cash to build the Colosseum and the Vatican (he didn't).

30 seconds later "Rome plunged into the Dark Ages" for reasons that are entirely spurious (and ignoring the fact that the Western Empire survived for another 400+ years and the Eastern half was only finished off in 1453.

Trouble is, when you hear something as hopelessly wrong as that, it casts a bit of doubt on the rest of it. The fanbase is more worrying, mind.

ps, I'm not Jewish, so you can still talk to me.

What you are saying Roman history may or may not be true as I´m no expert, but there is a lot of other things in the video that make you think, whether true or not.

Personally, the biggest eye-opener for me was the fractional reserve banking system and why our taxes are being used just to pay interest to anonymous bankers. I think that is plain wrong, especially as it doen't need to happen!

Also, to dismiss people for making what you think is a cheap video is a bit out of order. Something 'anti system' is hardly going to be made by Universal Studios is it?

It's also a bit of a generalisation to imply that everyone who agrees with the video is some kind of a nutcase. Radical thinkers are often dismissed or just plainly misunderstood.

I don't intend to use the whole video as gospel, just as I don't take the news from Murdoch world as gospel.

You use all sources you can and then try and make up your own mind.

P.S. I'm not particluarly anti-semitic - I dislike everyone equally, a bit like Dirty Harry! :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been lurking for a while on this forum and feel I have learned quite a lot about the economy and how it works in that time.

However, I would have been able to get to the truth much quciker had it not been for the fanciful conspiratorial nonsense that seems to accompany the rational economic analysis.

For that reason this particular thread has jolted me out of my silence.

I watched the Money Masters video after seeing a link to it on here and I confess I was seduced by it too. To be complimentary to it, it tells a truly fantastasic story that binds together many varied historical events in to one seemingly plausible theory. But then so does 'The Da Vinci Code'. And it doesn't need saying that Dan Brown's story is in the large part utter nonsense, albeit entertaining nonsense.

My thunder has been stolen somewhat by Pilgrim, who has discredited the account of Roman times portrayed in the film. I am sure that if one were to analyse the film in depth then almost all the shocking conspiratorial claims would prove unfounded.

A good debunking of many of the main claims of the film can be found here: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senat...serveFacts.html

The full basis of this debunking is too long to go in to here but as a starter please be aware of the following:

Yes, the Federal Reserve banks are privately owned, but they are controlled by the publically-appointed Board of Governors. The Federal Reserve banks merely execute the monetary policy choices made by the Board. In addition, nearly all the interest the Federal Reserve collects on government bonds is rebated to the Treasury each year, so the government does not pay any net interest to the Fed.

President Kennedy wrote E.O. 11,110 to phase out silver certificate currency, not to issue more of it. Records show Kennedy and the Federal Reserve were almost always in agreement on policy matters. He even signed legislation to give the Fed more authority to issue currency.

Federal Reserve Act of December 23, 1913 was not passed illegally. The House passed the bill 298-60 on the evening of Dec. 22, 1913.3 The Senate began debate the following day at 10am, and passed it 43-25 at 2:30pm.4

What of the missing Senators? Since there were 48 states in 1913, forty eight votes plus the tie-breaking vote of vice-President Thomas Marshall would have been sufficient to approve the bill even if all absent votes had been cast against the bill. However, many of the missing Senators had their positions recorded in the Congressional Record. Of the 27 votes not cast, there were 11 'yeas' (in favor of the bill) and 12 'nays.'1 Even if the absentee Senators had been there, the Currency Bill would have passed easily

And before you table any accusations against me please believe me when I say I am most definetely not related to the Rothschild family nor do I benefit from the fractional reserve system in any way. I enjoy hearing a good conspiracy tale as much as anyone else, but deep down i find them hard to stomach. Using the principle of Occam's Razor these things just melt away in to a land of fairytales. I do believe there are many pitfalls in the capatilist monetary system, in particular its insatiable demand for growth and the consumption of finite natural resources that are required to sustain the growth, and I do believe we are headed for a global credit crunch and a subsequent downward correction in UK house prices. But please do not be tempted in to believing this conspiracy nonsense or peddling it to your friends. It merely results in distorting your view of where the truth lies and destroying any credibility you have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't it occur to you how ludicrous it is that the government

has to borrow money into existence from a private bank?

Even if they do supposedly give the profits back to the government,

why doesn't The Fed write off the national debt too then if they are

such a charitable organisation.

Kennedy made a long speech saying how there was a conspiracy to take

over America, about 10 days before he had his head blown off.

To be honest I can see where you're coming from,

when I first saw the money masters, I found it a bit hard to stomach too,

questions like how so much information could be suppressed so well.

It then dawned on me that these people literally own the schools,

set the curriculum, and write the text books, as well as controlling everything else.

Leaves you feeling a bit like you're waking up in the matrix.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've been lurking for a while on this forum and feel I have learned quite a lot about the economy and how it works in that time.

However, I would have been able to get to the truth much quciker had it not been for the fanciful conspiratorial nonsense that seems to accompany the rational economic analysis.

For that reason this particular thread has jolted me out of my silence.

I watched the Money Masters video after seeing a link to it on here and I confess I was seduced by it too. To be complimentary to it, it tells a truly fantastasic story that binds together many varied historical events in to one seemingly plausible theory. But then so does 'The Da Vinci Code'. And it doesn't need saying that Dan Brown's story is in the large part utter nonsense, albeit entertaining nonsense.

My thunder has been stolen somewhat by Pilgrim, who has discredited the account of Roman times portrayed in the film. I am sure that if one were to analyse the film in depth then almost all the shocking conspiratorial claims would prove unfounded.

A good debunking of many of the main claims of the film can be found here: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senat...serveFacts.html

The full basis of this debunking is too long to go in to here but as a starter please be aware of the following:

Yes, the Federal Reserve banks are privately owned, but they are controlled by the publically-appointed Board of Governors. The Federal Reserve banks merely execute the monetary policy choices made by the Board. In addition, nearly all the interest the Federal Reserve collects on government bonds is rebated to the Treasury each year, so the government does not pay any net interest to the Fed.

President Kennedy wrote E.O. 11,110 to phase out silver certificate currency, not to issue more of it. Records show Kennedy and the Federal Reserve were almost always in agreement on policy matters. He even signed legislation to give the Fed more authority to issue currency.

Federal Reserve Act of December 23, 1913 was not passed illegally. The House passed the bill 298-60 on the evening of Dec. 22, 1913.3 The Senate began debate the following day at 10am, and passed it 43-25 at 2:30pm.4

What of the missing Senators? Since there were 48 states in 1913, forty eight votes plus the tie-breaking vote of vice-President Thomas Marshall would have been sufficient to approve the bill even if all absent votes had been cast against the bill. However, many of the missing Senators had their positions recorded in the Congressional Record. Of the 27 votes not cast, there were 11 'yeas' (in favor of the bill) and 12 'nays.'1 Even if the absentee Senators had been there, the Currency Bill would have passed easily

And before you table any accusations against me please believe me when I say I am most definetely not related to the Rothschild family nor do I benefit from the fractional reserve system in any way. I enjoy hearing a good conspiracy tale as much as anyone else, but deep down i find them hard to stomach. Using the principle of Occam's Razor these things just melt away in to a land of fairytales. I do believe there are many pitfalls in the capatilist monetary system, in particular its insatiable demand for growth and the consumption of finite natural resources that are required to sustain the growth, and I do believe we are headed for a global credit crunch and a subsequent downward correction in UK house prices. But please do not be tempted in to believing this conspiracy nonsense or peddling it to your friends. It merely results in distorting your view of where the truth lies and destroying any credibility you have.

First of all, it was meant to be a joke saying that people with a view against the video were members of the Rothschild family, hence the smiley face ;)

I take on board your alternative view, but there is always the problem in any part of history is that those who have the power or win the war, write the history from their point of view. Unfortunately, I wasn´t there at any of these events, and even if I was, I wóuldn´t be sure to be able to document events accurately anyway. Have you ever been a witness to a car crash and been able to be sure to document everything you saw? So any official document from any time in history can only be regarded as true with reference of those who paid for it to be written.

I do agree with you in that this video has a lot of chaff compared to the wheat, but there is a lot of economic information that you can do further research on. And like most of these things, opponents always use the conspriracy theory tactic to discredit anything that goes against the official line. It will be a sad fact that in 50 years time (if the human race survives that long), Murdoch news will come to be regarded as gospel.

I stand by my view that the fractional reserve banking system is wrong and that it is the main reason for the world being in such a mess, and I will continue to inform people about the video and let them make up their own minds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've been lurking for a while on this forum and feel I have learned quite a lot about the economy and how it works in that time.

However, I would have been able to get to the truth much quciker had it not been for the fanciful conspiratorial nonsense that seems to accompany the rational economic analysis.

For that reason this particular thread has jolted me out of my silence.

I watched the Money Masters video after seeing a link to it on here and I confess I was seduced by it too. To be complimentary to it, it tells a truly fantastasic story that binds together many varied historical events in to one seemingly plausible theory. But then so does 'The Da Vinci Code'. And it doesn't need saying that Dan Brown's story is in the large part utter nonsense, albeit entertaining nonsense.

My thunder has been stolen somewhat by Pilgrim, who has discredited the account of Roman times portrayed in the film. I am sure that if one were to analyse the film in depth then almost all the shocking conspiratorial claims would prove unfounded.

A good debunking of many of the main claims of the film can be found here: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senat...serveFacts.html

The full basis of this debunking is too long to go in to here but as a starter please be aware of the following:

Yes, the Federal Reserve banks are privately owned, but they are controlled by the publically-appointed Board of Governors. The Federal Reserve banks merely execute the monetary policy choices made by the Board. In addition, nearly all the interest the Federal Reserve collects on government bonds is rebated to the Treasury each year, so the government does not pay any net interest to the Fed.

President Kennedy wrote E.O. 11,110 to phase out silver certificate currency, not to issue more of it. Records show Kennedy and the Federal Reserve were almost always in agreement on policy matters. He even signed legislation to give the Fed more authority to issue currency.

Federal Reserve Act of December 23, 1913 was not passed illegally. The House passed the bill 298-60 on the evening of Dec. 22, 1913.3 The Senate began debate the following day at 10am, and passed it 43-25 at 2:30pm.4

What of the missing Senators? Since there were 48 states in 1913, forty eight votes plus the tie-breaking vote of vice-President Thomas Marshall would have been sufficient to approve the bill even if all absent votes had been cast against the bill. However, many of the missing Senators had their positions recorded in the Congressional Record. Of the 27 votes not cast, there were 11 'yeas' (in favor of the bill) and 12 'nays.'1 Even if the absentee Senators had been there, the Currency Bill would have passed easily

And before you table any accusations against me please believe me when I say I am most definetely not related to the Rothschild family nor do I benefit from the fractional reserve system in any way. I enjoy hearing a good conspiracy tale as much as anyone else, but deep down i find them hard to stomach. Using the principle of Occam's Razor these things just melt away in to a land of fairytales. I do believe there are many pitfalls in the capatilist monetary system, in particular its insatiable demand for growth and the consumption of finite natural resources that are required to sustain the growth, and I do believe we are headed for a global credit crunch and a subsequent downward correction in UK house prices. But please do not be tempted in to believing this conspiracy nonsense or peddling it to your friends. It merely results in distorting your view of where the truth lies and destroying any credibility you have.

The board members of the Fed have 14 year terms ! They do represent private banking interests. No single president can ever remove enough of them to make any difference. The belief that the 1913 act was illegal probably stems from the belief that it is against the constitution to allow private interests to create money.

Edited by sikejsudjek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IMO this needs a thread of its own. Many thanks to BENEFIT SPONGER for the original link. You don't have to watch it all at once, but it explains why we are in such a mess which is completely unnecessary!

http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/ind...0411&st=387

or direct

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=...h&plindex=0

Any one fancy doing some grafity outside the Bank of England? Spray the name plate to Bank of Rothschild

and then take a photo/video of it and put on Youtube?

This is a great video, packed with information. If you haven't got three plus hours to spare at a stretch, try watching "Money As Debt", which is three-quarters of an hour long, and covers the main points - http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9050474362583451279

Until enough people realise how destructive it is to use debt as our means of exchange - which is what we are doing at the moment - there's no chance of electing a government that will provide the country with an adequate money supply, instead of leaving us to borrow our national currency into existence.

http://www.freewebs.com/whosemoney

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doesn't it occur to you how ludicrous it is that the government

has to borrow money into existence from a private bank?

Even if they do supposedly give the profits back to the government,

why doesn't The Fed write off the national debt too then if they are

such a charitable organisation.

History has shown that when you let goverments print their own money they abuse the power in an effort to have an economic upturn and general 'feel-good factor' before an election.

Either that or they are so incompetent at managing the economy that it all blows up spectacularly.

The national debt of the USA is not owed to the Fed it is owed to other countries and to the american public.

The central bank system will probably fall out of fashion at some point in the future but at the moment it is the system the world has decided on to try to achieve economic stability, trying to learn from the mistakes of history (the great depression, bretton-woods system, ERM etc) and based on taking the control (to some extent) out of the hands of short-termist politicians.

Kennedy made a long speech saying how there was a conspiracy to take

over America, about 10 days before he had his head blown off.

I have no idea if that is true or not. If it is true then he may have been talking about some other group than the supposed 'money masters' though?

To be honest I can see where you're coming from,

when I first saw the money masters, I found it a bit hard to stomach too,

questions like how so much information could be suppressed so well.

It then dawned on me that these people literally own the schools,

set the curriculum, and write the text books, as well as controlling everything else.

but if they're so powerful and are going to such lengths to hide this information then surely they are well capable of removing it from google videos and the like..

Why aren't there SWAT teams descending on you right now to stop you spreading the information?

I agree there is huge financial illiteracy amongst the general public and a lot more should be taught in schools, but ironically I think that education would make people more able to see the conspiracy theories for the frauds that they are. At the moment the proponents of conspiracy theories are able to amaze people with actual truths about the monetary system - how money is created etc - and then with the viewer's beliefs already slightly shaken and their defenses down they are able to slip in some far more fanciful information which bypasses the usual skepticism it would be met with.

Edited by the_skeptic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
First of all, it was meant to be a joke saying that people with a view against the video were members of the Rothschild family, hence the smiley face ;)

ok. :)

I do agree with you in that this video has a lot of chaff compared to the wheat, but there is a lot of economic information that you can do further research on. And like most of these things, opponents always use the conspriracy theory tactic to discredit anything that goes against the official line. It will be a sad fact that in 50 years time (if the human race survives that long), Murdoch news will come to be regarded as gospel.

I completely agree that there is no real dividing line between historical truth and historical opinion. All you can do is try to use your own judgement to build up the picture that seems most likely to be true.

New Scientist had a good article on the phenomenon of the conspiracy theory - their website is subscription only but the text of the article is available here: http://www.therazor.org/?p=855

I stand by my view that the fractional reserve banking system is wrong and that it is the main reason for the world being in such a mess, and I will continue to inform people about the video and let them make up their own minds.

Is the world really in such a mess? Would you rather we went back to toiling in the fields day and night till with a life expectancy of 40? ;)

Yes there are many things 'wrong' with the world, but perhaps the alternatives would turn out to be even wronger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The board members of the Fed have 14 year terms ! They do represent private banking interests. No single president can ever remove enough of them to make any difference.

And that is the whole point! They are supposed to be interested in long term stability - not winning the next election.

The belief that the 1913 act was illegal probably stems from the belief that it is against the constitution to allow private interests to create money.

Yes, a belief that has been put to the test in the highest courts of the US and found wanting.

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senat.../flaherty3.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Would you rather we went back to toiling in the fields day and night till with a life expectancy of 40? ;)

Well I sometimes wonder whether that wouldn´t be a bad idea - ignorance is bliss etc. ;)

Yes there are many things 'wrong' with the world, but perhaps the alternatives would turn out to be even wronger.

I think a fair amount of 'good' (of course open to interpretation) could be done with all the money tied up in debt interest.

Edited by markinspain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
History has shown that when you let goverments print their own money they abuse the power in an effort to have an economic upturn and general 'feel-good factor' before an election.

Either that or they are so incompetent at managing the economy that it all blows up spectacularly.

Yes, this is true to some extent. However if it were the government printing money we would

just have to bear inflation, rather than inflation + interest. That isn't exactly what I advocate though,

I am more in favour of allowing a free-market in money to exist, and abolishing legal tender laws.

The national debt of the USA is not owed to the Fed it is owed to other countries and to the american public.

They've recently muddied the waters by using the chinese central bank, which they also control,

to buy US securities. This has the effect of extending a free line of credit, so that we can consume

endless quantities of chinese crap, without suffering too badly from inflation.

However before this recent brainwave of theirs, they were using the traditional fed buying securities

model, so I don't think what you are saying is entirely true.

but if they're so powerful and are going to such lengths to hide this information then surely they are well capable of removing it from google videos and the like..

Plenty of stuff does get pulled from google, for no reason. Like FTF did a few months back.

Seems their not smart enough to keep stuff off permanently though.

I'm guessing the controllers are not adapting fast enough to the new paradigm.

Why aren't there SWAT teams descending on you right now to stop you spreading the information?

I'm sure I'm probably on the "people to kill" list, when time comes to round us all up and put us in camps,

on the road to setting up a global police state.

I'm not too worried though, seeing how there are now literally millions of people on the same list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A good debunking of many of the main claims of the film can be found here: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senat...serveFacts.html

The full basis of this debunking is too long to go in to here but as a starter please be aware of the following:

Yes, the Federal Reserve banks are privately owned, but they are controlled by the publically-appointed Board of Governors. The Federal Reserve banks merely execute the monetary policy choices made by the Board. In addition, nearly all the interest the Federal Reserve collects on government bonds is rebated to the Treasury each year, so the government does not pay any net interest to the Fed.

I'm tried and just got home after a busy day so haven't got time to look at this in any detail right now.

However, with regard to the issue above. The claim is that the Fed pays back the interest on treasuries it holds only, it mentions 7% of total in issue. It does not mention the interest paid to other holders of treasuries, ie, foreign central banks. Nor does it mention why it is necessary for governments to borrow money in this way, when at the same time talking about debt free money.

I'll read through it when I've got more time.

Good link anyway, thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 350 The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.