The sulking Elves from the Woods of the North
(Left: Not all Elves are evil, but many are)
While some say Elves do not exist, in the days of yesteryear they were well known as tricksters, messing with livestock and fooling people with their strange beliefs.
Cross breeding between Elves and humans is possible, but when the Old Norse hero Helgi raped an Elf woman, she bore Skuld, who became so adept at witchcraft that she was almost invincible in battle. So perhaps it’s better to leave the Elves alone after all.
The problem is: they won’t leave us humans alone and strange noises keep coming from the distant fairy lands of Austrianism. Recently the Elves again opened fire with ‘the Con of Public Banking‘.
Here’s some of their text:
“Ellen Brown has written another statist hagiography called The Public Bank Solution. As a libertarian-oriented website promoting free-market economic approaches, we obviously disagree with her premise.
We don’t mind disagreeing with her because she is a nice person and she doesn’t do what some allied “neo-Nazi” websites do when confronted with their faulty analyses, which is to immediately launch vicious animadversions in place of logical rebuttals (because they have none).
We call such sites “neo-Nazi,” because public banking, LETS and other such alternative solutions have at their heart certain authoritarian premises, either overtly or covertly. A deep fascist impulse seems to run through the conversation.
Do they seek the lash? They may repudiate Hitler, but don’t believe it. They are likely in favor of the entire socialist paraphernalia, from private bank confiscation, to top-down monopoly money printing by the state and even the rule of one “superhuman” individual with a self-proclaimed “iron will” of the sort mentioned by Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini.
They admire people like Margrit Kennedy and her husband, both of whom had extensive careers with UNESCO. In fact, as we have extensively shown, the United Nations is the foremost backer of certain kinds of alternative LETS systems.”
The fascism of denouncing Usury! The iniquity of exposing massive elite financing of Austrianism! How much must these endearing creatures suffer before us primitive humans will understand how we have wronged them?
The conclusion of the Elves’ article runs: “The erudite Ms. Brown aside, those supporting such ideas do so with intentions much different than they claim, and some of them are, from what we can tell, maliciously opportunistic and plain evil.”
When confronted with this down to earth comment on the article and its conclusion, “Hmmm. I, George Washington’s Blog and others who agree with Ellen are a pack of liars – and the North Dakota State Bank is an example of evil? Give me a break please.“, they responded: “It is evil to attack Austrian, free-market economics as a knowing part of a Jewish genocidal, globalist conspiracy, label those who believe in freedom and write about it at great risk to themselves as elite conspirators, claim that a 10,000 year old freedom conversation is actually a Jewish con job, constantly celebrate the state over individual human action, etc. Evil seems to sum it up. ”
Yes, the cushy ‘middle class wages’ Gary North was making in the sixties at the Volker Fund and the multi-million dollar mansion that Daily Bell Editor Anthony Wile owns in Toronto certainly indicate grave risks to their health and fortune in valiantly defending the rights of the rich.
And then there is this quote from their article on ‘BIS demands Global Depression?‘:
“This is absolutely true but to blame “Austrianism” for this – and Austrianism is a term of contempt, as the correct phrase is Austrian economics – is entirely disingenuous. Just because one understands the reality of economics doesn’t mean one is supportive of the kind of ruin that the BIS now demands.”
In all fairness: the Mises Institute itself calls for ‘Radical Austrianism‘, and I assume they actually take pride in the term. But I don’t mind taking some credit for having slanted the phrase to become ‘derogatory’ in their ears. The day is not far off that their ‘correct phrase Austrian economics’ will sound like a curse too.
The Elves live in the Woods……
A few months ago I responded to Tom Woods’ rather simpleminded ‘Why the Greenbackers are wrong‘. A little while later Woods indirectly answered this with ‘the Greenbackers’ Fake Quote Industry‘. In my response to his original article I made a little fun about the difficulty the Libertarian leadership seems to have with the rather blatant Government conspiracy known as 9/11. Woods simply turns this argument upside down:
Woods: “The correct argument against the Fed is not that we need the federal government to create our money more directly rather than delegating the task to the Fed, but that is the Greenbacker objection to the Fed. No free-market person thinks this way. No one who takes liberty seriously thinks this way. This naivete on the part of the Greenbackers is especially hard to believe since so many of them are 9/11 Truthers. That means their position is this: we believe the U.S. government conspired to kill thousands of its own citizens in the interest of furthering its imperial ambitions, but we think they are the best people to trust with the creation of money.
Not all Greenbackers are Truthers, to be sure, but the position is terminally naive all the same.”
Note that Woods studiously avoids taking a position here himself. In fact, we know his position: he’s on the side of the Government. Woods, hating the State, has a wonderful future as a leading Libertarian politician and he certainly is not going to destroy that future with something as silly as 9/11 Truth.
We know all too well how the Libertarians chuckle at the ‘conspiracy industry’. That’s only one reason we keep warning the Truth Community about this Trojan Horse messing up our affairs.
After this brazen assault on the Truth Community, he goes on to make a little fun about the many fake quotes that circulate in the Populist movement. This is indeed an annoying phenomenon. Two great populist classics, Ellen Brown’s ‘Web of Debt’ and Bill Still’s ‘the Money Masters’ were slightly compromised by these quotes and here at Real Currencies we have been spreading them too, until the uncompromising gaze of the uncanny Name789 sternly reeducated me on these matters. As usual, I was the last to learn, as Bill Still already in 2011 opened up a page warning for bad quotes in his film, after the copyright holders of his film refused his request to correct them. Ellen Brown had no problems admitting some mistakes back in 2010. That’s what normal people do when they launch major works and are shown inevitable inaccuracies after the fact.
Here’s how Tom Woods concludes his article: “If they can’t be bothered to carry out this most fundamental obligation of the scholar (to check quotes, A.M.), how can we believe they have fulfilled the far more laborious task of studying economics beyond the slogans of their fellow Greenbackers? Their record makes me skeptical. You should be skeptical, too.”
So because we get a few quotes wrong, people shouldn’t believe anything we say and we should now all forget about the $450 billion the US Government loses on ‘debt-service’ to the banking cartel on the National Debt. Let alone about the $300k interest the common man pays for his $200k mortgage. I’m certain there is a term for this kind of logical fallacy, but I forget what it is.
We should not forget this is coming from a ‘Catholic’ guy who has managed to ignore 1500 years worth of quotes by Catholic scholars denouncing Usury in his ‘the Church and the Market’. According to Mises himself Christianity is ‘a religion of hatred’ because it despises ‘free market’ ideology, so I’m not too sure about Woods’ scholarship either.
…..and the dark and dangerous Woods are in the cold and dreary North
Of course, it’s ‘Grumpy Gary’ who’s behind the ‘fake quote’ trick. North has been devising sly arguments against all those pesky little monetary reform programs that have been popping up over the last century or so for more than fifty years now and his body of work pervades the entirety of Austrianism. In 2010 he thought to do away with Ellen Brown with the ‘fake quote’ trick and utterly failed. Previously we discussed his take on usury and how he tried to make the uninitiated believe that the problem is not interest, but fractional reserve banking. Worse still is his outrageous take on Usury in the Bible, exclaiming it’s bad to be in debt, but quite alright to lend out money at interest. Talking about bad quotes…….
Anyhow, for a normal person it’s always difficult to fathom outright lies. It’s always nasty to call someone a liar, because it’s hard to prove we’re not dealing with honest mistakes and the basic instinct is to stick with the benefit of doubt.
But recently I came across this little gem:
[youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqUSbrHguO0]
We watch Gary North so you don’t have to, so I certainly don’t recommend wasting an hour on this dreary piece of work. Here’s the deal: North is talking to some young people at a Libertarian get together. It’s a seminar in which the youngsters are trained how to deal with ‘Greenbackerism’ and the ‘murky underworld of Social Credit’.
The core of the lecture is how to deal with the notion that economies are depressed because of a lack of purchasing power. North explains a line of reasoning the youngsters can use in arguments when faced with this fundamental economic issue. As we know, Austrianism denies that deflation stifles economic growth and causes depressions. They even go so far as to deny that deflation caused the Great Depression (North does that again at about 29 min in the video). Hilariously, as I cannot help myself from gloatingly repeating, they use this FED study to back up this notion.
Deflation and Usury are closely related to the theme of ‘scarcity of money’, the notion that there is insufficient liquidity in the economy to finance all plausible trades, causing permanent depression. This is at the core of Social Credit, Keynesianism and Interest-Free Economics. It’s also well analyzed in the Protocols.
But whereas there is clear and insurmountable statistical evidence proving that a declining money supply will lead to a contracting economy, Austrianism has only deductionist arguments, i.e. wholly devoid of any empirical proof to counter this.
And this is why the video is so interesting. Because Gary openly admits this. He begins this lecture with a number of tips on how to defend what he (at 6:50) calls ‘ideological positions’. Meaning he openly distances himself from any scientific basis for his beliefs.
In short, according to the master Mind Controller Gary North himself , Austrianism promotes the purely ideological position that deflation and scarcity of money do not exist and that ‘markets will clear’ when they are ‘free’. Money has nothing to do with it.
Not only that, in this seminar Gary is teaching the youngsters on how to defend these purely ‘ideological’ and ‘unpopular’ positions and he even has no qualms to admit from whom he learned to do it himself: at 10:31 he starts explaining how the communist cadres of the old days went about defending ‘unpopular’ and ‘minority’ positions.
Conclusion
We can rest assured that the Libertarian Leadership knows exactly what it’s doing. They know quite well that Usury, Deflation and Scarcity of Money are the great problems of money and their whole ideology (and they know full well it’s an ideology and thus pseudo-science) is centered around arguments combating those trying to alleviate the suffering of the multitude by addressing these most fundamental problems. They have been paying Gary for more than 50 years to keep us all busy and distracted. They are grooming Tom Woods to push Gary’s venom as the future head of the Mises Institute or even in the Senate itself. They are funding Anthony Wile and the Daily Bell to call those looking for answers ‘fascists’ and ‘evil’.
Elves do exist, but they’re not really evil. They’re just a sorry bunch looking for attention and getting more of it than they should.
Related:
End the Fed: a Trojan Horse destroying the Truth Movement from within
Why Tom Woods is wrong about the Greenbackers
The Daily Bell: Usurious Commercial Banking is Good, Interest-Free Government Money is Tyranny
Discussing Gold and Interest with the Daily Bell
Debunking Tom Woods’ ‘Catholic’ Austrian Economics (Memehunter)
Austrian economics is a cult, not a science. Whenever you question any of their beliefs you get an avalanche of references to other Austrian economists and not data from the real world. If reality conflicts with their views, then reality must be wrong. Millions live in squalor and will die in deflationary austerity because Hayek, Von Mises & their elves say that gold, private banking and deregulated markets are sanctum sanctorum. Like mindless brutes they force their square economic polices through round holes, truth and humanity be damned.
Contemporary observer, Maynard Keynes, noticed this groupie/cult/idolizing metality:
“The last decade of his life was spent in Berlin and Switzerland and devoted to propaganda. Gesell, drawing to himself the semi-religious fervour which had formerly centred round Henry George, became the revered prophet of a cult with many thousand disciples throughout the world.”
as if he were writing about 2013 groupies of E.B. or B.S.
not only the quote fabrication is not new, the religous devotion is the same old same old
You’re right, although it is far from unique to this business. Just look at the Alex Jones/David Icke conference lately.
completely agree, this religous devotion to heroes (demonstarted here) is rampant on every side
you should read this interview, Mr. fekete notices it, too:
http://www.thedailybell.com/29047/Anthony-Wile-Antal-Fekete-Gold-Backwardation-and-the-Collapse-of-the-Tacoma-Bridge
(jews and hungarians are the intelligent life forms on this planet)
It doesn’t matter. When Fekete throws ad-hominems around he lowers himself into loser territory. He loses right away by not debating an ideas merit, but instead calling out names, little better than a 4 year old in a school yard. Keynes was right on some issues, and wrong on others. Their ideas and words should stand on their own merit. Same goes with all of the others.
Fekete is also wrong on ZIRP, because his world paradigm is positive interest “pulls.” But an object can be set into motion by pushing as well. Why is this simple notion beyond their imaginings? Keynes, Fekete, and others are trapped in a mental prison when they cannot see beyond their boundaries. They talk a good game about free will and free action, then they turn around and demand that government taxes the population to backstop banks, or “must spend gold to force movement” as key elements of their plans.
Any system has elements of truth to them. Fekete has good insights on real bills doctrine, but then just whines about how they became co-opted with bank money powers in 1906. Yes, it was the same privateers that did the co-opting that he now wants to be in charge. So, which is it, you can’t have both.
If the sign of intelligence is to hold two contradictory concepts simultaneously, then both Keynes and Fekete are mental giants.
Most groupies may not have the mental digits to understand, but then most people are not genius level by definition. But then, the groupies will never be able to understand because supposed expert economists are themselves full of contradictions and bad thinking.
the point that zoomed right over your head:—
the subject of the discussion was the religious attachment to cult leaders like Ellen Brown, David Icky; in the interview Fekete Antal notes this type of attachment among austrians…..
*//on a side note: keep remembering that you are a groupie while Fekete Antal is mathematics professor
Jesus name, I dropped out of high school when I was 17! Are you now telling me I need to ‘respect’ some self styled ‘professor’?
Just after you explain how these other professors of allopathy murder scores of thousands with just one of their concoctions?
I love and respect everybody and I’m sure it’s not all complete nonsense these people teach, but let’s stick to the point, right?
you know all these professors are just pot smoking good for nothing feminists baby boomer traitors, not?
There goes that labeling again, and it is baseless. When one does that, they’ve automatically devolved themselves to irrelevancy. Fekete and others who label with ad-hominems expose their smug superiority, and at the same time expose their logical fallacies. They dismiss relevant points with a wave of their hands, and we are supposed to be wowed? Wow us instead with the strength of arguments instead of slinging ad-hominems and claiming straw-men.
It’s often that way with smart people. They think they are the only ones in the room, but logically their smug certainty doesn’t correlate to statistical reality. There is always somebody to both the left and right of us on the bell curve. The groupies are slower and to the left, so what? It can be no other way. Others are smarter and better to the right…it must be so, it is the nature of things.
But, not acknowledging this reality puts you where on the bell curve?
Quite right REN.
so why ye groupies pick charlatans as your heroes? why ye not grow out of it when it is revealed that they are charlatans?
and why all this is my fault ?
(when Jimmy Swaggard was revealed christians stopped idolizing him; ye pagans would not give up on your pagan cheer-leaders if your life depended on it)
DiLorenzo studied the story of Lincoln, why not put him on your standards ?
===================
I simply countered the purposeful falsehoods presented in Migchels’ article (for which ye should thank me), why attack me, why not the liar? and why not be happy that someone made the effeort to upgrade ye ?
This is an absolutely useless discussion.
The critics of Gesell and Still forget the most important facts:
Their proposed systems even in weakened forms have worked in REAL LIFE and have improved lives of many people! Canada is an example of “evil” state-banking that worked by far better than the private Federal Reserve system. And Woergl is a working example of an additional interest free currency with demurrage.
Accusing people only of book-peddling, plagiarism or other great intellectual acts of treason is idiotic and completely useless.
Name – for all your obvious knowledge – your arguments or those of the Daily Bell are unimportant – what matters is what has worked before and what will work in the future. Implementation may be difficult in the near future, but at least ever more people will see through another dead-end solution presented by the money power.
Your arguments are similar of the cancer and vaccination industry – everything is quackery to them – no decent real-life testing necessary – let us discard those heresies instantly because that doctor was a drunk or the other one was only a biochemist. Ah – the mind – it is a good tool, but a bad master…..
I thought789 permalink would have the courage of his conviction to reply to my posting or any of the contributers.Obviously they cannot think out side their ”BOX’ It’s easier to behave like ostereriches exposing their thinking parts
In case he missed it here it’s again.You appear to be a well informed chap, why don’t you start your own web site, instead of a ‘free ride’, and being obnoxious and cantankerous.
Remember ”none is more ENSLAVED than those who hopelessly believe that they are free”
The bankesters have got you all by your Bs and Cs, from cradle to grave.They have been at it from 1694.
”
Thank you for supporting my point (once again, and again) on groupies’s inability to comprehend
as it is well known, this is my website:
http://www.yamaguchy.com
the source of your finagled wisdom (ye can thank me later)
has been there since Summer of 1998; many of ye (and your mentors) came there to acquire, to steal, to make money, to pretend………..
it is also known (Migchels linked to them in his articles)
http://www.yamaguchy.com/forum/index.php?topic=2.0
http://www.yamaguchy.com/forum/index.php?topic=3.0
if i want to engage in futile arguement with morons i can go to Bill Still’s forum or come here
you may also click on my username _name789.wordpress.com_ and get to the Lincoln theory, and to many 150 year old articles which a) show the true source/origin of your brain-fucked ideas; b) proves from examples how stupid your brain-fucked ideas are
(Migchels would not –for his life– acknowledge it that Daniel Webster and the Baring brothers circle of friends are the true source of his finagled ideas, which he imagines copied from Margrit and others)
but, i have to go to where the disease is, and apply salt there……
would Migchels be brave enough to mises.org/forum or to dailypaul/forum and try to flaunt his knowledge there ? of course not…… Larry the leech at least had the foolishness to go there, and got flushed down the toilet by republicae
in the process republicae also brought out of LarryL that Larry is a gold-bug who talks big about paper, but for his own self he wants to collect his pieces of silver…..
In this realcurrency blog it has been brought out of Migchels that he, also, is a silver-bug, and he, too, wants to collect his silver pieces –let the peasants deal with paper that expires on Friday
===============
some (or all) of your’s bright idea is that the criminals in banking should be replaced with liars, thieves, charlatans, town-drunks, dope-heads ….. what a testimony ye are to the harmfull effects of book-peddlers
======
as it seems, if i wasn’t here, there would be nothing to talk about; ye would have to resort to your usual activity of giving each other had-jobs;
of course, if ye were not here, we could talk about something useful, and i wouldn’t have to waste time in trench warfare against ignorance
======
once again, I noticed that some subversive element lurking around this blog, gave several thumb-ups to my replies……. what is going on? is the contagion spreading ?
=====
once, again
not one of ye dared to answer the point i listed from a) to f)
(just as no one dared to answer North’s points or Wood’s points;
not one if you dared to support with facts any of your conjured up theories)
ohohohoh Name……..I’ve been raised by a narcissist feminist and was married to another one, so I have an elephant skin and am used to laugh off abuse, but you’re sour even by your own standards today!
And you’re lying through your teeth too! I don’t have silver, nor gold, nor any other earthly treasure!
And to say I’d be worried by the Ron Paul forum………omg! Brrr!!!
You know I’d really relish taking them all on simultaneously, and I’ve got the goodies and the typing skills to back it up too, but it would just be trolling and they’d have every right to kick me off their pages, because it’s not polite to mess up someone else’s propaganda outlets.
I am lying?
it is you who is making atrocious statements in you article(s)
anyhow, on this forum, in response to my question: if people got expiring money as pay, they would run to the nearest commodity exchange to purchase something that maintains purchasing power; you responded that yes that is what they should do, become commodity speculators; you did say the unmentionable (gold/silver)
—-dailyPaul/forum awaits you…. 🙂
No my friend, you just want to take out your own unseemly behavior on us, the poor dimwitted. But there is no charity in that Name!
What is the problem with Larry, who I presume is against usury like the God fearing people here, possessing gold or silver? This stuff is a commodity; and as such it makes perfect sense to buy, sell or horde it. When you expect bad economic times in the future you will buy what you need to prepare for it, whether that be food, clothing, shelter, gold…. Even in a society with usury free fiat currency issued by a national bank, it would still make sense to do this. There is a difference between a pure medium of exchange is and a marketable commodity.
True, that’s why I tell people to hoard it if they insist on hoarding wealth. Personally I’m broke, so now I can parade like a good little Christian, following the One who implored us to own only what we need, which is nothing, and give all the rest to those needing it more than ourselves, which are most people we know, and just collect heavenly treasures which don’t rot and cannot be stolen.
Look my dear old boy I was not exactly paying your good self a compliment, but making an observation.Sorry that I was ignorant of your web site.
What you do not know now you know it by tomorrow.I haven’t had the time to go in depth but will do so.
It’s a pity you conveniently avoided the pungent comment, which was
Remember ”none is more ENSLAVED than those who hopelessly believe that they are free”The degree of ENSLAVEMENT varies.
The bankesters have got you all by your Bs and Cs, from cradle to grave.I put your good self and every one else in this category
Imagine when Icke launches his Global Television project. The type of crap that will go on, and the number of minds that scumbag will destroy.
It is a sign of an open and honest mind that admits to errors and shortcomings. Accusing basically one-man or one-woman-shows like Bill Still and Ellen Brown who also work “normal” jobs in addition to their money reform projects of fake quoting is simply ridiculous. And all after more than a hundred years of very busy history manipulation (certainly more, but not that organized in later times).
At times we may even disagree with people on minor issues – i.e. Anthony Migchels’ over-romantization of the middle ages as an interest-free paradise. Despite the lacking of usury the time of the de-facto slavery of the little people (most of them being one to two heads shorter than the nobility due to inferior nutrition – IQs must have been corresponding as well) was no paradise, despite latter improvements of artisans and guilds.
But those things do not matter and honest people correct their mistakes. Most activists do not have dozens of co-workers, fact-checkers and huge budgets to back up their operations. Just ask Foster Gamble what he spent on his documentary THRIVE just on production, travel costs and fact-checking. And even with budget of over a million dollars you can get facts wrong, since there is so much fake history, fake quotes and fake opposition out there (i.e. G.E. Griffin in Thrive).
Whether mankind this time will be able to recognize the herbalist woman as the only one offering them effective treatment or whether they will burn her at the stake as a witch remains to be seen.
Can you kindly specify thw exact comments.?
Anthony has given a link to Bill Still’s comment corrections – you will find quite a few that he wanted corrected – partly because some of them have been used in some books, but on exact review are found to be attributed to the wrong person or just plain false.
http://s6.zetaboards.com/Bill_Still_Reforum/topic/1177385/1/%29
None of the error’s and misquotes diminished in any way the veracity of Still’s (and Brown’s) main theses. The problem has been that opponents of public banking have always used these peripheral supports as a facile means of discrediting his work in its entirety. By making these corrections, he will force the Austrians to address the main issues.
so true, and this ‘fake quote’ stuff is such an easy distraction, but if you read the sycophantic comments left at Woods’ article, we have to face the fact that it works.
It’s ironic that you cite name789 in your article. He is one of the worst offenders in this regard. I’m sure he’ll stop by to congratulate you on debunking Still and Brown.
Offender in the sense that he abuses people for misquoting others, yes. He’s also known to respect the Austrians a little too much because he feels supported by their ‘false quote’ line. But while I disagree with much of what he says, I’ve never doubted his sincerity in looking for truth. He wouldn’t knife you in the back with some sort of verbose theory explaining deflation is great. He’d tell you to print some treasury notes as they had been doing already in the early 1800’s, backing it up with the words of those doing it themselves. Actually verifiable quotes.
He just (over)hates bad quotes, that’s all.
He’s also a fan of interest on money, and disparages debt free money people in the Austrian fashion (eg. lazy, wastrel parasites). Now, that’s all.
Yeah, you’re right, I guess. I just like him though……..:-)
that is simply a demonstration why the groupie is a groupie: he is unable to understand what he reads
had you (and you) been able to comprehend what i wrote, you would have noticed that i have shown no such fan-ness towards interest
The concepts presented by book-peddler Brown and Migchels are the concepts of the parasites
had ye been able to understand what (and why) i posted quotes from Mullins, you would have know (comprehended) that i was not posting on ‘parasites’
—[clicking on the link to Daily bell crashed my Opera twice; most annoying]
I’ve had several exchanges with you wherein you’ve defended usury in one form or another. Here is one example where you call people that don’t like interest on mortgage loans “…free-loaders, drunkards, drug-induced hippies and charlatans…” Fyi, Interest on mortgage loans is usury and is wrong nomatter who says it. http://realcurrencies.wordpress.com/2013/04/30/babylon-usury-we-want-interest-free-money/ There is more examples but I don’t have interest in dredging up anymore of your crackpot rants.
You just change your opinion to suit your irrational hatred of Still and Brown.
to this day you have been afraid to give any support to your contention that Lincoln was a good guy ….. being a crack pot and ex-centric i studied the subject because i am not afraid facts and history and library, neither you nor your favourite charlatan had the courage to do so 🙂
you cheer-leader proposed in her letter to the governor to print up notes and that way to pay for socialist programmes; you should understand sometimes what she writes
Oh yeah, let’s talk about your views on Lincoln. That you believe he started the civil war on behalf of the bankers and was a agent of theirs puts you squarely in the company of historians that palavers about planet nirbiru and the pyramids of Egypt being built by aliens. You completely ignore the fact that banker financed England and France were preparing to attack the U.S. form Canada and Mexico respectively. Where it not for the Russian fleet on the west and east coast, this would have occurred.
The issue was whether interest on mortgages is just. You said yes with unambiguous derision.
How about Ellen Brown.?
Brown graciously stood corrected where necessary when Gary North spent thousands of words dissecting some bad quotes.
No, she insolently ignored the revelation and with audacity of a black fly continued her buzzings
An honest person would have acknowledged and admitted that she lied, and shame-facedly disappeared from the scene
Once again, for the third time, North did not disected some bad quotes; North disected her lie that she was a student of history and expert on money and banking
Please give me examples of her mistaken quotes.
Here’s North’s hit piece:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north891.html
perhaps, we should interrogate Larry leech, how much of that forum post is my handy work, because B.S. has never been in the habit of looking into quotes
as you have already conceded, Daily Bell was right on Lincoln, on greenbacks, on Ellen Brown:
https://realcurrencies.wordpress.com/2012/04/11/meanwhile-at-the-daily-bell-they-may-have-a-point-about-ms-brown-and-ows/
it is a bold face lie, as ususal:
The two charlatans, book-peddler Brown and B.S. the lizzard of oz, are hardly populists, far from it, they are two book-peddlers; B.S. the lesser evil, is simply a two-bit con-man who saw an opportunity for easy money and ran with it (very likely B.S. and his partner, the griffin from jeckyl island, sat side by side at the same desk while they compiled their wares)
Peddler Brown, on the other hand, is a sinister infiltrator with nefarious purposes (some mistakes ???!!!! the whole book is pack of purposeful lies)
It is another lie that B.S. opened up a page about bad quotes; what he actually did is, that after people like me pointed out these quote fabrications, he now turns around and with the audacity of a shop-lifter presents himself as someone who looks into and looks up fabricated quotes; far be it from him, we did the looking up and looking into; at first, in ~2009, he considered it an attack on him and on his ware when someone posted on the B.S. forum that quotes he presented were fabrications; Bill Still has never questioned, critically examinded these fake quotes, he ran with them because they suited his purposes; Bill Still has not done research of any kind, ever (his wares are the proof of that)
If all the fabrications and the false premises and the computer models and the religious dogmas built upon the falsehoods were taken out of their wares, nothing would be left but empty pages and the opening and closing background music.
These conspiracist book-peddlers didn’t just get a few quotes wrong; the whole house of cards which they built up on fabrications is wrong ! Brown and Still purposely lied about Jefferson, Guernsey, Continentals, Lincoln, Greenbacks…..
What normal people would do is what Jimmy Swaggard and Jim Bakker did when the jig was up….. of course, they were made of different fibre, and their religion was more valuable than Migchels’
(It is not Gary North’s fault or ill intention that he took the time to learn facts about Lincoln and greenbacks; it is sinister Brown’s, the trojan infiltrator, fault that she did not; of course, the groupie is not able to give up his cult cheer-leader)
============
To this day you have been afraid to answer Tom Wood’s questions regarding the quote fabricating industry
http://www.tomwoods.com/blog/the-greenbackers-fake-quote-industry/
To this day you have been afraid to answer why Ellen Brown and Bill Still have lied about Lincoln.
http://realcurrencies.wordpress.com/2012/08/02/lincoln-was-indeed-a-money-power-agent/
But why insist on all this Name? It’s true there are many mistakes but the basic narrative stands, not? And did they not reach large audiences? Paving the way for closer scrutiny?
Bill in particular is the first to admit that he does not insist on writing the reform laws: he just wants to get it done, quickly and well.
mistake is when you mis-spell the name of Jefferson, or give wrong date
what these people did (not jus Still and Brown, but the whole hord of them)
http://www.yamaguchy.com/forum/index.php?topic=3.0
is that based on fabrications, falsehoods, false premises, they built a house of cards
yes, it is true that there is a conspiracy to control and subjugate to population in a planet-wide empire, but Bill Still knows fuck-all about it; and Ellen Brown is a sinister midget who is bent on helping the conspiracy to achieve its goal
you constantly lie that the austrians are bad and the money reformists are good; the truth is they are both equally bad, they are both the enemy; Migchels and the ‘elves’ are two sides of the same (dialectical) coin
You really think so?
Well, I’m certainly far, far more on their side than the Austrians, but it’s also clear that in terms of clear cut proposals I go a lot further.
But don’t you think they’d vastly damage the Money Power should they get their way? Or what is their role according to you?
>>>>really think so
it is not my thinking, it is my observation
in several places i posted my views on “your” ‘proposals’
unlike you, i do not entertain day-dreams about B.S. and E.B. or the conspiracy movement (bowel or otherwise); even if they were good people, they would not get in the way….. they are not in the position to get in the way
Napoleon (with his genius and military) did get in they way, but a world war neutralized him
Stalin, too, got in the way, another world war took care of him, and his silly ideas (which included state owned banking and debt/interest-free paper money)
a porch-monkey or his cheer-leader may trip over on his own legs, but he is not getting in anybody’s way
10 years from now please report back to me what E.B. & B.S (and Griffin, and Jones, and Icky, and who knows who else) achieved
In whose way did Gertrude Coogan get, or Charles Caughlin (who had a much larger audience then all them 2013 reformists combined), or Lindbergh, or LaFollette, or the Greenback Party, or Van Buren, or Jefferson; or Jonathan Duncan, or all those money reformist clubs 200 years ago ?
As I wrote way back when, the problem today is not money and banking (even the pharmaceutical industry poses more harm and danger than banks, just one of their drugs killed 70,000 people); the real problem is that we are dying out, and are being re-placed
so all this entertainment, the one which you partook in Irish land, is just that, killing the time until we go out of existence and are erased from history
Name789, you have quite stong views, and I must say that I am charmed by that. And I’m interested to know more. Yet when you say that ‘even the pharmaceutical industry poses more harm and danger than the bank’, i think you are underestimating the power of the banks, who have the power to loan (=create) money that financed every war and revolution in the last centuries. Also, these banks finance the development of weapons, and they even finance the pharmaceutical industry. As “the hand that gives is above the hands that takes” the bankers are the masters of us all including the governments ( “When the government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hands that takes.” Napoleon). Would you not agree with the general objection to the current monetary system that has caused Paul Crignon, Bill Still, Anthony Migchel and many others to criticise it is that the current system is controlled by the banks who create at allocate credit according to the whims and convictions, that is where they think they can increase their wealth but mostly their power in the greatest degree. Let us agree that the current system is making money on the marketing of death and destruction, and that ‘making’ money is the privilige of criminal elites associated with banking. First we need to define the problem, then we can try to agree on a solution. And I’m curious what your solution is.
Buzz
Ay – without the money power there would be no medical scam industry and knowledge suppression. It is the basis of the evil empire so to say.
”None is more ENSLAVED than those who hopelessly believe that they are free”Goethe
The bankesters have us by our Bs and Cs from cradle to grave
Times are changing. A major confrontation is coming. And its result is not a foregone conclusion. If it is, it is victory.
The basics are that there is a creator we can commune with and that in this communion there are systems he will show us to devise in all economic spheres that support behavior that we feel is appropriate, just as the current system supports behavior that abhors us.
It is not going to happen because some hero is going to save us. It is going to happen because more and more people stop whining and start acting according to the information that is so abundantly out there.
It is not going to happen today and perhaps not tomorrow. But it is going to happen. The only question is how high the price will be we will have to pay.
as usual, something is wrong with me because i read up on this subject and learned some facts; and because of it i notice that these charlatans Bill Still, David Icky, Ellen Brown, Ed Griffin did not study, do not know the subject; people in superstitious fear of history and facts call me every kind of name in the book (and out of the book) because i dare to say that history is far from what these book-pedlers say in their wares
as usual, i would ask where, when, to whom, did Napoleon say what you claim he said ?
have you ever read Napoleon’s writings, sayings ? or are you just regurgitating what low life scum B.S. regurgitated, because he, also, has never dared to go near the library and Napoleon’s papers
you say the problem should be identified; well, i am indentifiying the problem –one of it anyway– which is these charlatans like bill still and their apprentices like Migchels, who know nothing, want to know nothing, but they make noise and leading the village idiots in circles to nowhere — taking a shovel and beating them into a pulp would be a good start on the road to recovery, or at least to clearing the table
once, again:—
which one of ye opponents of (Rothschild) banking would have the courage to live without bank account, without credit (and debit) card ?
this does not take much, yet none of ye gasbags and money reformist heroes would dare to cut the embillical cord;
farting through your faces is the sum total of your ability
like Migchels so aptly observes:
Groupies are not really evil. They’re just wanna-bees, desparately looking for a cheer-leader.
=======
@ henrique
@ pm
as said before, i have read more of these books then all ye put together
two, unless ye are brave enough to learn the story of the bolshevik revolution and the lincoln revolution, stop flaunting your ignorance, or flaunting what you heard in the Larouche school of whig economics and solutions (even Migchels knows that Larouche is scuzz)
hocky and beer seems to be your forte, stick with it
====
as per drug companies
isn’t there a suit as we speak because one of their potion had the side effect of killing 70,000 people? How many people the bank-book or debit card killed lately ?
—–
http://www.yamaguchy.com
the source of your finagled wisdom
If you read Anthony Sutton’s books, then how can you still be so ignorant? Nothing in his books on the Bolshevik revolution is opinion. Every assertion is backed up by data derived from primary government/business documents.
You, sir, are this forum’s resident philodoxer.
I was taught that if you complain, you had also better provide a solution.
Let’s not forget about the experience with the state bank of Canada from 1938 to 1974. That most certainly was not communism. Yet, they had free medical care, free college, land grants, built a national railroad. During the 1970’s business became self financing, and the public could pool their savings to start business. The state bank squeezed private banks by moral suasion, in order to prevent excessive private debt leverage ratios.
Funny enough, China’s state banks just did the same thing recently, reigning in private banks by not interceding on their behalf.
While I don’t agree with State Banks, there is no doubt they work. They are the a control step toward fascism. We have examples of them working in history, and we have them right in our face, as in China. Their main trick is that they lure industry with “credit” and then forgive the loans. What was formerly credit money is then released to circulate in the economy as money. In the end, money is circulating in the economy, and industry has been lifted and then planted in new soil. This money is then available as savings, or it can be grabbed by other debtors to pay off their loans. In this way a state bank can control the ratio of money to credit in an economy.
>>>> And did they not reach large audiences?
i don’t know, are there any accurate numbers ?
in any case, what they actually did is they produced a large(?) number of groupies, even more lacking in knowledge than themselves
>> the real problem is that we are dying out, and are being re-placed
so all this entertainment, the one which you partook in Irish land, is just that, killing the time until we go out of existence and are erased from history (too little space on that post)
I agree Name – unfortunately. While sites like these will bring a degree of enlightenment for some who care about knowledge (yours included, I am afraid), they are not much more than mental masturbation – in the end fruitless and without anything to show for.
However I do not think that Still and Brown are money-power-stooges. I agree however that they will not be able to attain anything.
The best money system in my opinion is one which attains a state without any money at all. How many houses, cars and TV sets do you really need? How much food do you require? That is of course a matter of technological development as well, but it can follow swiftly after non-money-power-controlled interest-free systems.
However those systems will not become a reality until after the complete disintegration of the current regime. Some may consider me a negative fatalist – I am just realistic. A long-term plan could be succesful though.
Yes, as history shows, total collapse is the only way; after that there is a clean slate, and there might be a chance to take and go down a different road; the last time it happened the church of Rome took over, and while it did –for a 1,000 years– put an end to the money power, it also put an end to reading and writing; of course, as you state, happiness does not require an alphabet or sufficient amount of circulating medium of exchange
—we may not be here to change the world, we may just be here to work out our own salvation; the physical world is perishable and shall pass away, only the non-physical endures; happy are the simpletons because they know better than we do, and theirs is the kingdom
Church of Rome put an end to the money power…haha you should be a comedian, redneck. Seriously, have you ever thought about stand-up comedy ? Everything you say is shit. Stalin caused problems for the Power? Ridiculous. The whole Communist operation was financed and protected by the bankers ( and still is ), as their pet project. Lenin was put in a mausoleum in the Red Square, direct reference to Egypt and it’s mysteries. You’re a clown, and an abusive one, but at least in the end has the humility to expose yourself as just another pitiful bible-thumper..
It certainly true that the physical is mainly a tool to transcend the illusory and connect to reality and that this is an individual’s task first and foremost.
But I’m also quite positive that should sufficient numbers succeed in achieving it, life here on earth will look very different too.
I am siding here with Anthony, though we may disagree on the sufficient numbers issue and the timeframe.
Btw – the dreary predictions and lack of worthwhile activity of the end-of-timers are highly welcome to the money power.
There is always a way and there always will be.
Does anyone have any real financial solutions which will improve the lives of men, women and children around this Earth? Solutions which will be good for humanity and future generations? Isn’t this the point? It reminds one of people arguing for hours about how to put out a house fire as the house burns to the ground.
Thank you.
If you want a program for activism that will improve the lives of the working classes here and now then see http://againstausterity.org/ and http://tarpley.net/ They propose: 1% wallstreet sales tax on all speculative trading, esp. derivatives to generate billions on previously untaxed income to end the austerity, Warren Tierney bill to force the Fed to work for good of the people by issuing .075% loans to students, moratorium on all mortgage foreclosures, nationalization of the Fed, ect.
sorry, this house has already burned to the ground and the ashes were scattered by the wind
this blog is here for the purpose of passing the time
I provided one here, see SCD (Social Credit with Demurrage). However, implementation is unlikely due to tactical issues as well as embedded money power. SCD should be considered a strategic goal. Anthony is trying to figure out a way to make a system work from the bottom up. This is far from just mental masturbation, but is instead action. The action is both tactical and strategic. Alternate currencies have the very real effect of training the sheeple.
After 3 years of yelling and huffing and puffing, and pointing out the errors of their ways, have Brown & B.S. and all the rest, turned from their wickedness ?
Do they not, to this minute, put themselves forth as researchers and seekers of truth and solutions, shining hero leaders of the oppressed sheeple ? Do they not still
a) hold up Lincoln as hero of the people and opponent of bankers ?
b) present U.S. notes as interest-free, debt-free, paper money ?
c) present Continentals in a false light ? (as printing-press money)
d) present Guernsey meat market notes in a false light ? (as printing-press money)
e) say that the house of Rothschild wanted to split the united States into 2 units, one supported by England and the London house, the other supported by France and the Paris house ?
nothing substantive and factual do they have to offer to support it, none of it is true, but they are still selling/presenting this room of the conspiracist house of cards
f) say that the house of Rothschild financed Lenin and the bolshevik revolution ? do not some of them demonstrate their moronity by regurgitating the brainless statement that Lenin got onto that railway car with ~5 million dollars worth of gold in his posession ?
no need to be an expert on the history of that revolution (being a crack pot and ex-centric is enough) to immediatelly ask the question: how? At the end of march of 1917 what was the price of gold in US dollars ? What would be the weight of 5million dollars’ worth of gold ? (what make of fork-lift had Lenin used?)
documents of the financing are available, but these charlatans would never go near them; would not know where to go get near them; would not do any work of their own
g) mis-represent Thomas Jefferson, making him out to be some sort of supporter and proponent of printing press money ?
The reality is that after we pulled every leg and rug from under their house of cards, they claim the construct still stands, undamaged undisturbed shining bastion of truth search
Only a groupie can say that due to outside information B.S. and E.B. corrected themselves.
h) has Ellen Brown turned from Lucy Liu and the faulty computer model he constructed based on false premise ?
has she admitted that she have not read Thomas Jefferson’s writings ? that she simply regurgitated other people’s regurgitation ?
has she told us who compiled ‘web of debt’ for her ?
has she corrected her views of Roosewelt and the new deal ? her views on Hamilton and the American System ?
has she corrected herself on the views of Senator Calhoun? has she since bothered to actually read what Senator Calhoun said and what his views were ?
has Ellen Brown or any of her groupies ever suggested to reduce the size and budget of the government to that of Abraham Lincoln’s ?
i) have ye turned from Clifford Douglas’s A+B model after it has been shown years ago by another class=room modeller that it is faulty ?
j) have ye turned from Gesell’s drunken sailor money after it has been shown years ago by its best friends that it is not its nature to work ? (especially not as Gesell, Margrit, or Migchels would apply it)
k) has any of ye –in light of historical facts– changed his view on the impossibility class-room model and equation ?
====================
as per the content of your and daily bell’s article
is or is not Margrit Unesco affiliated and motivated ?
is or is not E.B. a goddess worshipper as Daily also noticed ?
is Ellen Brown, after demonstrating her complete lack of knowledge in “Web of debt”, now an expert on (and inventor of) state-owned banking concept ?
has Bill Still ever had a day job ? how much is he making from peddling his wares ?
how much is Brown pocketing ? does she have a day job in a law office ?
would the bank of North Dakota or the government of North Dakota have anything to do with Ellen Brown & her fellow travellers, and their ideas ?
who is behind Brown and the trojan infiltrators ?
>>>>deflation caused the Great Depression
it was caused by the credit system which, as usual, generates a bubble; which, in turn, as usual, will burst
you know full well that the reason you talk so much about North and Woods is to avoid talking about and examinig your drug-induced money concepts
>>>>Elves do exist, but they’re not really evil. They’re just a sorry bunch looking for attention and getting more of it than they should.
I should have knowns that Larry the leech is an Elf
All of this has been addressed many times and disabused, except for your conventional notion that the Bolshevik revolution was not financed by wall street and the banks. Anthony C. Sutton has meticulously documented using primary sources that communism in Russian was financed and built using American technology and intellectual capital.
Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development: 1917–1930 (1968)
Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development: 1930–1945 (1971)
Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development: 1945–1965 (1973)
National Suicide: Military Aid to the Soviet Union (1973)
Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution (1974
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antony_C._Sutton
as we can see no body is brave enough to answer any them questions, because they know what the answer is
yes, keep focusing on the austrians, on ickys, a jones; because we certainly would not want to look at (much less focus on) our poster boys, lest we were forced to notice that there is not a whisker difference between Brown and North, between Griffin and Still, between Rense and Makow…….
well there is one difference: some of them makes more money off the village morons than others
The LaRouche solution to problems:–
/quote
What the people did in fact surrender was control of government.
They did not intend to do that. For a long time they did not realize they had done it, and when at last it came to them they were already deeply infected with a virus that devours the copy book virtues, creates habits of dependence and destroys the valiant love of self-responsibility.
The crisis was moral.
Happily for their designs, the New Deal physicians found the patient in a state of economic pain, extreme but not fatal, and proceeded to administer imported narcotics, all habit forming, such as:
(1) Repudiation of the United States Treasury’s promises to pay.
(2) Confiscation of the people’s gold by trickery.
(3) Debasement of the currency.
(4) Deliberate inflation.
(5) Spoilation of the savers, whose little rainy day hoards melted away.
(6) Deficit spending to create buying power by conjury.
(7) Monetization of debt.
(8) The doctrine of a planned economy.
(9) A scheme of taxation, class subsidies and Federal grants-in-aid designed ostensibly to redistribute the national wealth for social justice, but calculated in fact to reduce millions of citizens to subservience, to bring forty-eight sovereign states to the status of provinces and to create in the executive principle a supreme government with extensive new powers, including the power to make its own laws by simply publishing from its bureaus rules and regulations having the force of law, disobedience punishable by fine or imprisonment.
These physicians kept saying to the patient, “Now aren’t you feeling better ?” Many, very many, were feeling immediately better, and because they were feeling better and because the government offered to provide them all with economic security forever, they were easily persuaded to exchange freedom for benefits, until at last they had surrendered, almost unawares, the most elementary freedom of all, namely, the right to receive in your pay envelope the full reward for your labor and do with it what you will.
Thus the Welfare State was built. The facade was magnificent; the cornerstone rested on quicksand; the moral cost of it may be reckoned in terms such as these:
If the great Government of the United States were a private corporation no bank would take its name on a piece of paper, because it has cynically repudiated the words engraved upon its bonds.
This revolutionary elite was nothing you could define as a party. It had no name, no habitat, no rigid line. The only party was the Communist Party, and it was included; but its attack was too obvious and its proletarianism too crude, and moreover, it was under the stigma of not belonging. Nobody could say that about the elite above. It did belong, it was eminently respectable, and it knew the American scene. What it represented was a quantity of bitter intellectual radicalism infiltrated from the top downward as a doctorhood of professors, writers, critics, analysts, advisers, administrators, directors of research, and so on–a prepared revolutionary intelligence in spectacles. There was no plan to begin with. But there was a shibboleth that united them all: “Capitalism is finished.” There was one idea in which all differences could be resolved, namely, the idea of a transfer of power. For that a united front; after that, anything. And the wine of communion was a passion to play upon history with a scientific revolutionary technic.
The prestige of the elite was natural for many reasons; but it rested also upon one practical consideration. When the opportunity came a Gracchus would be needed. The elite could produce one. And that was something the Communist Party could not hope to do.
There was probably no blueprint of the New Deal, nor even a clear drawing. Such things as the A.A.A. and the Blue Eagle were expedient inventions. What was concealed from the people was a general revolutionary intention–the intention, that is, to bring about revolution in the state, within the form of law. This becomes clear when you set down what it was the people thought they were voting for in contrast with what they got. They thought they were voting:
For less government, not more;
For an end of deficit spending by government, not deficit spending raised to the plane of a social principle, and,
For sound money, not as the New Deal afterward defined it, but as everybody then understood it, including Senator Glass, formerly Secretary of the Treasury, who wrote the money plank in the Democratic party platform and during the campaign earnestly denounced as akin to treason any suggestion that the New Deal was going to do what it did forthwith proceed to do, over his dramatic protest.
The first three planks of the Democratic Party platform read as follows:
We advocate:
“1. An immediate and drastic reduction of governmental expenditures by abolishing useless commissions and offices, consolidating departments and bureaus and eliminating extravagance, to accomplish a saving of not less than 25 per cent in the cost of Federal government….
“2. Maintenance of the national credit by a Federal budget annually balanced….
“3. A sound currency to be maintained at all hazards.”
Mr. Roosevelt pledged himself to be bound by this platform as no President had ever before been bound by a party document. All during the campaign he supported it with words that could not possibly be misunderstood.
And so the first problem was solved. The seat of government was captured by ballot, according to law.
The fourth line was a doctrine invented and promulgated by New Deal economists — the doctrine of perpetual unlimited public debt. What difference did it make how big the debt was ? It was not at all like a debt owing to foreign creditors. It was something we owed only to ourselves. To pay it or not to pay it meant only to shift or not to shift money from one pocket to another. And anyhow, if we should really want to pay it, the problem would be solved by a rise in the national income.
Many infuriated people wasted their time opposing this doctrine as an economic fallacy. But whether it was a fallacy or not would be entirely a question of the point of view. From the point of view of what the New Deal has called the fetish of solvency it was a fallacy. But from the point of view of scientific revolutionary technic it was perfectly sound, even orthodox. From that point of view you do not regard public debt as a problem of public finance. You think of it only in relation to ends. A perpetual and unlimited debt represents deficit spending as a social principle. It means a progressive redistribution of wealth by will of government until there is no more fat to divide; after that comes a level rationing of the national income. It means in the end the cheapening of money and then inflation, whereby the middle class is economically murdered in its sleep. In the arsenal of revolution the perfect weapon is inflation.
/un-quote
below passage from David Astle, indicates the view he held –the view any normal person would hold– that cash (whatever it happens to be: clay, silver, paper) alone must be used in transactions; when one buys shoes, slaves, or automobiles he must pay cash, and not some ‘promise to pay’. It also shows what low opinion David Astle had (as any normal person would) on credit and the system around it, so advocated by Lucy Liu and parrots Ellen Brown, Larry leech, Antoine Migchels: a euphemism to cover criminal activity.
b) unlike the book-peddler scum –as Bill Still– David Astle visited the library, did reasearch, uncovered new information; in fact, he was the only one taking a look in this direction
c) not one of the book-peddler scum, or their groupies, has ever read such books, or even known about their existance, as “Public Economy of Athens” by Augustus Boeckh, and others, written by actual historians and researchers, that Astle used in his study of the subject; (which one of the conspiracist vermin would know about Hamurabi, would know where to read his laws?)
/quote
The requisite of witnesses and contract attesting to the true facts of valuables on deposit, would to some extent obviate the danger of the goldsmiths, silversmiths or traders, involved in a transaction, creating receipts for valuables that did not exist, in safe custody or otherwise. It was equally possible in ancient times as much as in modern times to circulate such receipts as money lawfully instituted.
Provided a corrupted priesthood turned a blind eye to this practice and loaned their sanction thereto, such fraudulent money or, in the misleading euphemism of a corrupted world, “credit“, would be equally effective in foreign markets as in the home markets, if not more so because of the greater danger of exposure of the criminal nature of this activity that would undoubtedly exist in the home market.
The severity of the penalty required by this Law Number 7 of the Code of Hammurabai, exercised by a strong and dedicated ruler, would have been an absolute deterrent to such practice that since that time, and more especially in modern times since the 16th Century A.D., has become so indurated to a fixture… Its results are to be seen on every hand, not to speak of the final result which though not yet arrived, else this book would not be in existence, is clear.
/unquote
normal people do not recommend drug-addicted and satanist concepts like drunken-sailor money; normal people want units that maintain their purchasing power and are sufficient in quantity; only trojan infiltrators –bent on dis-crediting the concept of government-owned banking and government-issued currency– would float such subversive ideas
David Astle’s writing also shows that he had a very positive view on the concept of city state, priest-king, royal priesthood (a.k.a. theocracy)
on the other hand, book-peddlers of the past 120 years were generally on the side of democracy which David Astle has properly shown to be the invention of the international money power
these book-peddling charlatans lead their groupies into the belief (mistaken belief) that they are qualified to speak on (and have the right to have an opinion on) matters of state craft and state finance; far it is from the truth;
*// in Russia, under the Tsar –the kind that rushed to the aid of the house of Rothschild– there was no conspiracy industry because only qualified persons were allowed to publish books on money, history; and there were no groupies because only qualified persons were allowed to have an opinion –village idiots, town drunks were kept in their place and kept busy –so there were no porch-monkies at all– “if any serf shall dare to present a petition he shall be punished with the knout and transported for life to the mines of Nerchinsk”; only when revolutionary agitators started their nefarious work among them did dicks and hairies fall into the mistaken imagining that they were qualified to have (and voice) an opinion.
as Benjamin Franklin stated, only if you can logically defend it (with facts you can support it) are you allowed to have an opinion…..
—-a groupie is a groupie because that is the extent of his intellectual capacity (otherwise he would have long ago gaave up his devotion to the charlatan); liars are your heroes, ignorance is your religion
You appear to be a well informed chap, why don’t you start your own web site, instead of a ‘free ride’, and being obnoxious and cantankerous.
Remember ”none is more ENSLAVED than those who hopelessly believe that they are free”
The bankesters have got you all by your Bs and Cs, from cradle to grave.They have been at it from 1694.
For 20 years, professional liar Bill Still (professional, for he is doing it for the money, not for amateurish fame and glory) told his victims that he read this London Times editorial from 1863 which voiced the money power’s opposition to United States notes. The truth, of course, was that he has never spent time reading old issues of the London Times (or any other newspaper); he simply regurgitated some gabage that a more talented liar invented years before; it is very likely that Bill Still haven’t even read yeasterday’s Times which is freely available in subway cars.
Anyhow; in 2011 professional liar Bill Still declared that what he sold to his victims for 20 years was not true…….
question 1 which occurs to normal people: how and why did liar Still arrive at this conclusion that one of the load-bearing stud in the book-peddler’s house of cards is a fraud ? professional liar Bill Still carefully withholds this important piece of information from his victims (the money fountain might dry up if his groupies were told the true nature of his character, and the true source of his finagled wisdom)
question number 2:
what happens to the room in the conspiracist house of cards which professional liar Bill Still and other book-peddlers built up on top of this bold-faced falsehood ?
*//now that the retaining wall –the Bismarck confession– is removed from under the floor, what happens to the conspiracist dogma built upon this false premise ?
Eventhough the false premises –and load-bearing studs and retaining walls of the house of cards– are completely gone, professional liar Bill Still and the other charlatans continue to claim that the construct fabricated upon them still stands…..
In the Bible dogs are the second lowest from of animal life; today, due to individual and societal degenaration, dog are fetish items……
Inspite of all the revelations about sinister and professional liars Bill Still and Ellen Brown, their groupies remain faithful to them….. because these groupies degenerated to the level of dogs
Ay – Name – that is low and frankly sad…
To see dogs from the viewpoint and prism of times long gone! Dogs may be too humanized by many and thus treated like humans instead of according to their psychology, but they do teach so much unconditional love and compassion to humans. All pets do! And that gift is priceless.
Mankind slowly advances also in terms of concsiousness, that is why even Jesus was updating doctrines like “eye for an eye” to universal compassion and love. He is not responsable for the church’s actions for combining his teachings with the completely different old testament and also adding their “amendments”.
Those comments also betray an inability to perceive with your intuition and our currently untrained empathic and telepathic abilities. We all are empathic to a degree and that is why we react to someone’s inner self-confidence and also high spiritual nature. That is why people like Francis of Assisi were able to attract crowds. It was not because of the current propaganda and professional lying that produces slick-talking PR-pumped con-artists who are torturing dogs and small children in their basements and are made to be our media-role-models.
Consciousness even manifests in the writings of people (if they have written it themself). We can perceive that if we have trained our intuition accordingly (sometimes through meditation, contemplation, inner perception, deep prayer etc.). If we are unable to use these abilities we become food on the table as Pike put it.
Why? Because we will be unable to differentiate from the NLP-talking secret satanist and the mankind-loving idealist who just wishes to improve everyone’s life.
Very nice Bourchakoun. Let us let Love rule!
Love rule ?!?
you constantly malign christian man Gary North….
you malign christian man Alex Jones (who is on mission from God to lead the unfortunate to safety)….
you malign Ron Paul (is he not also a christian man ?)
you malign christian man Tom Wood
(you are religiously attached to pagan Brown, anything but christian Still who advertises gold-line, you idolize pagan Margrit, pagan Gesell)
charity does not rejoice in iniquity Name! It rejoices in the truth!
There is very little Christ in Christianity!
One knows a tree by its fruit and many true believers will never be seen in Church, and many seen in Church do not believe! You know that!
>>>>rejoice in the truth
Yes, sir; and the truth is Bill Still and Ellen Brown are for-the-money liars
the fruits of the church of B.S. & E.B. is a bunch of groupies sorely lacking in knowledge
=====
in any case, enough of deflection; which one of you bankbook heroes has the (moral) courage to answer the question a) to f) ?
what you term advance and evolution, is decline…..
(as i mentioned before, our wholoe society degenrated to the level of the royal court of Versailles, where dog-loving was also rampant)
every day 4000 children killed, a very few of them late term…..
but when a gladiator beats to death some pitbull the whole country is in righteous indignation, and the gladiator gets 7 months……
we torture millions of chicken, pigs, cows every day……
we kill birds by the countless…..
Name789 – you should be more careful in attacking the monetary ideas of others since you’ve suggested that we use gold to back our money. None of the people that you regularly besmirch would ever consider such an idiotic notion.
Consider… The U.S., Canada, etc., have no gold. Nada – none – kaputz. The international investment banks and central banks hold all the gold. You would rent their gold so that we might have a means to trade with one another. Why??? Think man!
Consider… the gold market is thoroughly manipulated on a daily basis.
Stop by and view the evidence at Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee (GATA) — http://www.gata.org
You share a common monetary misunderstanding along with E.B. and B.S. – that is you don’t understand usury – the charging of interest:
However, compared to E.B. and B.S., you sir, are a dumbass when it comes to monetary issues.
We cannot repeat it often enough, Larry the leech is a gold-ite and this how he tried to debunk the gold standard:–
that is why republicae could flush him down the toilet so easily, Larry leech did it to himself
thank you, again, for proving my point that groupies are groupies because they are not able to understand what they read, they regularly lie, they have no ability to reason
i would like you to point out where i suggested to use gold to back ‘our’ money……
the only ability Larry the leech have (other than leeching, at one time you even copied and presented my response as yours) is to parrot others…..
here is the problem –and that is why trojan infiltrator Ellen brown was NOT able to defend and explain her position when Mr. Shiff asked her– you parrot theories of others that they built up on false premises (the gaping hole in Lucy Liu’s, Margrit Kennedy’s fanigled contraptions were dealt with here (on this forum)
you still have not been brave enough to explain the historical fact that under a willing government debt and interest WAS paid off (in gold, at that) so much for the impossibility class-room model
You hero –Mr. Hobart– (and you can keep thanking me for introducing her to you….) builds up a straw man; she starts with a madeup (non-existent) premise, then spends 50 pages debunking it; but to crown her inconsistency, she uses a quote from Bastiat, about a gold crown piece, to tell what money is…….
http://www.yamaguchy.com
the source of your finagled wisdom
—I keep forgetting this:
It was Larry the leech who, in 2010, wrote to me that it is my mission in life to provide e-text to illiterate americans, that it is my duty to go on the internet frontline to awaken the sleeping sheeple…..
I am here, now…… but nobody wants to awake
Larry leech, the expert, who not long ago mistook a campaign pamphlet for official document (and started to develop a dogma based on it)
After quoting Bastiat to poetically explain what money is, Mary Hobart concludes her booklet:–
” the government should see to it that the increase in coinage should be sufficient to prevent business failures and the foreclosure of real estate. Instead of fearing the free coinage of silver, our gravest apprehension should be that there is not enough”
which (far from being an opponent of silver as currency) puts her in the camp of free-silverites of the 1890s; just as the greenback party was; just as Sarah Emery was; just as Ignatius Donnelly was………
Yes – I have read on your website the texts concerning your ideal system. Ample liquidity of silver and goin backed paper or best the coins themselves.
Well – needless to say that sounds good only on paper. Apart from the fact that the mere volume now is highly different, the technological advancement makes carrying coins quite cumbersome, the commodities themselves are far more concentrated into far fewer hands and last their very prices can easily be manipulated or even bought up within days by a bunch of hedge-funds or 2 major banks themselves. If silver or gold became money they could have silver at the price of gold within days and control over 99% within months. (Not taking into account their control of unknown number of mines.)
Those proposals of yours are completely illusory. And why are Bill Still and Ellen Brown traitors? Nevermind their supposed short-comings or historical errors – their proposed systems are transparent, they are interest free and they give a transparent country the ability to control the quantity of money. The money bunch will NEVER EVER go for their system! But they sure as hell will support yours, because yours can be manipulated by them easily!
Those propositions remind me of Indian gurus who defend the caste system, when they are approached by people who have real experiences about past lives and tell them that you are born sometimes rich, sometimes poor and those born rich cannot simply say that they are rich and wealthy and thus they are the most spiritual on earth! (BTW – the Money Power bunch uses that explanation too for their own “obvious” superiority.) Do you know what those gurus say? They say that the code of Manu was meant to work like this: When a child is born the guru comes and assesses the consciousness of the child and then it is carried to the caste the child has earned. Oh sure – I see it happen – the guru telling the Maharaja that his kid is an asshole and should be at the bottom class and that he should adopt a kid from the Untouchables! Even if reincarnation were true, that is certainly not how it would work.
But hey – follies are defended despite never having worked in real life!
we don’t know what you read, but you are following the groupie method (highly preferred by Larry leech) of making up something, then blaming it on me (in this case); then disproving it
in the meantime all of ye are steadfastly refuse to defend or support or answer question regarding the concepts ye advance (drunken-sailor money, Ellen Brown’s printing-press money, impossibility equation, A+B computer model)
>>>>> And why are Bill Still and Ellen Brown traitors?
why is it none of ye dare to answer why B.S. and E.B. lied ? when they compiled books and told customers they studied the subject ?
how did demostrated liars become experts ? what sopporting evidence does anyone have that B.S. & E.B. knows any more about state finances as they know about history
why do these heroes need to invent quotes, fabricate quotes, fill their wares with fabricated quotes, why they build up theories based on these fabricated quotes ?
====
in the article Migchels several outright lies, and falsehoods between the lines;
I asked a few questions, nobody dares to answer, everyone deflects…..
Polite Mr Hollis, advocate of paper money in England in the 20th century, studied history and was not afraid of facts; perhaps that is why conspiracist book-peddlers know not of his exitance and his writings, book-sellers never published and re-published his work in the United States. Of course, none of ye groupies know of his book, either; how could ye ? your cheer-leaders couldn’t tell ye about it. It remained to my fellow traveller and vagrant, M.B., to find it and produce the electronic text of it (no groupie would lower himself to doing such thing as going into the library, copying a book and producing the electronic text)
Mr. Hollis had a dim view on Lincoln, and a very low opinion on the other hero figure of the book-peddler mythology, Thaddeus the Stevens:—
/quote
Lincoln’s Party was the party of the money-power…….
Legend, skillfully directed for somewhat obvious purposes, has sought to make of Lincoln an almost superhuman figure.
It is therefore hard to say anything moderate or balanced about him without appearing to be engaged in an exercise of the odious art of debunking. But, while much can be said in praise of his engaging, colourful, and humorous personality, while he proved himself a great master of the diplomacy of war, the sane verdict on his political career cannot be other than this: Lincoln was put forward by the moneyed interest as an ‘available’ candidate who would attract the votes of the West but who was never for an instant intended to be the master of his own policy. It was the stalest and most regular trick of American politics.
Whether Lincoln would have been pliable to his master’s voice or whether he would have turned and fought the money-power, as Andrew Jackson fought it, can never be known, for he was killed before he had the chance to show. One thing is very certain, and that is that, had he fought it, his place in the polite textbooks of history would have been to-day a different one from what it is. He had not fought it during the war.
Lincoln was succeeded by his Vice-President, Andrew Johnson, a man from Tennessee, the only President to have come from that state except Jackson. He had unfortunate faults of personality which made him ill-suited for fighting the great battle which Jackson fought and which Lincoln perhaps would have fought. President only by accident, he could bring to his task none of the prestige which Lincoln would have brought to it. He was not fitted for success and he did not meet with it. Yet both in the North and in the South he fought for the permanent appetites of mankind –for justice and for mercy and for honest government. Whatever may be said against him, there is this to be said for him. The men who hounded at him –Senator Charles Sumner (greenbacker, radical re-constructionist), Representative Thaddeus Stevens (greenbacker, radical re-constructionist) with his mulatto mistress, Benjamin Butler, the blackmailer– were perhaps as vile a crew as ever dabbled anywhere in the trade of politics. I know not where to find the likes of them unless perhaps among those who made the English Revolution of 1688. It is a certain title to honour to have been hated by such men. Of these men and of their policy during the years of reconstruction it is not unfair to say that they destroyed every good thing for which Jefferson Davis fought in the South and every good thing for which Lincoln fought in the North, and that under their rule ‘government of the people for the people and by the people’ perished utterly from such portions of the earth as they were able to control.
The effect of the Civil War and the reconstruction [the same re-construction –‘one government over all the states’– which was highly recommended by the House of Rothshcild in 1862!!] was to transfer the Government of the United States to the professional politicians of Lincoln’s Party.
/un-quote
so, who is brave enough to answer the question: why has professional liar Bill Still and trojan infiltrator Ellen Brown lied about Lincoln and themselves ? (and why the attachment to professional liars and trojan infiltrators?)
Big deal, you went to the library and found some obscure kook that has the same lunatic view of Lincoln that you do. I’m so impressed….
The chain of causation which leads from Bank and Tariff to civil war is unbroken:—
During the 1850s, the leaders of Lincoln’s party remained devoted to the Bank and Tariff, but they saw that the anti-slavery issue was the only one which gave hope to them of gratifying their personal ambitions hence they resolved to seize upon it for the accomplishment of their purposes; —politics were taken over by mercenary adventurers who followed politics as a trade, such demagogues pandered to the passions of the hour— and the country was plunged into civil war.
The United States emerged from the war beridden again with Bank(s) and Tariff(s); Constitution trampled; Centralization accomplished
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zn93UwAYpow
Bourchakoun wrote:
I dont think that Bill Still or Ellen Brown has ever suggested an interest free system. Like the Nameless789, they apparently have not figured out that the all debt interest bearing money system is in fact a pyramid scheme. Mathematically, the system cannot be long sustained (reason for periodic depressions) with proceeds transferring from the many (borrowers) to the few (wealthy).
Bill Still’s proposition includes the state issuing – aka “printing” money themselves – so there is no reason to pay interest on that debt to whom? To yourself? And his proposition goes into shutting down the fractional reserve banking system which gives the banks the power to manipulate the quantity of money. That is what he critizised about Andrew Jackson as he left the fractional reserve banking system intact. His proposal includes a full reserve system by the state – the states giving the money the banks. It probably would almost instantly include a state banking system, since the banks could simply take the money and stop credit as to strangle the economy. However interest free would mainly be what the state would spend for his upkeep and infrastructure, not necessarily what the banks receive, so interest would remain an issue, though a much much weaker one.
Sure – he does not address many issues like interest free credit i.e. real estate for the common man or other issues, but even his proposals would be a nightmare to the money power. All that would remain is a highly competitive banking system and they could expand it only the old-fashioned way by giving more credit up to the limit given to them by the state or taking in more deposits.
So no – his proposals are honest – I consider Anthony Migchels’ one superior and both equally unrealistic and suicidal for any politician to propose currently, but at least it is not instantly primed for the dark side.
Bourchakoun wrote:
Hello Bourchakoun. Bill Still supported the old “Chicago Plan” (aka US-HR-2990 N.E.E.D. Act, from Kucinich and AMI) during his run for president. The plan is basically a turd with a cherry on top – the cherry being that the federal government, through a centralized “Monetary Authority” (not elected and not accountable) would spend debt free money into circulation via projects and initiatives of their choosing.
While I am a strong advocate of spending debt free money into circulation, this is NOT the way to do it. It would create/strengthen a moneyed aristocracy that Federalists like Hamilton would love.
Bourchakoun wrote:
Yes, is is unfortunate that Bill Still would get rid of what he calls “fractional reserve banking” and instead, the private sector and local government could only borrow existing money from others – no new money would be created in the bank lending process.
Of course this would sharply increase the cost of borrowing (higher interest rates); especially in long term loans (people would actually have to lend their money and do without for the duration of the loan).
Most people, including B.S., don’t seem to understand what “fractional banking” means. I explain this in an article entitled The Fallacy of Fractional Reserve Banking (FRB) that I posted at Bill Still’s blog. — http://s6.zetaboards.com/Bill_Still_Reforum/topic/8743531/1/
I don’t mean to criticize Bill Still as I greatly admire “The Secret of Oz” and the classic… “The Money Masters”. That said, I don’t think his monetary plan is a good one.
I agree, but for clarification: one thing Bill always will see is that as long as the State is losing even 1 cent on usury on any kind of ‘national debt’, something’s wrong.
So Bill will always at least liberate the state of the banks.
What I think many populists for the time being don’t see is how we can do without interest and without banks for the common man.
I even had some contact to Bill Still.
It seems that he did not delve very deeply in the whole scope of alternative knowledge or how deep the rabbit hole really goes. As most of here know it reaches far wider than just money and banking. He supports sometimes various politicians, as if we could work ourselves out by voting for anyone at the current time.
Yes – his proposal regarding the Fractional Reserve System would create a lot of retribution by the banks, so JAK-bank-like state banks and other regional banks should be given ample money to lend out to people according to ancient conventional credit rules. It is not rocket science really. It only starts to become rocket science when banks “lend” to their subsidiaries offshore and around the world, take over companies and “lend” to them or purely gamble in the global derivatives markets expanding their basically free cash from THEIR FED to an almost infinite amount and squeeze out all other competition and wreak havoc around the world. They do all this, but of course restrict credit to the local businessman and the common man at home.
And Anthony brought up a good point – changing the system that drastically even at the proposals of B.S. would also change current rules – i.e. it could eliminate the need for banks to charge interest on collaterized loans like real estate. How much work does the local bank really have when giving you a credit on your house? Consider that. There is some work at the beginning or at construction, which can be paid by charging a bigger fee at the beginning. Later on only a yearly flat fee is sufficiant. House still standing – check, credit is being paid – check. The fractional reserve system allows the banks to rule over all other businesses and it has to go and that is what Andrew Jackson did not understand.
Your characterization of HR. 2990 as the Chicago plan is fallacious as it is does not reflect at all the monetarist school of Friedman but that of Stephen Zarlenga and his American Monetary Institute. They are not at all the same.
Bill Still’s latest book, “No More National Debt”, his endorsement of Zarlenga’s plan (hr. 2990) is not without some critiques and reservations — the most important of which has to do with the unelected separate Monetary Authority. He said he didn’t like it because it should be “independent of any other arm of government … the ‘new’ monetary authrority would be constituted similarly to the current Federal Reserve Board of Governors” p. 271
>>>> Bill Still’s latest book
So, whose work has Bill Still plagiarised this time ?
3 years ago you wrote to me that a team assembled “web of debt’ for Ellen Brown. would you dare to expand ?
I’ve heard about this gossip too and would certainly be interested to hear whether it’s true or not!!
You boys have a look at this to see that we are all barking up the wrong tree.The Elite have got us by the Bs and Cs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtM6qtNzLHM&feature=player_embedded# https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtM6qtNzLHM&feature=player_embedded#
If it were true they would have released the information with proof long ago. It’s just another attempt to discredit interest free public banking by conjuring fake scandals and overstating irrelevant side issues. Not one of their arguments has disproven its economic soundness, because it cannot honestly be done.
mind you, Ellen does not resist interest in Public Banking, but obviously it could and should be organized interest free.
> But Bill and Ellen are not too keen on addressing the usury issue yet. Although I think that may change at some point, since the subject has been gaining a lot of traction lately.
Ellen Brown especially is more versed in health topics since most of her books cover that and she only became more famous with Money of Debt. She obviously completely distances herself from the fallacies of the Gold Standard (contrary to agent G.E. Griffin). Her support of public banking is what she thought would be a viable next step. I agree that this can easily be manipulated.
Still – I consider even her too close to the truth and thus too dangerous to be money-power-created. BTW – public banks might become the future bad banks for us to pay off in the end, but I doubt if that is what Ellen Brown had in mind 🙂
She acknowledges the fact that it is present in the operations of the BND. She doesn’t like it but it seems to work and move things in the right direction. People who wait for reform to happen all at once will get nowhere and will wait forever in vain. You must fight for incremental change in the direction of your ultimate goal. Once the BND model becomes a viable model nationwide, you can move toward interest free money.
Another example of this is Elizabeth Warren’s Bank on Students Act S.897. You want to nationalize the Fed all at once. It will never happen. But if you demand that the Fed issue loans .075% interest on stafford loan for students then you have taken small control of the Fed. With a small victory like this you can create an awareness that the purpose of the Fed is to serve the people and not just member banks; and that ultimately all loans should be interest free. The is no excuse not to as this costs the Fed nothing, and the taxpayer nothing (off budget). And it’s a better investment in our countries economic future labor force cannot be had.
I agree. B.S. and E.B. are shots too close to the boat. This is way too risky for THEM.
The same concerns “free” energy technology, super-powerful-batteries, high-dosage vitamin cures and frequency cures via vibration (Dr. Rife – 1930s). They always stay away from those topics far and wide by never mentioning them or instantly dismissing it as nonsense.
The same is true with BS-EB-propositions – imagine a TV discussion and economics professors having to explain why it is so wonderful to pay interest instead of paying nothing and how beautiful our system works by letting those splendid banks decide on how much money is really in the economy. Certainly the public will appreciate that. No – they might invite David Icke and talk about reptilians or Alex Jones to talk about guns, but this? No way!
It’s closer than you think Bourchakoun. Especially for public banking, which is promoted also by for instance the huffpost, which is as mainstream as it gets. Usurious PB (which is much better than private banking obviously, since it saves the Taxpayer the interest on the national bank) is very likely to get a lot of traction, especially when the next crunch comes.
The Money Power might actually be very interested at this stage to allow it. They would have at least some banks operate as public banks, if only to unload their ‘balances’ (unfathomably deep black holes) on the public.
The IMF was recently discussing the Chicago Plan, as you know, which is pretty close to what Bill is suggesting.
But Bill and Ellen are not too keen on addressing the usury issue yet. Although I think that may change at some point, since the subject has been gaining a lot of traction lately.
(interest on the national debt, that should read)
2013/7/5 Anthony Migchels
> It’s closer than you think Bourchakoun. Especially for public banking, > which is promoted also by for instance the huffpost, which is as mainstream > as it gets. Usurious PB (which is much better than private banking > obviously, since it saves the Taxpayer the interest on the national bank) > is very likely to get a lot of traction, especially when the next crunch > comes. > > The Money Power might actually be very interested at this stage to allow > it. They would have at least some banks operate as public banks, if only to > unload their ‘balances’ (unfathomably deep black holes) on the public. > > The IMF was recently discussing the Chicago Plan, as you know, which is > pretty close to what Bill is suggesting. > > But Bill and Ellen are not too keen on addressing the usury issue yet. > Although I think that may change at some point, since the subject has been > gaining a lot of traction lately. > > >
Larry the leech wrote to me in 2010 that a team compiled it for her –being an insider groupie he must have known something
I am not part of the team so one of you fine upstanding groupies with high moral character should come clean, or investigate
Migchels would not dare to talk about the origins of Ellen Brown, or of the religion of Ellen Brown; because Migchels is constructed of high moral fibre
the ignorance presented in ‘web of debt’ speaks for itself; the self contradiction in the ‘book’ would be explained by ignorant teamsters patching together a product
=====
@pm
Even your own kind, Larry leech, recommends the legislative history of greenbacks as a ‘must read’ if someone wants to learn the truth:
Larry also suggests that you crawl out of the pit of ignorance and bondage of book-peddlers, and upgrade yourself at the one and only fountain of actual history:–
the history of central banking in the United States:
http://www.yamaguchy.com/library/uregina/speeches.html
====
where did any of ye get the idea that ye are experts on finances, and qualified to invent reform ideas; do you think that reading the ware your favourite charlatan equipped ye for the task ?
so far every brain-fucked concept advanced on this blog collapsed under its own weight (don’t even need outside refutation, only reason, logic and critical examination)
which one of ye fanigled experts could manage a branch bank, or a discount house, or survive on the commodity or stock exchange ?……. neither could your mentors, professional liar Bill Still, trojan infiltrator Ellen Brown, Henry Makow the homosex expert (or any other of the horde of book-peddlers)
which one of you could get a job in the treasury department ? (a janitor, maybe)
========
in the article Migchels presented several lies, of course none of you is willing to address that……..
Everything you suggest as the truth only perpetuates the status quo and this does nothing to change the downward cycle of debt slavery. Commodity money and interest in whatever form are hallmarks of this. Anyone who recommends this a form of change is ignorant of history, common economic sense or perhaps a charlatan.
I do not share the opinion of the Libertarians & Austrians, if they are the groups to which Larry belongs, that the Fed should be ended. This also changes nothing as private banking elsewhere fills the void. The fed should be nationalized and used for the public good. Debt free currency/credit should be ubiquitous and easily accessible to the public as a tax/unearned rent free medium of exchange for labors and services. You don’t have to have a CPA to know that the value of money is derived from labor and that this should not be plundered via interest by parties not involved in production.
The Nameless789 wrote:
You count the people short. It may be that you cannot grasp monetary systems but most people, with average intelligence, can figure out that the system is a ponzi scheme – and yes, there are better ways!
In the Money Creators, by Gertrude Coogan — http://www.yamaguchy.com/library/coogan/coogan_index.html
You either do not bother reading the stuff at yamaguchy?
so when are you going to immitate a man, and tell us who compiled ‘web of debt’ ?
=======
I make an accurate observation of the people (especially ye people, and you)
two;
just because Coogan makes and observation, it does not make ye experts
none of ye could run a lemonade stand profitably, much less a money changer’s counter, but somehow, in your delusion of grandeur, ye imagine and declare yourselves monetary experts –so much for the harmful effects charlatans and their ware
three;
Coogan is mistaken –to give her the benefit of the doubt– (she also fell for the usual, run of the mill regurgitations of the day); information was available, plenty, long before she was born…..
four;
it is beneath your (and your kind’s) dignity to produce e-text (or do research, or anything else) so you cannot know that to produce the -etext of Coogan’s book a) I had to buy and read the book; b) i had to reproduce its content as e-text
=====
so, why has infiltrator Ellen Brown lied about Lincoln ?
Oj – Name – it gets worse and worse …..
Not only overestimate you the real complexity of basic finance – the average person can understand it. The same goes for other fields like medicine, nutrition and basic technology.
Apart from that your comments betray a lack of experience in the very professional fields you somehow find in such high esteem. If you had worked in a number of positions in the corporate world you would have met plenty of almost total morons as vice-presidents who obviously have some really powerful backing. You would have seen the follies of the corporate world and also met the dried up counterparts i.e. working in such insitutions like European Central Banks and regulatory agencies.
As far as trading or investing goes (surviving in the capital markets is mainly trading) – the abilities that make you a success are basically good money-management skill in tandem with a good strategy combined with your own psychological make-up. Only very few are cut out for the job similar to opera singing. It can be learned, but would entail plenty of work and dedication. Of course you can also be a complete idiot and get insider tips, NSA-spying tips which let you win 100% of the time – but that kind of trading can be done by a 6-year-old on heroin.
I could give you countless examples from my own corporate experience and also tell you stories of friends who have been regional country-managers for major corporations or had similar jobs like I had. For example there was one vice president for a world-wide corporation who had a complete floor under him. His status was somehow high enough to hire only female employees and sleep with all of them. After having slept with all of them he let HR hire them during his absence and hired new women. No one without major real-owner-backing would be able to pull off that kind of shit.
As far as intelligence goes – some were very bright, some of the best were sometimes even slightly above average but put in a lot of work, had experience and great social skills which let them rise fast. Others were just plain con-man assholes who had the ability to sell anything. Also you meet quite a good number of idiots and assholes in one, who got a high-level job without any known reason at all. The major and minor families have plenty of cousins and 2nd cousins, who have to make a decent living, don’t they? But I did not know that at the time.
All in all – the opinions of the simplest farmer can be invaluable to society and who are you discard it ? (i.e. farmer and self-taught scientist Johann Grander and his water systems used even by major corporations). We have heard those arguments you make by others: WE ARE THE RICHEST, THE BRIGHTEST AND THUS WE WILL DECIDE WHAT IS BEST FOR ALL YOU FOLK DOWN THERE! I wonder where we have heard that before? Only strange for You to utter the same words as them.
– he let HR hire them during his absence and hired new women.
Of course I meant fire them.
This makes you wonder about the republican & libertarian mantra that government should be run like a business. Apparently they believe that letting greedy, hedonistic sociopaths who care only for profit and acquisition of monopoly power govern us is a better idea? Look at what privatization and the unfettered profit model has already done to the food industry(gmo ), medical care (toxic drugs for symptoms only), banking (usury), wall street (derivatives, rigged high spoof trading), prisons (lobby for more criminal offenses and longer terms), ect.. Yeah, we need more of this.
Thank you for supporting my point.
Larry leech, Migchels, pm, ren, B.S., E.B. &c….. are not farmers, not fish-mongers, ……
neither are they students of relevant history and historical examples……
Larry the leech is still here (even if under different avatar) and could tell why he wrote that to me, whether it is true or not………..
Perhaps a forum or panel of some type could be arranged where the various ideas could be discussed. Include all sincere men and women who are concerned about these financial affairs and film it. The documentary could then allow people to gain an awareness of the tremendous consequences for humanity. The production could be done over Skype. Simple.
Thank you,
Jerry
Thanks Jerry, that certainly makes sense.
Anthony,
My guess is that Michael Moore would be interested in producing a documentary of this type. It is also my guess that he would like to remain behind the scenes for a change. Given the tremendously consequential nature of this subject for the world, with enough intense, smart dialogue/information (Fahrenheit 911, Inside Job) an Academy Award would be a slam dunk. This would not be the prime motivation; to win awards or make a lot of money. The motivation for the film would be creating an improvement in the lives of all of humanity, and all future generations. In essence such an endeavor would be an act of love.
Thank you,
Jerry
Please – Michael Moore covers the left wing of the NWO. He may or may not be an active co-worker of them, but he sure as hell did not do any documentary on the crimes of Obama. Apart from being black and a good signal for a disadvantaged race Obama is as bad as Bush. Michael Moore will stay away from any topics, that could really change something. Oh yeah – vote in the next Democrat or “compassionate” Republican – things will surely become better then. According to CFR historian Carroll Quigley there has not been a US president for over 100 years who did not belong to THEM.
Yeah, maybe moore isn’t a great choice. He won’t even speak up for the poor in Detroit and various other cities in Michigan being taken over by dictatorial fascist “emergency managers”, who sell off the city’s assets for pennies on the dollar to wealthy. http://tarpley.net/2013/04/01/detroit-under-austerity-dictatorship/ This should be the biggest story reported in journalism, and it’s not even on the radar in the truther media.
pm, thanks for the link to the Tarpley piece on Detroit — http://tarpley.net/2013/04/01/detroit-under-austerity-dictatorship
That’s an incredible expose on what is coming for many more cities through-out the world.
You’re very welcome. Spread the word because they have nearly 200 of these emergency dictators trained and ready to be deployed to any municipality in receivership throughout the country — and nobody is alarmed about this. Most people think fascism occurs via catastrophe and violent social/political upheaval, but in reality it occurs stealthily one unconstitutional local putsch at a time.
Detroit is an interesting point as on an island in Detroit is reputed to be built one of the first real-life city-states:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2268696/Belle-Isle-Developer-wants-buy-island-Detroit-start-remarkable-new-nation.html
http://www.commonwealthofbelleisle.com/
You only had these discussed in military papers and by globlist think tanks and NWO-strategists like Jacques Attali. City States are planned to take over from the future world government. Actually as an investment for the survival of your family just in case this is not such a bad idea.
It is still amazing how they can simply put it out in the open just like that since A City State is basically a completely indepent state within the USA and they even say it so in the article! If you know the plan it is not surprising though.
This is just meant for the ultra rich. If you are poor and unemployed, and most are in Detroit, they have no plans in the future to change that. Instead of making plans to develop a jobs and housing program, they are busting unions and using tax money/breaks to to build high priced condos and golf country clubs. The poor in Detroit are being sequestrated out of any viable livelihood and life.
> this is just meant for the ultra rich. If you are poor and unemployed, and most are in Detroit….
Of course it is only for the mega-rich, their immediate servants and some people who know where the wind is turning. So far they are offering the initial spots for a mere 300.000 $ which will rise in value tremendously. It won’t be so cheap in the future. But let’s hope they will not attain their plans, which will be hell for the lower 90%. So far only very few plans have been really stopped – some things have been delayed, so there may be some sliver of hope.
Bourchakoun,
I have never met Michael Moore. I have no true idea of what his motivations are when he makes a documentary. How about Charles Ferguson? I apologize for mentioning Moore. The main point of the comment was the potential of a smart documentary to influence public opinion and change the world. All I can say is “I’m fer ya, not aginst ya.” What are your thoughts on possible documentaries. Who would be the men and women interviewed in the film? Who could be the backers/producers of such a film? A Canon EOS camera takes motion picture quality video. Are backers/a large investment even necessary?This is a simple suggestion that has potential. Michael Moore aside, do you think such a project could make a difference?
Thank you,
Jerry
My nomination for people interviewed would be, Michael A. Hoffman http://www.revisionisthistory.org/ , Stephan Zarlenga http://www.monetary.org/ , Ellen Brown http://webofdebt.wordpress.com/ , Bill Still , and Wayne Walton. I’m sure i’ll think of more later but this is a good start.
> What are your thoughts on possible documentaries. Who would be the men and women interviewed in the film? Who could be the backers/producers of such a film?
I agree. A well-done documentary on the fallacies of usury and some alternative systems with historical examples – basically Anthony’s viewpoint – has not been done before. It could really bring across the topic to many people. The less the people can be conned on the point of monetary reform the better. That could actually do some good.
Bourchakoun,
There are people who have made documentaries in a few weeks. The fellow who wrote the screenplay for “Dances With Wolves” completed it in one week. Such a project could not fail to be successful (change the world) because it would simply tell the truth. The entire human race is hungry for the truth at this time. The timing of such an effort could not be better. A collaboration between like minded men and women from around the world (like International Consortium of Investigative Journalists / icij.org), the finest thoughts available on the subject, would result in people lined up around the block to view it. Not to make money but to create a better world for all people.
Thank you,
Jerry
The idea may be a good one, but I’ve learned to be leery of qualifiers like “sincere.” Who is to determine who is sincere?
Rampant lying is not limited to Ellen Brown and the groupies, it is foundational in the Zarlenga neighbourhood, too
http://www.monetary.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Natelson-Study.pdf
http://www.monetary.org/paper-money/2013/01
Lawyer Natelson picks a false premise, then builds a theory upon it, then underpins this fiction with falsehoods
bold-face lies, in an effort to underpin pre-determined outcome; as usual he is not able to support his conception with genuine facts
He quotes Jefferson’s letter –but purposely does not tell that Jefferson wrote about (non-legal-tender) bank issued paper money, and lawyer Natelson dresses it up as a constitutional question; the constitution has nothing more to do with bank paper than with horse-napping
the truth is Thomas Jefferson considered silver/gold/copper coin the constitutional money of the united states, and money in general; Thomas Jefferson recommended –as a form of borrowing from the people– issuing non-legal-tender Treasury notes –which the notes issued by the Treasury during his life-time were; it is an outright lie to write that “these old Founders refrained entirely from questioning its [non-legal-tender bank paper] constitutionality”
During Jefferson’s life no one suggested that Treasury notes (or bank notes) should be declared legal tender; had anyone asked, Jefferson, Adams, even Hamilton, would have told that paper is just a promise to pay money, not money itself, and certainly not what the framers and ratifiers intended —no one in the 1780s, 1790s, 1800s construed “to coin” to mean ‘to coin paper’….
That is the reason why the lawyer Natelson relies solely on secondary sources, and not on the writings of the people who participated in the framing and ratifying of the constitution
He twists the meaning of the statements of ratifiers: the people he quotes referred to the Continentals, which were non-legal-tender promises to pay silver and an emergency measure during a revolution; they referred to federal Treasury notes, which would have been, and were, non-legal-tender evidences of debt, promising to pay principal and interest in silver
He carefully avoids mentioning who these supreme judges were (upon whose decision he hangs his hopes) who decided in favour of legal-tender U.S. notes, and why they decided so; prior to the addition of two railway lawyers to the supreme court, the court decided 4 to 3 against legal tender, the two railway lawyers tilted the ballance 5 to 4 in favour of it……
—so much for basing your construct on a false premise of corporate interest, instead of principles (it took a 100 years, but the supreme court eventually decided that corporations are persons, with civil rights; and to object to that, lawyer Natelson would term as “originalism”)
http://www.yamaguchy.com/library/myers/supreme/supreme_12.html
“The receipts of the railroad companies were almost wholly in legal-tender notes. If they were required to pay their fixed charges or contracts in gold, they would be so completely at the mercy of the banks that it would only be a short time before the banks would own outright virtually every railroad system.
This was the prodigious contest now under way between these two powerful interests.”
“On December 20, 1869, President Grant appointed Edwin M. Stanton, but Stanton died four days later.55 Then, on the same day that Chase’s opinion in the Legal-Tender case was announced, Grant sent the nominations of William Strong and Joseph P. Bradley, as Associate Justices, to the Senate. Their nominations were shortly afterward confirmed.”
“Now that the Supreme Court of the United States was packed,73 or to put it more felicitously, reconstituted so as to reverse Chase’s Legal-Tender decision, Attorney-General Hoar moved for a rehearing of the case. This motion was granted ; and, in December, 1870, the Supreme Court, by a vote of five to four (Associate Justice Strong writing the majority opinion) reversed the previous decision, and declared the Legal Tender Act constitutional.”
name789 wrote:
Where is the lie? What point are you making?