It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

The Liberal Leftists Illuminati - "Taking a look inside the secret leftist billionaires club"

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in


posted on May, 12 2014 @ 01:35 PM
a reply to: Kali74

In any case, there is an Illuminati link to communism via the Rothschild family Bloodline and their banking industry

Goldsmiths began to realize that only a small portion of their depositors ever exchanged their receipts of deposit for the actual bullion, at the same time, so the goldsmiths started lending out some their depositors bullion for additional interest. This, dear readers, is where the whole thing went wrong. The loaning of someone elses property for a profit, without their knowlege, is undeniably deceitfull and dishonest. It is the point when tiny bubbles started to appear on the bottom of the pot. It is also when the devil got involved.

Meyer Rothschild began to realize that in order to attain the power necessary to influence and control the finances of the various monarchs in Europe, he would have to wrest this influence and power from the church, which would necessitate its destruction. To accomplish this, he enlisted the help of a Catholic priest, Adam Weishaupt, to assemble a secret Satanic order.

As the name implies, those individuals who are members of the Illuminati possess the 'Light of Lucifer'. As far as they are concerned, only members of the human race who possess the 'Light of Lucifer' are truly enlightened and capable of governing. Denouncing God, Weishaupt and his followers considered themselves to be the cream of the intelligentsia - the only people with the mental capacity, the knowledge, the insight and understanding necessary to govern the world and bring it peace. Their avowed purpose and goal was the establishment of a "Novus Ordo Seclorum" - a New World Order, or One World Government.

In 1785, Meyer moved his entire family to a five story dwelling he shared with the Schiff family. In 1865 The Schiffs' not-yet-born grandson Jacob would move to New York and in 1917 become the mastermind behind the funding of the Bolshevik Revolution. This action would successfully instate communism as a major world movement, which was, (and still is), a basic tenet of the Illuminati and their collectivist agenda, (but more Jacob Schiff and the Illuminati agenda later). From this point on the Rothschilds and the Schiffs would play a central role in the rest of European financial history, and subsequently that of the United States and the world.

During the American Revolution, the House of Rothschild brokered a deal between the Throne of England and Prince William of Germany. William was to provide 16,800 Hessian soldiers to help England stop the Revolution in America

Meanwhile Benjamin Franklin, having become very familiar with the Bank of England and fractional reserve banking, (see goldsmiths above), understood the dangers of a privately owned Central Bank controlling the issue of the Nation's currency and resisted the charter of a central bank until his death in 1791. That was the same year that Alexander Hamilton pushed through legislation that would provide for the charter of The First Bank of the United States

(in my research on the Net, I have found claims that Rothschild commissioned Marx to write the Communist Manifesto). Marx by the way was known to attend houses of Satanic worship.

Here's another article explaining the Marx/Rothschild connection

posted on May, 12 2014 @ 02:38 PM
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Could you briefly explain why anyone should take either of those references as presenting anything but creative alternate historical fiction?

I realize that you obviously believe it ... but why would anyone else? This is an honest question.

posted on May, 12 2014 @ 04:32 PM
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Absolute hysterical nonsense. By all means, make me your boogey man.
edit on 5/12/2014 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 12 2014 @ 04:52 PM
a reply to: Kali74No I haven't made you any kind of bogey man. You are just someone who believes that some Marxism is a good thing when it applies to something like employee owned business or hippie style communes or whatever it is you think should replace Capitalism. You are still talking in vagueries anyway.
What's more is you have resorted to ridicule. Which rule is that in Alinsky's rulebook?
In fact you are ridiculing me about "hysterical nonsense" and yet you cannot see what is right in front of you. You do not believe there is a NWO and yet two major players on the Globalist scene have said it very plainly in public, and yet I am the one who is posting nonsense? Or maybe it's Karl Marx being Satanist? How about other socialists? And wait, isn't this thread about leftist billionaire Illuminati? Maybe you could move your insults to other people on this thread, instead of focusing on me just because we disagree on how much Marxism is ok in society. By the way, while we are clearing up misconceptions about Marxism, Marx apparently meant the Middle Class by his term "bourgeois". Middle Class is not the Super Wealthy Elite is it? So why are the Marxists running about government today talking about taxing the wealthy? Oh wait, they are taxing people making $250,000 a year. That is not Buffett or Soros by any stretch of the word is it?

“I thank Satan,” exclaimed the Socialist delegate, “that I have lived to see the day when the great popular masses united. I beg Satan to give me six months more, so that I shall see the Front in operation.” The author of this sardonic invocation was bent, shriveled old Comrade Corradetti, a devout diabolist from Benevento; he was addressing the 26th National Congress of the Italian Socialist Party in Rome’s new Cinema Astoria.

Here is your theory of anarcho communism, which you seem to believe will allow you to be left alone to enjoy life....I beg to differ...

Anarchist communism[1] (also known as anarcho-communism, free communism, libertarian communism,[2][3][4][5][6] and communist anarchism[7][8]) is a theory of anarchism which advocates the abolition of the state, capitalism, wages and private property (while retaining respect for personal property),[9] and in favor of common ownership of the means of production,[10][11] direct democracy, and a horizontal network of voluntary associations and workers' councils with production and consumption based on the guiding principle: "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need".[12][13]

Notice that this description focuses on direct democracy which is what is being spouted by the Occupy movement as being opposed to the Republic which our Founders built the framework of the Constitution on, and for good reason....
edit on 12-5-2014 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 12 2014 @ 05:23 PM
a reply to: Gryphon66

Well, this seems to be a quote by the infamous Bakunin so many on this site seem to like...

The Evil One is the satanic revolt against divine authority, revolt in which we see the fecund germ of all human emancipation, the revolution. Socialists recognize each other by the words “In the name of the one to whom a great wrong has been done.” Satan [is] the eternal rebel, the first freethinker and the emancipator of worlds. He makes man ashamed of his bestial ignorance and obedience; he emancipates him, stamps upon his brow the seal of liberty and humanity, in urging him to disobey and eat of the fruit of knowledge.

So how hard would it be to imagine that some socialists literally hate God and worship Satan?

posted on May, 12 2014 @ 06:28 PM
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

That's really interesting.

Yet, I can't see that it has anything to do with my question to you about your two links explaining the connection between the Illuminati, Satanism and apparently (since we're going for a full conspiracy-theory house) the Rothschilds and Marxism ...

And here's my question done out a bit more: Neither you, nor your sources, offer any secondary sources for your claims. Claims are made a plenty, with just enough real history sprinkled in to make it sound reasonable or perhaps reliable ... but, your source Mr. Silver Fox or whatever his name was seems gloriously unaware of what primary sources are and why one would quote from them or at least cite them to help verify made claims.

That was the point of my question ... no, I'm not asking you to write an academic paper, nor would I accept "do the research yourself" because that is the silliest cop-out I've heard in quite some time (and it's becoming more and more popular among the I-want-to-talk-out-of-my-butt-and-not-be-challenged-on-facts crowd ... but still, one has to admit that good solid investigative work does require facts to back up what we're saying ... yes?

posted on May, 12 2014 @ 06:44 PM
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

I was stating that the material you are quoting is hysterical nonsense. And it is.

You are just someone who believes that some Marxism is a good thing when it applies to something like employee owned business or hippie style communes or whatever it is you think should replace Capitalism.

I'm not someone who believes that some Marxism is a good thing. I'm someone that believes that socialism is a good thing. Maybe if you don't like the tone I take with you, you should consider keeping your paintbrush far away from me.

Which rule is that in Alinsky's rulebook?

Invoking all the demons feared by the Right now are we? It's okay, good for a few stars... I'm already despised on this site for being a Leftist, if it bothered me do you think I'd still be here?

You do not believe there is a NWO and yet two major players on the Globalist scene

Why should I believe anything they say? They're heavily invested in the current world order or paradigm as most people like to call it.

Maybe you could move your insults to other people on this thread, instead of focusing on me

I think you have it backwards as to whom is doing the insulting. If you don't wish to have this debate, perhaps you should stop initiating conversation with me.

AKA evil Marxist, evil Leftist, evil Socialist, student of Alinski, Satan and ummm oh yeah Hegel.
(good f'n grief)

posted on May, 12 2014 @ 07:04 PM
a reply to: xuenchen

The ultra-Left factions hate competing among themselves.

Hard pill to swallow indeed.

They can't convince the real "Right" to play along so they resort to compartmentalizing within their own ranks.

It's all part of the old bag of tricks.


Really: You really ought to check out some sites that don't parrot FOX, Limbaugh, Beck, et al. ETA: Alex Jones.
Really? The 'old bag of tricks,' eh?

try a 'new bag of research', and give the barrage of right-wing propaganda a rest. Sorry, but this really IS tiresome.

edit on 5/12/2014 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 12 2014 @ 07:17 PM
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Haha which real Right would that be? The GOP, the Tea Party or the Religious?

Don't box me bro!

posted on May, 12 2014 @ 07:18 PM
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Fascism just allows for partnerships between government and private business. Today, we call it public-private partnerships(in the lingo of Agenda 21), which allows for a blurring of the lines between what is public and what is private.

*clears throat* *raises hand*


FASCISM as you define it right there, above: partnerships between government and private business.

And, I don't understand....isn't that what we have RIGHT NOW?

*mutters* corporations are people and their money equals free speech *cough* *gag*
Sorry, just threw up in my mouth a little.

Wow. Really?
I just don't understand. Can you please explain to me how that flip-over works? Do you honestly not understand that 'leftists' want to sever the relationship between government and big business? Really?

posted on May, 12 2014 @ 07:58 PM

originally posted by: Kali74
AKA evil Marxist, evil Leftist, evil Socialist, student of Alinski, Satan and ummm oh yeah Hegel.
(good f'n grief)

Uuumm ... I think you forgot Fascist, Progressive, Ivory Towerin', Kenyan-lovin', Jesus-hatin', homer-sexul facilitatin', poo-poo hed ...

... oh wait, that''s just me.

My bad, my bad.

edit on 20Mon, 12 May 2014 20:00:37 -050014p082014566 by Gryphon66 because: Had to quote it.

posted on May, 12 2014 @ 08:05 PM
a reply to: Gryphon66

Ouch! All my feels! Wait... I'm a Lefty, I don't haz.
Carry on comrade.

posted on May, 12 2014 @ 08:11 PM
a reply to: Kali74

Would you believe I'm actually sitting here trying to figure out how to characterize doing a "Nazi salute" with a "limp wrist"?

"Zeigfield High-all, y'all, ... heeeeey! Vote Hillary 2016, ve have vays of makink you vote!"

What a woild, what a woild ...


posted on May, 12 2014 @ 08:13 PM
a reply to: Gryphon66

I actually laughed out loud.

posted on May, 12 2014 @ 08:15 PM
a reply to: Kali74

Then all is not yet lost.

I'm wagering our thread-mates won't find the humor ... in fact I'm half expecting a "SEE!!! So you two ADMIT it!"

posted on May, 12 2014 @ 08:22 PM
a reply to: rickynews

Well the link given is funded by the koch brothers: So billionaires shocked at other billionaires spending money to further there political ideology. is a collection of independent journalists covering state-specific and local government activity. The program began in September 2009, a project of Franklin Center for Government & Public Integrity, a 501(c)3 non-profit organization dedicated to promoting new media journalism.

posted on May, 12 2014 @ 09:26 PM
a reply to: Kali74

In your opinion the material in nonsense. You forget to make note of the difference between your opinion and absolute gospel.

What exactly did you find nonsense?

Over the months I have seen your posts, you say the same thing about businesses run by the proletariat, and I keep challenging you, and others have too. You know you are preaching Marxism and yet you are boxing my ears on this. You are trying to deflect by saying that I don't understand the teachings of Marx, and then you give me a quote from the Communist Manifesto as if I didn't really know what you were talking about. That is a typical deflection pattern and I see it here all the time. You keep saying that not all communism is authoritarian. It's the same thing some guy called in to talk radio said yesterday, and it's the same stuff that people are told by someone, whether it's Marxist professors, or some group. It's the same stuff Occupy Wallstreet keeps saying, that we need more democracy(no thanks, we have enough already). Our Founding Fathers eschewed direct democracy and that is why we have a Republic. Some people want to change that. In your mind you must imagine that there will be this nice Utopia where employees run the businesses and everyone will be happy and fulfilled.

Whether there is a Stalinist type of program or what we are seeing today in Agenda 21(Communitarianism), it is still going to be a centrally controlled program. Maybe you have a little village of Hobbit Huts in mind...and they all just bring in their tithes and offer it to the central authority.
I explained about the mixed economy. That is straight out of a college textbook, so if you want to tell me I'm posting nonsense, then hack away on your keyboard my dear.
If it bothers you that I even stuck to the topic and talked about the Illuminati connections, then that's too freaking bad isn't it BOO HOO!

posted on May, 12 2014 @ 09:51 PM
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

It's really more complicated than that. Definitions of fascism are hard to codify, but some of the main ones are a State which is Supreme, which uses nationalism to unify people. Fascism is a form of socialism, make no mistake, but it uses corporatism.
In Agenda 21, there is something called a public/private partnership. This blurs the lines between what is public and what is private, thus setting the stage for a fascistic society.
Incrementalism is a big key to the development, since in the 30's and 40's it set off a World War and people rose up against it. I would say that certain things are fascistic in nature, how about Patriot Act, NDAA, NSA spying, TSA groping, drones killing civilians. Don't you kind of say the authoritarian police state in that? Mussolini called it Totalitarianism because it was the Socialist Nanny State cradle to grave, the government giveth and the government taketh away. Mussolini projected a more benevolent type though.
But yes, essentially, we have some degree of corporate partnership with government. Look at Fannie May....who cashed in on that and the taxpayers picked up the tab. But essentially, businesses are co opted but somewhat left in place. Whereas in straight communism, the government controls and owns the means of production. Some people hope for the proletariat owning the means, but this is just part of the communist model, and certain, (uh cough cough) people won't admit that.

There just so happens to be two different forms of privatization. The first type is genuine privatization; that is the political class and bureaucrats completely removing their hands of any dealings with the offering of a service. Supporters of the free market should applaud this type of privatization as it means entrepreneurs and investors can freely enter into the industries the government has just vacated. As long as consumers demand the service in question, the opportunity will exist for businessmen to devise new and profitable ways in ensuring its delivering.

The other type of privatization shouldn’t be so appealing. That’s because it isn’t true privatization but a deceptive form of political patronage. These rackets are commonly known as “public-private partnerships” and tend to garner bipartisan support due to the crooked dealings which are almost always their sole impetus.
According to the National Council for Public-Private Partnerships, PPPs are

a contractual agreement between a public agency (federal, state or local) and a private sector entity. Through this agreement, the skills and assets of each sector (public and private) are shared in delivering a service or facility for the use of the general public. In addition to the sharing of resources, each party shares in the risks and rewards potential in the delivery of the service and/or facility.

In other words, PPPs result in the government still maintaining the final say over the delivering of the service. Taxpayers now have the noose of being forced to guarantee an “acceptable rate of return over the term of the partnership” to the contracted company around their neck.

There is actually another, more accurate term for public-private partnerships. It’s called fascism; plain and simple. Private business may act as an administrator but the state still pulls the reigns.

I hope that clears up my position a bit.

posted on May, 12 2014 @ 10:02 PM
a reply to: Gryphon66

If you really want to discuss something fine, otherwise couldn't you just drop the ridicule? Not that I really care, as I don't need your approval, and I surely don't need it to be RIGHT!

As for your boxing my ears over secondary sources, did you know that there are entire threads already on this site devoted to the Illuminati Bloodlines?

If you must ridicule, then go ahead and ridicule everyone else who posts on those threads. mkay?

There are always going to be naysayers and those who ridicule. That just comes with the territory. When I was in high school, my peers thought my practice of yoga was odd. Now it's an every day kind of thing and fancy hotels teach it. I've known about the NWO since the late 70's...catch my drift here?

Here's another thread delineating Cultural Marxism and the NWO

Oh by the way, here is a book on Karl Marx and Satanism, by a guy who was in the gulags apparently.

So maybe you could just tone down the jokes about you know who.
edit on 12-5-2014 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 12 2014 @ 10:23 PM
a reply to: LDragonFire

The Left had to find a right wing bogeyman to offset the public exposure of their buddy George Soros. Soros of course far outspends the Koch Bros. and the Kochs are really more LIbertarian anyway. But the T Party is the enemy of the Left, so that's where they hit.
I personally think Soros is a bit more megalomania in his approach to transforming society into the great Globalist Socialist Utopia he wants to bring to fruition.
Don't forget what a great guy he was when he was 14 and stole wealth for some jackbooted thugs.....

new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in