Rothschilds proof ?

I have been researching central banks, Rothschilds and other secret socities and I am finding difficulty with the evidence presented about the Rothschilds. Whilst there is information that can back the 'Jeckly Island' meeting I am really struggling to find hard evidence. Can any ATS's fill in the blanks and present proof. For example

Rothschilds bought Reuters
Rothschilds funded JP Morgan, Cecil Rhodes, Herreman, Carniegie etc
Own the BoE and the FED
Own the AP
Own the BMA
What is there true wealth.

etc etc. Would be great to also see evidence of other activites too.

I am posting due to this link www.iamthewitness.com...

But I want hard facts, not documentaries that tell stories with little evidence. I hope ATS is a treasue trove of facts.

Well, I will be the first one to ask you, how much money are you paying?

You want people here on ATS to get you evidence on the Rothschild's?

Let me give you a little info on the Elite. They do not want anyone to know what they are up to or own or control.

That is why they have ARMY'S of lawyers that set up Trusts, Foundations, Colleges etc etc.

They set these things up for the very purpose of secrecy.

Hell, I would love all the facts also. Speculation is all you are going to find.

If we had facts, instead of giving them to you, we would probably burn them because I am sure, a hitman would be in our near future.

HEHEHEHEHE. Paranoid laughter ensues.

By the way, have you tried the search function in the upper right corner of your screen?

i found this bit of information about their involvement withh carbon trading, if thats of any interest www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by queuepolitely
Would be great to also see evidence of other activites too.

I know they make tasty wine.

Also you were aksing for proof, I just checked my 2005 and it is 12.8% alcohol by volume which would make it 25.6% proof.

You could start by seeing what they say about themselves.

www.rothschildarchive.org...
www.rothschild.com.../history

Hi there

I agree, accurate data is hard to come by, wonder why that is? Have you looked at Hitchcock's site www.thesynagogueofsatan.com... - you can access the whole book, well worth doing.

The timeline though is a good starting point for those unaware of the Rothschilds' grip on world power, it gives a historical, step-by-step account of how they came to accumulate such power, and the implications are frightening. Basically they own outright, or have controlling interests in pretty much everything. And I do mean everything, from the World Bank, Bank of England, Federal Reserve, Reuters (the feed from which all news is taken), pretty much all oil, mining, metalworking, infrastructure, communications, arms manufacturing, heavy engineering, etc. etc. etc. Not just that but they gave us such delights as income tax, all of which goes to pay off the interest on our government debt to the central banks which they own! Talk about having the system by the proverbials!

But because they own the banks that provide the finance, thye have control over all aspects of world business, no matter if they own it or not. That is the reality, they don't need to own something to have power over it, including YOU!

They basically own you!! You are seen as a commodity to them, with a maximum working life, which has a value to them. Once this is realised, it becomes easy to see why education has become so dumbed down.

Another frightening thought is that before Iraq and Afghanistan, there were only 6 countries in the world without a Rothschild-owned central bank (according to the source above - if anyone can disprove this I would be mighty pleased) - of which of course Iraq and Afghanistan are two. The others include Iran, North Korea, Sudan I think, well you get the picture. Very concerning if true.

Hope this helps.

Peace



[edit on 16-12-2009 by stumch]

[edit on 16-12-2009 by stumch]

Hi Q

I suggest reading "the Bilderberg Group' by Daniel Estulin.

Very comprehensive and informative. Should help you make your desicion.

have the best day

themuse

I havnt got much to say on this but hav heard there name mentiond more and more lately. Mainly through sport. There apparently in charge of finding the replacement of new owners for West Ham United Fc in the UK.

"The bid has been submitted to Rothschild and Standard Bank, who were appointed to find new owners back in October."


www.skysports.com...

and just a wiki link,
en.wikipedia.org...

money, money, money...

I have to agree with endisnighe above, all you'll find is speculation.

You might be able to stumble across some evidence, perhaps even a few hints, but it's simply not in the Rothschilds' interest to let the world know what their net worth is.

Since most of their fortune was accumulated before the advent of Income Tax, chances are the majority of their assets are safely tucked away in a multitude of tax havens.

Here's a thread that might interest you:
What's the Net Worth of the Rothschilds???
www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by stumch

Another frightening thought is that before Iraq and Afghanistan, there were only 6 countries in the world without a Rothschild-owned central bank (according to the source above - if anyone can disprove this I would be mighty pleased)

Here you go:
www.bis.org...

As you can see, most of these central banks have been nationalized for a while. (aside from the Federal Reserve, of course) Unless the Rothschilds "own" all these governments, I seriously doubt they "own" their central banks. (for example, your Bank of Spain was nationalized in '62)

The origin of this misconception is probably because most (if not all) central banks are carbon-copies of the Bank of England model,(debt-based scam) which in its beginning was probably heavily influenced by the House of Rothschild.

The Bank of England has since been nationalized. (1946)


[edit on 16/12/09 by ConspiracyNut23]

reply to post by endisnighe


Thanks, not much ££ Ha ha. No I'm interested truly to be able to dig deeper. Stories have habbits of expanding and if you look at this type of information on the internet many seem to come from the same sources and all wish to have your believe with little subtance, depsite your personal ithering to either side. Also many do not credit the original sources.

ATS is an abundance of good places of information and sources but there are lots of threads and only so much time to go over the same information again and again. I also hope it may spark an oppurtunity to discuss a topic, if no interest the thread dies.

Thanks to the posters for book ideas, will check those out.

reply to post by ConspiracyNut23


BoE is not necessary Nationalised on 6th April 1977 the Bank of England formed the BANK OF ENGLAND NOMINEES LIMITED, (BOEN), a wholly owned subsidiary private limited company, no: 1307478, with 2 of its 100 £1 shares issued and its Memorandum & Articles of Association’s Objectives are;-

“To act as Nominee or agent or attorney either solely or jointly with others, for any person or persons, partnership, company, corporation, government, state, organisation, sovereign, province, authority, or public body, or any group or association of them….”

Just the time after the IMF bailed the UK out.

reply to post by queuepolitely


Do you have a source for that queuepolitely?

At the time of this writing, the wiki entry for BoE has exactly what you wrote on here:

In 1977, the Bank set up a wholly owned subsidiary called BANK OF ENGLAND NOMINEES LIMITED, (BOEN), a private limited company, no. 1307478, with 2 of its 100 £1 shares issued. According to its Memorandum & Articles of Association, its objectives are:- “To act as Nominee or agent or attorney either solely or jointly with others, for any person or persons, partnership, company, corporation, government, state, organisation, sovereign, province, authority, or public body, or any group or association of them….”

Unfortunately, no source is given for this claim.

How can a "wholly owned subsidiary" of a nationalized entity be private? Doesn't that sound a bit suspicious? (or even nonsensical) I fear that wiki might have to review that statement. (usually claims without citations are either flagged as such, or removed)

From the official BoE site:

...the Bank was founded in 1694, nationalised on 1 March 1946, and gained independence in 1997.

(bold emphasis mine)

reply to post by queuepolitely

RE: your op

The links between Cecil Rhodes and Rothschild are indisputable. It was Lord Rothschild (Natty) who gave £750,000 in cash to De Beers for the purchase of Kimberley mines. See the section entitled Rhodes and the Rothschilds in the book The House of Rothschild - The World's Banker 1849-1999 by the family's official biographer, Nial Ferguson.

About JP Morgan, I find it quite suspicious that, when adjusted for inflation, his wealth is estimated at a mere $38 billion USD!!! We are talking about the man who essentially bankrolled the US involvement in WW1 and financed a large part of England's involvement as well.

To me, that suggest that the Morgan Empire could've been a front for someone much more powerful. - but this is just speculation on my part.


Here's a pretty mainstream source that pegs the Rothschilds' fortune in the trillions:

...the ability of the family which has founded one of the world's largest private banking dynasties to sustain their secretive fortune, which industry insiders count not in billions but in trillions, and keep it within the family.

source (The Independent)

[edit on 17/12/09 by ConspiracyNut23]

Seek the good and not the evil.

Greetings,

Here is a shed load of info for you.

ROTHSCHILD TALKS ABOUT THEIR DYNASTY

Lord Rothschild in his book The Shadow of a Great Man quotes a letter sent from Davidson on June 24, 1814 to Nathan Rothschild, ,,As long as a house is like yours, and as long as you work together with your brothers, not a house in the world will be able to compete with you, to cause you harm or to take advantage of you, for together you can undertake and perform more than any house in the world."(1) The closeness of the Rothschild brothers is seen in a letter from Saloman (Salmon) Rothschild to his brother Nathan on Feb. 28, 1815, "We are like the mechanism of a watch: each part is essential. (2) This closeness is further seen in that of the 18 marriages made by Mayer Amschel Rothschild’s grandchildren 16 were contracted between first cousins.

The Rothschild Bloodline

The History of The House of Rothschild

World Governance by The Rothschilds

Did Rothschild Write The Protocols Of Zion?

The Rothschild and The "Nazi" Pope

Rothschild & Obama Demands Pay in Euros!

The Illuminati-Rothschild Banking Family Exposed


Loads more here


Hope this helps,

Be safe and be well

reply to post by Spiro


Spiro,
Perhaps you missed this specification in the OP:

But I want hard facts, not documentaries that tell stories with little evidence.

The site you link to is so full of BS, I don't even know where to begin.

Originally posted by ConspiracyNut23
reply to post by stumch

 

As you can see, most of these central banks have been nationalized for a while. (aside from the Federal Reserve, of course) Unless the Rothschilds "own" all these governments, I seriously doubt they "own" their central banks. (for example, your Bank of Spain was nationalized in '62)

The origin of this misconception is probably because most (if not all) central banks are carbon-copies of the Bank of England model,(debt-based scam) which in its beginning was probably heavily influenced by the House of Rothschild.

[edit on 16/12/09 by ConspiracyNut23]

Hey man,

Nice idea, and thx for trying to allay my fears, but the problem I have is that your source is the BIS, which is wholly controlled by Rockefeller/Rothschild interests!! So forgive me if I don't accept it at face value! As for doubting they own the central banks, well I believe they do, they set all this up centuries ago, they have the governments in their pockets as a result.

Also have been looking for sources all over, and the truth is that there is very little hard data on these people, and I am coming to the conclusion that there has to be a reason for this. For example, they have never had to publish their accounts in any country, ever, because they are a "private institution". WTF?? My companies are all private institutions but I still have to publish accounts annually, and get fined if they are late! The only way they could get away with this is if they are sat at the very top of the tree, ie. there is no-one powerful enough to challenge them.

Also, it appears that anyone trying to research this subject rapidly hits not just one, but several brick walls, the ways in which they set themselves up, using such instruments as trusts, banks, universities etc. etc. means that it is virtually impossible to trace anything. It would be very interesting to hire a forensic accountant to see what they could turn up, shall we chip in and see what we get?

As far as JP Morgan is concerned, that $38billion is probably the least he can get away with declaring, I agree this is very very suspicious. Whats ur source on this?

Peace

reply to post by stumch

Nice idea, and thx for trying to allay my fears, but the problem I have is that your source is the BIS, which is wholly controlled by Rockefeller/Rothschild interests!!

The info is not on the BIS site itself - I gave you that link because it links to all the central banks websites. (use this link if you wish)

You have to follow the links for yourself (from the BIS page I posted) and you'll see that most central banks are nationalized. Meaning, there is no way the Rothschilds own them.

You can easily verify for yourself that the Bank of Spain was nationalized in 1962. This alone should be enough to prove to you that the claim that the Rothschilds own all but 6 central banks simply isn't true.

My companies are all private institutions but I still have to publish accounts annually, and get fined if they are late!

And do you think I'd be able to find your accounts online? In the library? Of course not. The Rothschilds, and their companies file taxes like everyone else, (well, like any other billionaire or multi-national, with teams of lawyers and such) but it's quite unlikely that they would publish these results online.

What you are probably referring to is that NM Rothschild is a private institution, so is their winery. As such, they differ from a public corporation, who have to publish their report to their shareholders annually.

As far as JP Morgan is concerned, that $38billion is probably the least he can get away with declaring, I agree this is very very suspicious. Whats ur source on this?

I linked the source in my post. The numbers come from wiki, which in turn took their numbers from the New York times.

PS: JP Morgan died the very year that the Income Tax was implemented.


[edit on 17/12/09 by ConspiracyNut23]

This is a fascinating exchange, but it also highlights the fundamental problem with much of the literature purporting to expose the alleged omnipotence of the Rothschild business dynasty.

Hard facts won't dissuade people who are convinced they're being mislead if someone claims the Rothschilds power falls well short of the myth.

I've been examining Rothschild connections to the War on Terror in an effort to see if there's any plausibility to the claims made by Nicholas, Hagger, David Icke and Henry Makow that somehow the Rothschilds were behind the invasion of Iraq etc.

I've discovered a lot of interesting connections between the English Rothschilds and some of the key decision-makers in the war on both sides of the Atlantic,. But there is no smoking gun, if you like, proving that the Rothschilds were they key behind-the-scenes players in that tragic drama.

BB.