It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Stop bashing the rothchilds. These quotes about them are lies. no conspiracy at all

page: 20
22
<< 17  18  19    21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 12 2011 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by John_Rodger_Cornman

Originally posted by nightbringr
reply to post by John_Rodger_Cornman
 


Sorry, earthquakes have been happening for millions of years. HAARP has been around a couple decades. The logic ive seen used to show HAARP causes earthquakes all fall short.

Yeah, Americans REALLY want to hit Japan with earthquakes! Not like Iran would be a better target or anything if they wanted to do such things, if they were possible.


No just the recent rash of earthquakes. Why attack iran with a earthquake when they can make exponentially more money off a fake war?

Japan owns alot of our debt.

So who's going to sell that debt so that they can help rebuild?

The calvation from HAARP's atmospheric harmonics cause earthquakes and other activity.

Wake up.


No, it does NOT cause earthquakes. This has not been proven and it laughable to real scientists.

Can you please link a source showing how the US has profited from Japans earthquake? Ive tried to google a Japanese US bond sell-off as a result of the earthquake and i do not see any evidence of this happening.

Why do you make wild accusations without ever any proof?

Your accusations of the US making money off a war with Iran is preposterous as well. Why would the USA work with Israel to create the Stuxnet virus to attack Irans nuclear infrastructure rather than attack them militarily? Because they wanted to avoid the war you are saying is their justification for not hitting them with HAARP. Do you not see the circular contradictions you are making? They wont hit Iran with HAARP because they want war, yet they didnt want war obviously, so they used subterfudge.

Trust me, if they wanted a shooting war with Iran, they would have attacked them long ago.
edit on 12-5-2011 by nightbringr because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 12 2011 @ 11:00 PM
link   
reply to post by John_Rodger_Cornman
 


HAARP affects the ionosphere, if it was weaponized it could produce some effects similar to a solar flare, but thats it.

No earthquakes, volcanoes, etc. There are other ways to do that, to increase pressure on a fault line or magma chamber, that involve explosives, water and drilling.

Attacking Japan over US debt, makes no sense. Japan is the second top investor in the US. At one time they were number one. They are a close ally. The US would not benefit from disaster in Japan. If anything Japan could try to cash in their US securities which could accelerate the impending US default. That would not be good for anyone.
edit on 12/5/11 by MikeboydUS because: argh



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 04:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by MikeboydUS
reply to post by Unknown Perpetrator
 


If the road companies are using loans to buy the roads, they arn't getting the loans from NM Rothschild, they're going to places like Barclays and HSBC. NM Rothschild is a financial advisory and investment company.

In terms of assets, HSBC and Barclays wield trillions of pounds.
edit on 12/5/11 by MikeboydUS because: r


Yeah, right. That's why Barclays had to get a sovereign wealth fund bail out in 2008. They were insolvent like the rest of the high street banks.

High Street banks don't fund corp takeovers, private equity firms do, even though some investment banks have private equity arms, most you won't have heard of, they're not in the retail banking sector.

Worlds biggest private equity group, The Carlyle Group has ties to the Bin Ladens, the Bushs and house of Saud

www.independent.co.uk...

7.3 billion bail out is chicken feed if we are to believe you that they wield Trillions (they do but it's debt liabilities
or derivatives- which are worthless).



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Unknown Perpetrator
 


Barclays did not take the government bailout. Even your article mentions that.


Barclays also issued a trading update saying that group profit in the first nine months of this year was “slightly ahead” of the same level a year earlier.

It said that the results included an early estimate of the net benefits from the acquisition of Lehman Brothers' North American business as well as losses from credit market writedowns of £129 million.

In contrast with Royal Bank of Scotland, HBOS and Lloyds TSB, which will receive £37 billion from the Government to prop up their balance sheets, Barclays had said that it would raise additional funding on its own.

business.timesonline.co.uk...

By 2010, they were the 3rd largest bank in terms of assets on earth.

Carlyle Group hasn't been the biggest private equity group in two years.
www.peimedia.com...

TPG Capital is number one.

Goldman Sachs is number two.

Carlyle is number three.

The problem with most of the "theorists" on ATS, is no one bothers to do real unbiased research. They repeat hoaxes and myths as if its religion. In fact many of the so called theories on here are nothing more than cults, where followers reinforce each other's faith in lies. This saddens me as many people here are being manipulated like sheep to believe in all kinds of bizarre things, whether its to sell books or genuine black propaganda.

I'm not here to bash or troll, but to get people to go out and research on their own and think for themselves. I'm not here to smash the paradigm, but get people to build their own.



posted on May, 15 2011 @ 03:10 PM
link   
Doesn't matter how much you shuffle the pack, Barclays required a wealth fund bail out of $7.3 bil.

Doesn't matter what figures you post of assets, they were and still are illiquid.

Don't know what your agenda is to deflect attention away from the big players, Rothschilds are
directing the stage show here with a CROSS PARTY white paper.

We elect politicians to do such things, not have some unaccountable private hedge fund manager
chart the course of the British nations fortunes.




,



posted on May, 15 2011 @ 05:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Unknown Perpetrator
 


They didn't take the bailout, read the article you posted and the one I posted.


Don't know what your agenda is to deflect attention away from the big players, Rothschilds are
directing the stage show here with a CROSS PARTY white paper.


The only ones deflecting attention are the ones ignoring the facts and being misdirected by a fallen banking dynasty, while the real directors are hidden behind the curtains.



posted on May, 15 2011 @ 05:41 PM
link   
I don't know much about them to be honest.
Are they not suposedly part of The Illuminatti?



posted on May, 15 2011 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Emocentric
I don't know much about them to be honest.
Are they not suposedly part of The Illuminatti?


People claim that, but the Illuminati was wiped out in 1785 by the Holy Roman Empire.

Some of its ideas survived among the Jacobins in France during the French Revolution, but they too were dismantled in 1794.

The Illuminati and the Jacobins were strictly anti-religious, anti-feudal, pro-human, liberal, secular, republican, and bourgeoisie.

The Rothschilds on the other hand were pro Monarchy and Conservative.

During the time of Cecil Rhodes, the Rothschilds formed a partnership with him. Rhodes supposedly formed something called the Society of the Elect, whose goal was to create an Anglo-American Imperial Federation. That dream died with World War 2, the collapse of the British Empire, and rise of Pax Americana. The Rothschilds may have been and may still be part of some British or European Society of the Elect, but it is not the Illuminati.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:21 PM
link   
Barclays was a bailout, Quatri Wealth Fund bailout but a bailout all the same the conditions of this prevented Barclays going back to the British taxpayer as the Arabs were required to be compensated fully should a state hand out being required further down the line.

business.timesonline.co.uk...

...the existence of a little- known clause in a deal, done last October, under which Barclays raised £7.3 billion from investors in Dubai and Abu Dhabi. The clause effectively blocks the Government from attempting to part-nationalise Barclays and would deliver it into the hands of its Middle Eastern investors should it try to raise more capital through the market before the end of June. January 23, 2009

Now follow closely, look at the date of the link below, very close to the end of June statement above.....

www.usatoday.com...

LONDON/BOSTON — BlackRock (BLK) has agreed to buy Barclays Global Investors (BGI), creating the world's biggest asset manager, in a $13.5 billion deal that British bank Barclays hopes will put to rest concerns about its capital.

Barclays was barred from government bailouts, only way round it was to get Blackrock to buy a portion

and here is the real stickler... all Blackrocks flushness was in part due to TARP fund bailout Government (or taxpayers) cash.... it was a backdoor bailout to stop Qataris and the China Development bank gobbling up Barclays


A December 31, 2008 story in TPMMuckraker notes another instance of crony capitalism perpetrated by those who are supposed to be seeing us out of this mess. Private managers of a Fed program announced November 25, 2008 (see above) to buy up $500 billion in mortgage backed securities from Fannie and Freddie (who themselves have been directed by Treasury’s Paulson to buy up some $400 billion in these toxic assets; see October 11, 2008 paragraph above) are Goldman Sachs (please try to restrain your surprise), Blackrock, Wellington Management, and PIMCO. PIMCO holds some $500 billion in these securities (61% of its assets) and lobbied for the creation of this program.

If you add it up, Barclays was in for more than £25 billion+ in total losses which is on par with RBS (imagine if Barclays had beaten RBS to the punch with a merger with ABN Amro ?? Scary)

So, I have proven that without a shadow of a doubt that Barclays was and still is effectively bankrupt and none of the high street banks are in a position to fund any leveraged buyout of Britains Motorway system.

Back to you, where do you suppose the money would come from? Certainly not the Chinese or Arabs.... the private credit markets via the Shadow Banking system from their TARP slush funds which is effectively taxpayers money.

The bankers (AKA the Rothschilds) have taken it one step closer, they use your own tax dollars (TARP cash) to drive state owned assets into private hands and you have to pay to drive on roads you've already bought and paid for? That's a doosey!

Meanwhile all the Rothschild Gold is tucked away in Asian vaults. They haven't got a penny risked in any of this.

Therein lies the beauty of the scam. Blackrock = BoA is bankrupt as is Blackrock = Barclays Global Investments = bankrupt. Cue TARP funds, smoke screen to bail out high street banks when in fact it's the shadow banks that are insolvent.

Public bought it instead of allowing the whole thing to burn to the ground.

www.truthdig.com...#

Bank of America, with a 47% ownership position in BlackRock, is also the owner of what was once Countrywide Financial, which led the pack in selling bad mortgages

Had BoA have failed, Blackrock shares would have been sold in the firesale and the only buyers are Chinese, Arabs, Gaddafi types with hard cash and gold. (go back and read the only line underlined
) Likewise with Barclays, they (Zionist bankers) DON'T WANT ISLAMISTS MEDDLING IN THE ANGLO SAXON BANKING EXPERIMENT.
edit on 16-5-2011 by Unknown Perpetrator because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 04:44 PM
link   
reply to post by MikeboydUS
 


Cecil Rhodes set up a scholarship, managed by the Rothschilds and President Clinton is a Rhodes Scholarship boy.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 05:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Unknown Perpetrator
 


I don't see how an investment from Qatar is a bailout, or selling off assets is a bailout. It was smart business.

Rather than depend on a bailout, they chose to seek investment and get rid of some assets.


Back to you, where do you suppose the money would come from? Certainly not the Chinese or Arabs.... the private credit markets via the Shadow Banking system from their TARP slush funds which is effectively taxpayers money.


You highly underestimate how much money China and the OPEC countries have.


Had BoA have failed, Blackrock shares would have been sold in the firesale and the only buyers are Chinese, Arabs, Gaddafi types with hard cash and gold. (go back and read the only line underlined ) Likewise with Barclays, they (Zionist bankers) DON'T WANT ISLAMISTS MEDDLING IN THE ANGLO SAXON BANKING EXPERIMENT.


Its not an issue of "Zionist Bankers", but just bankers. Some might say European since the Bilderberg Group to this day will not allow Japan and China membership. There are factions within the financial system: One American and the other European. This is a point I have been trying to make, but most of the so called theorists on here follow their theories like cults.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 05:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lynda101
reply to post by MikeboydUS
 


Cecil Rhodes set up a scholarship, managed by the Rothschilds and President Clinton is a Rhodes Scholarship boy.


Thats all thats left of that legacy. The dream of an Imperial Federation died with the end of World War 2, when the US set up Bretton Woods and let the British Empire collapse.

Many people don't understand or realize, the Round table movement wanted an Imperial Federation with the US. They fought for a global currency, the Bancor, and organization called the International Clearing Union that would regulate the new world currency.

They lost and with it, the dreams of Rhodes died.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 01:21 PM
link   
I don't see how the dreams of Cecil Rhodes have died, his legacy lives on and thrives. His financiers the Rothschild control all th mining through De Beers. The Rothschild's dealt with Rhodes wealth and his 7 wills. In fact you could say that wherever there is money there is Rothschild



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lynda101
I don't see how the dreams of Cecil Rhodes have died, his legacy lives on and thrives. His financiers the Rothschild control all th mining through De Beers. The Rothschild's dealt with Rhodes wealth and his 7 wills. In fact you could say that wherever there is money there is Rothschild


You do realize they lost De Beers.

In the 1920s, the JP Morgan financed Anglo American Mining Company bought out De Beers. They still control De Beers to this very day.

The American bankers killed Rhodes and Rothschilds dreams. Look up the history of the UN and the Bretton Woods conference. The American bankers ensured there would never be an Imperial Federation of the US and the UK, and went to lengths to make sure the UN would not become a global federation.

Their power is immense and if you need an example, look at the head of the IMF. They are currently making an example out of Strauss-Kahn.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by MikeboydUS

Originally posted by Lynda101
I don't see how the dreams of Cecil Rhodes have died, his legacy lives on and thrives. His financiers the Rothschild control all th mining through De Beers. The Rothschild's dealt with Rhodes wealth and his 7 wills. In fact you could say that wherever there is money there is Rothschild


You do realize they lost De Beers.

In the 1920s, the JP Morgan financed Anglo American Mining Company bought out De Beers. They still control De Beers to this very day.

The American bankers killed Rhodes and Rothschilds dreams. Look up the history of the UN and the Bretton Woods conference. The American bankers ensured there would never be an Imperial Federation of the US and the UK, and went to lengths to make sure the UN would not become a global federation.

Their power is immense and if you need an example, look at the head of the IMF. They are currently making an example out of Strauss-Kahn.



How on earth do you know that the Rothschilds are making an example of Strauss-Kahn? If the rumours are correct how come they didn't do it before? Also anyone who thinks Gordon Brown is fit to run the IMF needs their head testing as many a Brit will tell you.

Regarding the Rothschilds history its worth a look at rense.com it gives a pretty comprehensive view especially concerning their relationship with Cecil Rhodes. The Rothschild's control all the gold mining in South Africa through De Beers and they also fix the gold rate. If you google Rothschild and De Beer you will see for yourself.

There are only these countries: Iran, Cuba, North Korea, Afganistan and Libya (although the rebels have a new Bank) who don't have a Central Bank owned by the Rothschilds. The last country to be made to have a Central Bank was Iraq and we all know the price that country was made to pay in loss of life, infrastructure and the pollution of its land by depleated uranium weapons. Once the Rothschild's force their Central Banking system on these last few countries they literally will control the world, no government can withstand their financial grasp on its economy. Whilst you may possibly think that's healthy, for competition in the world and to avoid a world dictator and any further Iraq's, there are many who don't. In fact I am wondering where the Monopolies Commission is, because in the past monopolies were frowned upon. People have no protection if one party owns not only the banks but also the brokers etc.

Its also very strange that there is never any public face for this powerful family. No press coverage. pictures etc at all, I know they have patronage of various charities etc but a press blackout, even Royalty don't get that. Not that I blame them for their discernment concerning the antics of celebrity.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 04:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Lynda101
 


Rense.com? Youve got to be kidding me.

Rothchilds LOST DeBeers. Its a known, documented fact.

If you would like to dispute this, please show some real proof to the contrary. I dont think you can do it.

The Anti-Rothchild conspiracy is laughable and takes away from the real problems the world is facing.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Lynda101
 


Sudan and Venezuala are two more countries that belong to the group of countries without a rothschild controlled central bank. Venezuala recently paid off their debt and got out of the IMF. Afghanistan has a bank called the Afghanistan International Bank which is a privately owned bank set up in 2004.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by nightbringr
reply to post by Lynda101
 


Rense.com? Youve got to be kidding me.

Rothchilds LOST DeBeers. Its a known, documented fact.

If you would like to dispute this, please show some real proof to the contrary. I dont think you can do it.

The Anti-Rothchild conspiracy is laughable and takes away from the real problems the world is facing.


Why are you so mad?

You gettin paid?



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 05:01 PM
link   
I have been told that in 2013 they think they will rule the world, but this is assuring them, no they won't and instead if they wish to avoid prison, please step down and redistribute. Ask for amnesty and forgiveness. But you're not going to have anything like it is now for much longer.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by John_Rodger_Cornman

Originally posted by nightbringr
reply to post by Lynda101
 


Rense.com? Youve got to be kidding me.

Rothchilds LOST DeBeers. Its a known, documented fact.

If you would like to dispute this, please show some real proof to the contrary. I dont think you can do it.

The Anti-Rothchild conspiracy is laughable and takes away from the real problems the world is facing.


Why are you so mad?

You gettin paid?


Yeah, the Rothchilds have nothing better to do than hire a middle aged, modest living Canadian to troll conspiracy theory sights to defend them. *rolls eyes back*

No, i just see more evidence to the contrary, and that no, they certainly dont own DeBeers. If you disagree, your always welcome to post evidence to the contrary. Oh, but thats right...........you cant.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 17  18  19    21  22 >>

log in

join