Your bank, My bank, what the hell, even some MODS confused

a reply to: ISawItFirst

Why are you so curious about my relationship towards finance? Did I ask you if you are a member of the Sovereign Citizens movement or are in a militia? The fact of the matter is I use money every day, even though I know money is a fiction. I own property, even though I know that there is no tangible connection between what I believe I own and myself. I use banks because they are a convenient way of turning my labor into goods and services over time. I pay my taxes because the benefits of American citizenship justify paying dues to be a member of that club. (I just wish they'd stop _____ing around and start providing a decent healthcare benefit like they have in Europe and Canada!) If you think being an American is slavery, you are welcome to leave the country and renounce your citizenship. They need people who speak English in China, I hear.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: ISawItFirst

Why are you so curious about my relationship towards finance? Did I ask you if you are a member of the Sovereign Citizens movement or are in a militia? The fact of the matter is I use money every day, even though I know money is a fiction. I own property, even though I know that there is no tangible connection between what I believe I own and myself. I use banks because they are a convenient way of turning my labor into goods and services over time. I pay my taxes because the benefits of American citizenship justify paying dues to be a member of that club. (I just wish they'd stop _____ing around and start providing a decent healthcare benefit like they have in Europe and Canada!) If you think being an American is slavery, you are welcome to leave the country and renounce your citizenship. They need people who speak English in China, I hear.

No. We have a constitution. You don't like it you are the one to leave.

You like being a slave, there are lots of countries willing to oblige.

You Don't Use Money EVERY day. You use debt. There is a difference. A difference big enough to fight a revolutionary war over.

You can cut things with glass, but that doesn't make glass a knife.

There is the difference. You don't know that your 'money' is actually debt. You don't care that our monetary policy is a grand pyramid scheme as long as you get whatever freebies it is that you want.

Yeah you're towing the line for personal gain, there is no doubt. The question is whether it is overt or not.

Any chance that 'labor' you trade would dry up if we had real money. Probably. When this country was healthy, we'd have kicked parasites like you right back to your Majesty.

By the way, if most of your money didn't go to servicing an imaginary debt, you might have money for your healthcare. As long as you keep trading in FRNs, your slow death is profitable anyways.

Good post OP. You know which countries don't have a Rothschild style central bank?

North Korea
Cuba
Iran

Do you see a pattern here?

Isn't it amazing that the three countries without a Central Bank are all demonized by Western Media?

Until recently, that list also included

Afghanistan
Iraq
Sudan
Libya

But all those countries got involved in wars with the USA and are now centralized.

originally posted by: babybunnies
Good post OP. You know which countries don't have a Rothschild style central bank?

North Korea
Cuba
Iran

Do you see a pattern here?

Isn't it amazing that the three countries without a Central Bank are all demonized by Western Media?

Until recently, that list also included

Afghanistan
Iraq
Sudan
Libya

But all those countries got involved in wars with the USA and are now centralized.

Not To Mention what a huge problem it was to have Chavez and Morales down south with all their terrible human rights violations that disappeared as soon as they got with the program.

a reply to: ISawItFirst

Relax. Stop working yourself up. Your ignorance is making you unhappy and frustrated. Learn something about economics, history and the Constitution. Stop believing freeloaders who justify their criminality by misinterpreting law. I am not a slave to anything. You are a slave to your anger. Let it go.

a reply to: babybunnies

What is the standard of living in those countries? How much say do individuals have in the ordering of their own lives?

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: ISawItFirst

Relax. Stop working yourself up. Your ignorance is making you unhappy and frustrated. Learn something about economics, history and the Constitution. Stop believing freeloaders who justify their criminality by misinterpreting law. I am not a slave to anything. You are a slave to your anger. Let it go.

I think that post was directed at your mirror. Who are you talking about that I am believeing?

This is all well spelled out by the founders who are my sources.

It does not surprise me that you consider Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson and the like, "freeloaders who justify their criminality by misinterpreting the law" I'm sure that the crown at the time felt the same way.

Swinging at imaginary foes, and moving goal posts is all you can do.

Obviously all you have is rhetoric.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: ISawItFirst

Relax. Stop working yourself up. Your ignorance is making you unhappy and frustrated. Learn something about economics, history and the Constitution. Stop believing freeloaders who justify their criminality by misinterpreting law. I am not a slave to anything. You are a slave to your anger. Let it go.

Don't have to take my word for it, how about the guy who signed it into law (the third time)

Despite these warnings, Woodrow Wilson signed the 1913 Federal Reserve Act. A few years later he wrote: “I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.” -Woodrow Wilson

PS. He's talking about your boss.

a reply to: DJW001
Here's one talking about you:



“It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and money system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.” Henry Ford, founder of the Ford Motor Company.

originally posted by: ISawItFirst
a reply to: DJW001
Here's one talking about you:



“It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and money system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.” Henry Ford, founder of the Ford Motor Company.

... and author of The International Jew. I had a hunch that's where you were coming from.

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: ISawItFirst
a reply to: DJW001
Here's one talking about you:



“It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and money system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.” Henry Ford, founder of the Ford Motor Company.

... and author of The International Jew. I had a hunch that's where you were coming from.

More rhetoric. Move along. You've been exposed.

If your trying to say he was a bad guy, haha. That's my point. These are the people YOU align with. I just take them at their word when they tell you what they are doing.

Can't refute anything else. Just an ad hominem on the very people committing the acts you defend.

There is no way you do not work in finance. You are probably here to try to clear your conscience. Sorry, you're too smart for that.

No one without a vested interest could possibly condone the FED.

The OP, first line, is about you.

a reply to: DJW001

How about Roosevelt then. He seems up your alley.


The real truth of the matter is,as you and I know, that a financial
element in the large centers has owned the government ever since
the days of Andrew Jackson… -Franklin D. Roosevelt
(in a letter to Colonel House, dated November 21, 1933)

I could do this all day. There is no shortage of info on this topic. It is you who lack any insight or understanding.

Next well do quotes from secretaries treasury. I'm sure there is one of those who is not objectionable to you dissonance.

a reply to: DJW001

As promised

“Banks lend by creating credit. They create the means of payment out of nothing. ” Ralph M Hawtry, former Secretary to the Treasury.

How about Lincoln. Did he write something objectionable that poisons the well of his experience?



Abraham Lincoln

“The Government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and credits needed to satisfy the spending power of the Government and the buying power of consumers. By the adoption of these principles, the taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest. Money will cease to be master and become the servant of humanity.” -Abraham Lincoln

How about from the horses mouth?

“The few who understand the system will either be so interested in its profits or be so dependent upon its favours that there will be no opposition from that class, while on the other hand, the great body of people, mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous advantage that capital derives from the system, will bear its burdens without complaint, and perhaps without even suspecting that the system is inimical to their interests.” The Rothschild brothers of London writing to associates in New York, 1863.

Still not enough??
“The death of Lincoln was a disaster for Christendom. There was no man in the United States great enough to wear his boots and the bankers went anew to grab the riches. I fear that foreign bankers with their craftiness and tortuous tricks will entirely control the exuberant riches of America and use it to systematically corrupt civilization.” Otto von Bismark (1815-1898), German Chancellor, after the Lincoln assassination

Precient if you ask me.

Cautionary note. Keep to the topic. Any more personal posts will be actioned accordingly.

a reply to: ISawItFirst

So... why do you think central banking is unconstitutional, given that it is not mentioned in the Constitution? What do you mean by the phrase "constitutional money?" What difference does it make whether or not funds are borrowed in order to acquire assets, provided that those assets are used to repay the loan? Please explain your understanding of the concepts of "money," "credit," and "debt." Can you provide a reliable (ie; non- conspiracy or Anti-Semitic oriented) source for your claim that the Rothschilds own the Federal Reserve Bank? A non-accusatory response would be appreciated, thank you in advance.

a reply to: DJW001

originally posted by: engineercutout

I think there was a good reason that the US Constitution had specific instructions as to how money is to be created.

Okay, I wanna go back and correct myself here, I was mistaken on this point. The US Constitution does not give specific instructions as to how money is to be created. Those specifics that are thought of as constitutional money are expressly implied in its wording, and under a strict interpretation could be interpreted to be the only way that money is to be created, but the document was left intentionally vague on this point. I still consider it to be unconstitutional, for all the reasons I've listed, and I think that in practice the fed is anything but constitutional.

We're really just rehashing the Federalist/Anti-Federalist arguments of old I think when we get down to it. I share Jefferson's fear of an impoverished populace and a serious overreach of governing power under a central bank, and this life's experience so far seems to justify that fear fairly well.

Like, OMG DJW001, you're such a Hamilton!

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: ISawItFirst

Can you provide a reliable (ie; non- conspiracy or Anti-Semitic oriented) source for your claim that the Rothschilds own the Federal Reserve Bank?

I don't know if you can get that answer. This is a conspiracy, in that two or more gathered in secret to plan what were, IMO, serious misdeeds. It did/does involve SOME people of Semitic descent.

Bearing these assertions in mind, Mr. Marrs did a pretty good job of tracing this cartel back several centuries in his book "Rule By Secrecy", wherein Jim traces the history of secret rulers back from present times to antiquity. The book does not turn into a treatise on Jew-bashing, I assure you. I wouldn't dismiss his work before you've given it a chance: Mr. Marrs does a good job of cutting through the crap on conspiracy type topics, in my opinion, and is meticulous about quoting his sources. If you want some original sources on that claim, I'm prety sure you'd find them in that book. As I recall, the Rothschilds were major players in building the banking cartels that hold the monopoly on the planet's money creation. I'm not sure that they directly founded the fed, though.

originally posted by: engineercutout
a reply to: DJW001

originally posted by: engineercutout

I think there was a good reason that the US Constitution had specific instructions as to how money is to be created.

Okay, I wanna go back and correct myself here, I was mistaken on this point. The US Constitution does not give specific instructions as to how money is to be created. Those specifics that are thought of as constitutional money are expressly implied in its wording, and under a strict interpretation could be interpreted to be the only way that money is to be created, but the document was left intentionally vague on this point. I still consider it to be unconstitutional, for all the reasons I've listed, and I think that in practice the fed is anything but constitutional.

We're really just rehashing the Federalist/Anti-Federalist arguments of old I think when we get down to it. I share Jefferson's fear of an impoverished populace and a serious overreach of governing power under a central bank, and this life's experience so far seems to justify that fear fairly well.

Like, OMG DJW001, you're such a Hamilton!

This is true and very honest of you. The implication in the constitution rests on the credit of the US. Which is why my one question will never get answered.

The Fed issues the credit in direct opposition to the constitution. It is not the US credit, because we have none, the fed interest rate has eaten any credit that we once had. It is its nature.

Until we know why djw is a hardened fed defender we'll never be able to understand his point of view. He does understand ours, so it is pointless to continue.

He steps over all the facts and all the history and even the war that was fought over this.

But to answer the question of why it matters that funds are paid back with assets, that is very simple.

They don't allow you to pay with assets. Only FRN. The total number of FRNS owed to the FED is greater than the total number of FRNS in existence. This is the purpose.


So you issue some bonds and get FRNS from the fed. The US create the debt, the bond, and the fed issues the credit. (The constitutional obligation of the federal govt, non transferrable)

So say they buy a printing press and make books and sell them and turn a profit. They pay back the FED, the original amount plus interest in FRNs. The problem, is that every other FRN was loaned into existence at interest as well, so someone will now be unable to pay their debt. It is a game of musical chairs and the bankers conduct the music from a lazy boy.

The federal Reserve profited 74 billion in 2007 IIRC. Just by issuing credits they don't have.

a reply to: ISawItFirst

He does understand ours, so it is pointless to continue.

No, I honestly do not. You use expressions I have never seen in five decades of reading in economics, from Adam Smith to Karl Marx! Please, simply define your terms. You talk about credit as though it is a physical object you can stub your toe on, and money as something completely divorced from transactional utility. You also interpret metaphorical statements like "Congress is owned by Big Business" to mean that Big Business literally keeps Congress locked in a basement and feeds it scraps.

a reply to: engineercutout

Like, OMG DJW001, you're such a Hamilton!

Thank you... and I will build that canal in upstate New York.