The US Treasury's Secret, a 75-Year-Old Fund and Its Dark History Exposed

thanks for posting.

everything will come to light eventually.

SQUEALER, I like your perspective. Good stuff.

The Jews invented money. It's their expertise. It's also part of their religion.

Did the Jews also invent God? Perhaps, but I think a large part of the
Supreme Meme was independently crafted by the Stoic Philosophers.

I think it would more correct to say they understand money is linked to
our sinful nature, and that we seek entertainment as a way to escape,
ever so briefly, from that awful debt we think we owe to our God/gods.

Why is Hollywood so good at producing entertainment the world is willing
to pay money to go see? One reason is they have the formula down pat.
The hero's journey is older than the Bible, but it was the idea of debt=sin
(as taught in the Bible) which really got money/guilt into the human psyche
as a first-class deluxe virus of the mind.

In my experience, a good number of religious people think about two things
more than anything else: sex and god. If you know this, you can go to a place
like Hollywood and make movies... movies that make money!

So why are Jews so successful, they were given the tools and resources
to be successful, they were taught about how money works in the context
of law and religious terms. It is little surprise then than most of the these
successful folk are atheists? Is it any wonder, we see Jewish comics
on stage getting people to laugh about sex, ridicule the law, and
question morality? Nope. It makes perfect $ence/cent$

They know, better than most, that God/morality is a hustle.
So why not get paid?

The very first mention of money in the Holy Bible is in the old testament.
And this verse links money with "The Circumcision" == the mark of the Jealous God.
That's because of a deep secret, that money is "created" by the passion of "jealousy".

Actually, money is created by labor... but I get your point.

In a "free" society, it is jealousy/envy within a man that often drives
him to labor... to work, to toil, in ways he would not, for MONEY.
And it is the rewards of money that the jealous of heart seeks,
that much does seem clear... but what of this Jealous God?

The Biblical word for God is “EL” and that word is not Jewish in origin,
but rather it traces back to older Levant (Canaanite) religion. We might
ask what reward is in the mind of this Jealous God, but that question
doesn't make it a lot of sense when you realize EL was just the Father
of the Canaanite Pantheon and the Jew re-purposed EL for their own
nationalistic needs. Namely, to forge their own tribal identity.

It follows then that to control money (the passion of men) is the
way to control the world. Control and manipulate beliefs, that
is the name of the game. Communism/Capitalism, who cares
what the political ideology might be--it is all about money.

So, from a religious point of view, "money" measures the amount of "jealousy" that has been created in the society. ....Notice that advertisers use the same trick effectively, to sell that fancy car. They'll put a young beautiful woman to stand next to the Porsche, and show those images on the TV, to inspire the young men to go out and work, to make the money and buy that car. The car gets the girl, and the jealous impulse is satisfied, hence the Jew has his tools circumcised, to remind him, not to fall for that simple trick.

You claim this is how money is created. Or rather, you claim this is
what Jews are taught from a very young age, all about the theory and
reality of money through reading the Torah. This may be, I can't say.
But it does raise a question about what Jesus was teaching.

In your view, what was Jesus teaching with his Parable of the Talents?
When this young Rabbi told a story of how stewards used their master's
money, he speaking to his fellow Jews, but did they understand his
meaning.... and do we? How does this parable us?

Originally posted by CheckPointCharlie
These ideas make perfect sense to me. However I find it difficult to understand the over all purpose.

Why would the Bangsters need such a complex and time consuming plan to rule the world?
Surely they've had ample time, power and influence to have completed their plan long ago...
As well as indoctrinate the masses with better precision than what we've seen thus far?

“Democracy is the road to socialism.” ~ Karl Marx

While our Founders may not have envisioned America we see today, Karl Marx did. What most people don’t know is Karl Marx was being financed by International bankers, and the Bolsheviks enjoyed the support from the same coalition of super-capitalists. The big question has always been why? And answer is simple: they shared the same vision for America’s future. A future which we are faced with today: Karl Marx’s America. (where the bankers rule).

The International bankers wanted to create a New World Order in which they would control the wealth of the world. The question for them was how to bring about this global socialism–that answer is found in the Hegelian dialectic (the system upon which Marx based all his writings). The Hegelian dialectic formula is as follows: A (thesis) versus B (anti-thesis) equals C (synthesis). First, the bankers knew they had to turn our Republic into a Democracy, and knew this was the formula to follow: Capitalism vs Communism would result in the synthesis: socialism. And under their careful planning this synthesis would grant them total control of the world. All they needed to do is follow the formula.

Today people are saying “Marx was right! Capitalism has failed” but what they don’t know is the same International Bankers who supported Marx now stand to gain what they have always wanted: total and complete control of the entire world’s money system. How did we get to this place you ask? Simple: we the people let our guard down as our Republic was turned into a Democracy. As a result we can expect global dictatorship to follow as surely as night follows the day. Unless we as individuals, and then as a nation, conquer fear and apathy we are doomed to dependence and then bondage by a state ruled by the wealthy oligarchs and their henchmen.

Welcome to Karl Marx’s America.

“When a 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 hand that takes… Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain.” – Napoleon Bonaparte, 1815

“I sincerely believe that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies, and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale…. Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have … The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases.” –Thomas Jefferson

Awesome post. These secrets must be exposed to public.

Originally posted by stirling
There ya go, give some guy a licence to virtually print money......and expect him to stay honest?
never happen...why not face this reality, and set it up so that no one has anywhere near this kind of power....
Design the system to eliminate the possibility of dishonesty.

As long as humans are not bartering and using money there will be dishonesty in my opinion. You are talking about the system they have on Star Trek the Next Generation.

Originally posted by LastStarfighter

Originally posted by stirling
Design the system to eliminate the possibility of dishonesty.

As long as humans are not bartering and using money there will be dishonesty in my opinion. You are talking about the system they have on Star Trek the Next Generation.

www.coindesk.com...

Part of the geek appeal for Bitcoin users is that it is a real-life example of a concept often featured in science fiction or sci-fi-oriented computer games: an advanced, universally accepted form of currency.

---snip---

But are credits truly central to Star Trek? The question of money for the Federation is a subject of both speculation and debate, as the television series and films have not been altogether consistent about if and how money is used in the universe envisioned three centuries into the future.

An article on the Star Trek site – “A Look at Money in Star Trek – Italian Style – examines the subject in detail, from the original series all the way up to the most recent reboot by JJ Abrams. Writer Gabriella Cordone begins by asserting that Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry decreed that no currency was used at all in the Federation. Rodenberry didn’t want “the concept of accumulating wealth” in “his universe,” recalled Ronald D. Moore, co-executive producer of the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine series, in a web interview … nor did he want money to be the prime motivation for doing a job.

Thanks OP, you & your contributors have enlightened me much. S&F.

Originally posted by SQUEALER
The Jews invented money. It's their expertise. It's also part of their religion. The very first mention of money in the Holy Bible is in the old testament.

Not at all true. Money in the form of equally weighed and measured silver bars was used in Mesopotamia before the Jews created their currency. This was codified not just by Hammurabi but Ur-Nammu and the code of Eshunna and the Code of Ipit-Lishtar which dates back to 1870 BC, long before Genesis

And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed.

- Genesis 17:12

The aspect of money in the passage is a reference to circumcision of slaves who have been purchased.

For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.

-- 1 Timothy 6:10

So, the Christians are charged to turn away from money, but they are generally not circumcised to remind them of why.

I don't even know what to say to the last part. Would you care to back up some of the conjecture soaked hyperbole with citations or facts?