TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- America: From Freedom to Fascism (MUST SEE)
Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »
| quote: |
| Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN i think youre paranoid enough  |
Paranoid about Laz showing up with a sack of weed???
| quote: |
| Originally posted by shaolin_Z Paranoid about Laz showing up with a sack of weed??? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by LazFX you should be worried about me taking it ha ha ha.....my connect left town and now I have been dry for weeks........................ mesican needs a fix!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws." - Mayer Amschel Rothschild, 1790
"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." - Henry Ford
"The few who understand the system, will either be so interested in its profits, or so dependent on its favors 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 advantages...will bear its burden without complaint, and perhaps without suspecting that the system is inimical to their best interests." - Rothschild Brothers of London communiqu� to associates in New York June 25, 1863
"The trade of the petty usurer is hated with most reason: it makes a profit from currency itself, instead of making it from the process which currency was meant to serve. Their common characteristic is obviously their sordid avarice." - Aristotle
"All the perplexities, confusion and distress in America arise not from defects in their Constitution or Confederation, nor from want of honor or virtue, so much as downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit, and circulation." - John Adams
"History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling the money and its issuance." - James Madison, 4th US President
"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 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, 16th US President
"A great industrial Nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the Nation 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 world - no longer a Government of free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of small groups of dominant men". - Woodrow Wilson, 28th US President
"This Act (the Federal Reserve Act, Dec. 23rd 1913) establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President (Woodrow Wilson) signs the Bill, the invisible government of the Monetary Power will be legalised... The worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking and currency Bill." - Charles A. Lindbergh, Sr (1859 - 1924) Congressman (father of the famous aviator)
"The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the large centers has owned the government of the U.S. since the days of Andrew Jackson." - Franklin D. Roosevelt, 32nd US President
"All the perplexities, confusion and distresses in America arise not from defects in the constitution or confederation, nor from want of honor or virtue, as much from downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit, and circulation." � John Adams, letter to Thomas Jefferson.
"History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and its issuance." � US President James Madison
"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies." - Thomas Jefferson
"I have two great enemies, the southern army in front of me and the financial institutions, in the rear. Of the two, the one in the rear is the greatest enemy..... I see in the future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. As a result of the war, corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before, even in the midst of the war." - Abraham Lincoln
"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation then by deflation, the banks and the corporations will grow up around them, will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs." -Thomas Jefferson, The Debate Over The Recharter Of The Bank Bill, (1809).
"In the Colonies, we issue our own paper money. It is called 'Colonial Scrip.' We issue it in proper proportion to make the goods and pass easily from the producers to the consumers. In this manner, creating ourselves our own paper money, we control its purchasing power and we have no interest to pay to no one. In this manner, by creating ourselves our own paper money, we control its purchasing power, and we have no interest to pay, to anyone. You see, a legitimate government can both spend and lend money into circulation, while banks can only lend significant amounts of their promissory bank notes, for they can neither give away nor spend but a tiny fraction of the money the people need. Thus, when your bankers here in England place money in circulation, there is always a debt principal to be returned and usury to be paid. The result is that you have always too little credit in circulation to give the workers full employment. You do not have too many workers, you have too little money in circulation, and that which circulates, all bears the endless burden of unpayable debt and usury." - Benjamin Franklin Autobiography
"The government should create, issue and circulate all the currency and credit needed to satisfy the spending power of the government and the buying power of consumers..... The privilege of creating and issuing money is not only the supreme prerogative of Government, but it is the Government's greatest creative opportunity. By the adoption of these principles, the long-felt want for a uniform medium will be satisfied. The taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest, discounts and exchanges. The financing of all public enterprises, the maintenance of stable government and ordered progress, and the conduct of the Treasury will become matters of practical administration. The people can and will be furnished with a currency as safe as their own government. Money will cease to be the master and become the servant of humanity. Democracy will rise superior to the money power." -*Lincoln Abraham Senate document 23, Page 91. 1865
"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
"Money plays the largest part in determining the course of history" - Karl Marx (Communist Manifesto)
The Money Masters
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Arbiter You should have kept reading... http://evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html#ratification You're awfully quick to accept tax protestors' claims without verification, but it seems you actually go out of your way to avoid seeing evidence to the contrary. |
Oooh an economics thread. Dammit why can't you people make it clear in the headline?? So what's the thesis behind income taxes or taxes in general? There's no point in me watching 10 videos ... since those of you who watched the videos are experts I would appreciate it if someone were to relay the primary talking points so that we all have a clear understanding of what is being disputed.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by occrider Oooh an economics thread. Dammit why can't you people make it clear in the headline?? So what's the thesis behind income taxes or taxes in general? There's no point in me watching 10 videos ... since those of you who watched the videos are experts I would appreciate it if someone were to relay the primary talking points so that we all have a clear understanding of what is being disputed. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by shaolin_Z Income Taxes & The Federal Reserve (The first one anyways) The Federal Reserve & a short history of Fractional Reserve Banking & Monetray Systems (The one I just posted) That's a very general overview of what they go over. And it's two videos, not ten. If you want to know what their arguments are, why don't you find out for yourself? Sorry, I'm just too burned out rightnow, and if you don't want to watch it, don't. I'm not going to summarize it for you. Plus, I'm beggining to get sick of this place anyways, and am not sure how much longer I'm going to stick around, since no one seems to really give a shit about any issue. EDIT: In case you plan on watching it, feel free to post your opinon and comments on it. Then I might be interested on commenting on that. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by shaolin_Z "Money plays the largest part in determining the course of history" - Karl Marx (Communist Manifesto) |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by occrider 2 videos ... that are both nearly 2 hours each. I have never spent more than 4 hours to hear any singular argument on the internet (or in real life) and I'm not about to start doing so now. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by occrider Is there something in text that I can look at, directly reference, and come back to in the future, or am I supposed to memorize the entire video and transcribe portions to "quote" should I disagree with it? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by occrider Sorry if you're getting sick of this place. However, I wouldn't confuse people not giving a shit about the issues you raise with people not giving a "shit about any issue". There's plenty of discussion and argument on this forum on any number of issues despite the fact that the outcome may not be to your liking. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by shaolin_Z That's because there's a library of knowledge and backround information they have to cover (atleast in the second one, that is, the one not by Russo) in order for the veiwer to be able to understand the arguments and context. |
| quote: |
You could, but that kind of what you asked of me, except I would have to pretty much transcribe the entire thing. Or you could do both. |
| quote: |
Mostly partisan politics and other inconsequential issues, at least the framework in which the discussion is confined. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by occrider And in the information age this is not available online? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by occrider If it were establishing an argument I would be sure to be able to summarize and put forth the salient points that I'm making to support my argument. Since this particular argument is not my own, I don't feel like I should have that obligation. It's analagous to someone asking me to refute one particular statment that Bush made in the context of everything that he's said, and putting the research burden upon me. Well I wish I could just as easily find a link that could possibly refute or affirm everything the video said, however, I'm not going to find that. If I post a 10 hour video or a 100 page document and expect you to refute it in its entirety would I be justified in my expectations? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by occrider Sorry if you're getting sick of this place. However, I wouldn't confuse people not giving a shit about the issues you raise with people not giving a "shit about any issue." |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by occrider What exactly are you looking for? Why don't you point out some discussions elsewhere that are to your liking and then explain how such discussions here are completely lacking in comparison? I'm guessing there is consistency to substantiate your determination. |
Another interesting quote:
"Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take it away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But, if you wish to remain the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create money ."
- Sir Josiah Stamp, Director of the Bank of England (in the 1920s); reputed to be the 2nd wealthiest man in England at that time
| quote: |
| Originally posted by shaolin_Z "They" haven't been able to present evidence to the contrary (i.e. "Show me the law!") |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by shaolin_Z Apparently you can download (or purchase?) a transcript from Russo's website: http://www.freedomtofascism.com/ As for the other one, 'The Money Masters,' those guys have just done way too much research in a vast range of areas that I would be doing a great diservice to their work and the potential viewer by paraphrasing it in my own words, and would hardly substitute for it. There may be a transcript of it, haven't looked for it though. They do have a website if you prefer taking a look at that before (considering) to watch the movie: http://www.themoneymasters.com/ |
| quote: |
Well, apparently you misunderstood my intention of posting it in the first place. If I wanted to present an argument (of mine), I'd do so. After having watched this, I thought it was interesting, informative, and had an important enough message that it should be shared with others. That doesn't mean I wasn't interested in comments or critique But in order for anyone to do eigther in any meanigful way, they'd have to watch it in it's entirety. If you feel my posts or issues I bring up are generally nonsense, non-existant (issues), or don't justify much concern or attention, you can save yourself alot of time by simply ignoring them. If my intelligence and credibility is so low in your eyes, as demonstrated by this comment: why waste your time on sap like me? |
| quote: |
Are you serious or are you being facetious? Eigther way, I don't think there's much point in directly stating that. It's not likely to be well received and would be a fairly tangential side discussion involving an evaluation of our very thought process. I'll only end up wasting my time along with yours. But just as a hint, I think responsibility, elementary standards of morality, and critical thinking (including critical analysis of one's own world view, thought process, values, actions, and inactions) should be relevant. |
F_l_ow t_e _ _n_y.
| quote: |
| The New York Times March 9, 2007 The Man Who May Become the Richest Rothschild By LANDON THOMAS Jr. Happy or unhappy, each family generation often resembles another, and that is especially true when it comes to the Rothschilds. More than 200 years after Mayer Amschel Rothschild founded the family dynasty that offered discreet counsel and investment wisdom to kings, queens, emperors and industrial titans, his 35-year-old direct descendant, Nathaniel, has emerged as a kingmaker in his own right and an investor who some say may become the richest Rothschild of them all. In five short years, the man in line to be the fifth Baron Rothschild is close to becoming a billionaire through a web of private equity investments in Ukraine, Eastern Europe and most significant, his partnership stake in Atticus Capital, the fast-growing $14 billion hedge fund. The ascent of Mr. Rothschild is a vivid illustration of how the still glittering, if somewhat faded, prestige and wealth of Europe�s most storied banking family has been reinvigorated from bold bets in this era�s new-money investment vehicles. Like his forebears, he prefers that his influence remain unseen. Mr. Rothschild is a principal adviser to Oleg Deripaska, one of the richest oligarchs in Russia and the owner of the aluminum giant Rusal, which recently merged with two other companies to create the world�s largest aluminum company. Mr. Rothschild received no public credit despite having played a crucial role in getting the deal done. And like a true Rothschild he has a taste for the good life: as an avid skier, his principal residence is in Klosters, Switzerland, and he uses his Gulfstream jet to shuttle among his other homes in Paris, Moscow, London, New York and Greece. But he is also a man of contradictions: he dates supermodels and actresses, sits on an advisory board of the Brookings Institution, a research organization in Washington, and serves his guests the best wines from the Rothschild vineyards, which he himself will not drink. He professes to have a penchant for privacy and would not be interviewed for this article, yet he allowed his lushly renovated town house in Greenwich Village to be featured in Men�s Vogue magazine. Despite his reputation as the most gregarious of men and the increasingly public nature of his life and career, he comes across as a pinched, reticent man in the few public photographs of him � as if he was shying away from his renown. The burden of being a Rothschild can be a heavy one. In 1996, one of Mr. Rothschild�s cousins, Amschel, having been asked to fill a leadership position in the family bank in London, hanged himself in a hotel bathroom at the age of 41. Four years later Raphael de Rothschild, also a cousin, died on a sidewalk in Manhattan at the age of 23 from a heroin overdose. In the early 1990s, some thought that Mr. Rothschild might also buckle under the weight of the family name. He appeared to be an aimless society playboy with a taste for the slack, unchallenged lifestyle so often embraced by the sons and daughters of Europe�s rich families. �This is the story of Prince Hal turning into Henry IV,� said Charles G. Phillips, who supervised Mr. Rothschild during his time at the investment firm Gleacher & Company. �He is one of the few sons of great men who has enhanced the family stature and created his own wealth.� The family legacy was daunting at first for Mr. Rothschild, whose ancestor Nathan Mayer Rothschild helped finance Britain�s victory at Waterloo and whose father, Jacob, split from the family bank in 1980 to begin his own successful career as an investor. So much so that until he started work as a 25-year-old investment analyst at Gleacher in 1995, Mr. Rothschild avoided it altogether. He was the life of parties in New York, Paris and London, and in 1995 he eloped to the Dominican Republic with Annabelle Neilson, a free-spirited London socialite with a reputation for dancing on dinner tables in her high heels. In 1995, when Mr. Rothschild showed up for work at Gleacher, he was still trying to find his way. He was a recent graduate of Oxford, where he had been a member of the exclusive Bullingdon Club, a notorious drinking society known for its rite of wrecking the restaurant furnishings after raucous dinner parties. With his shabby dress, limited financial experience and energetic social life, he did not make much of a first impression, according to Eric Gleacher, chairman and founder of the bank who is a close friend of Jacob Rothschild, known as Lord Rothschild. �He was kind of floundering,� Mr. Gleacher said. �I figured he had some big boots to fill.� While he undertook the drudgery of trainee investment banking work, Mr. Rothschild kept his eyes open for an opportunity more in tune with his growing ambition. In the spring of 1995 he found just that when he left the Gleacher offices in Midtown Manhattan to smoke a quick cigarette a few floors above. Puffing away in an anteroom, he ran into Timothy R. Barakett, then a 29-year-old investor who was doing the rounds trying to raise funds for Atticus, his new hedge fund. Learning that Mr. Barakett was starting up a fund, he asked for a job. Mr. Barakett turned him down. But the two men stayed in touch, and in the fall of 1996, Mr. Barakett took Mr. Rothschild on as a minority partner in the nascent fund, then $90 million in assets, and gave him the title of director of business development with a mandate to tap his considerable connections and family connections for new capital. Mr. Rothschild took to the new opportunity with renewed vigor. He stopped drinking, reached a divorce agreement and devoted his energies to promoting the investment talents of Mr. Barakett. The fund�s extraordinary performance � since inception it is has grown on average 30 percent a year � made Mr. Rothschild�s job an easy one. Still, some early investors like Peter Munk, the founder and chairman of Barrick Gold, were skeptical at first. In 2001, he agreed to meet with Mr. Rothschild at the request of Mr. Rothschild�s father, a longtime friend. �He did not carry the halo of being the future of the family,� Mr. Munk recalled of their brief meeting in the lobby of Claridge�s, the hotel in London. �I wanted to get rid of the boy.� When Mr. Rothschild said he was a partner in a hedge fund, Mr. Munk had his doubts, assuming that the fund was just a family hedge fund. �He was indignant,� Mr. Munk recalled. � �My family did not put in one cent,� he said.� Mr. Munk would become an investor and a happy one at that. Now, Mr. Rothschild sits on Barrick�s advisory board and is an investor along with Mr. Munk in the TriGranit Development Corporation, a real estate company that invests in Hungary and Eastern Europe and which may go public this year, representing another big payoff. �This kid is special,� he said. �It�s back to when they were ruling the world.� With his mix of Old World politesse, a racy appreciation for fast times and the brute force of his accumulating wealth, Mr. Rothschild has become friend and adviser to many � including Russian billionaires, Indian steel magnates and a long list of people who have helped him out during his ascent. �I will literally get a BlackBerry from him in Siberia asking me how I am doing,� said Glenn Dubin of Highbridge Capital, who was an early investor in Atticus. To a large extent, the source of Mr. Rothschild�s renewed wealth and influence is tied to the explosive growth of Atticus, where over the last three years assets have surged to $14 billion from $2 billion. (Last year, the fund was up 50 percent before fees, an astonishing return given its considerable size.) In 2005, Mr. Rothschild was paid $80 million in compensation and made more than that last year, according to people with knowledge of his pay arrangement at Atticus. Now co-chairman, he spends less time raising money for the fund, which is for the most part closed to new investors. But his influence in opening doors for Mr. Barakett, especially in Europe, has been considerable. His Oxford connections came in handy when he pried David Slager, also an Oxford alumnus, away from Goldman Sachs�s risk arbitrage desk in London. Mr. Slager is now Mr. Barakett�s top investing deputy and a vice chairman at the fund. Mr. Barakett and Mr. Rothschild remain close and speak every day. �He has had an incredible evolution, and he has done it on his own,� Mr. Barakett said. �It�s not about family connections. He has a knack for identifying talented people and interesting investments.� By all accounts his relationship with his father is a complicated one. He sits on the board of RIT Capital Partners, Lord Rothschild�s investment trust, and he has never been shy about using the family name to open doors. Still, people who know him say that he is consumed by a furious ambition to live up to, if not surpass, the reputation and doings of his father. �Being Jacob�s son was difficult for him,� Mr. Dubin said. �But he has matured and is comfortable with himself.� But, while his rapidly won riches may give him pleasure, it will take more than a billion dollars to live up to the wider social and charitable responsibilities that fall upon a Rothschild baron. �The family is accomplished in so many different ways,� said Jeffrey T. Leeds, a private equity investor who knows the Rothschilds well. �Nat knows that he would not be fulfilling his responsibilities if he were simply someone who amassed great wealth.� Now his investments are done through his personal merchant bank called JNR, an entity that is controlled solely by him, in spite of the initials, which stand for Jacob and Nathaniel Rothschild. It is through JNR, based in London and run by a small crew of investment bankers, that Mr. Rothschild has made his latest investments, prospecting for oil in Ukraine and buying a stake in Diligence, a corporate intelligence firm. �There is a lot of power behind him, and like all the Rothschilds they use their power with discretion,� said Guy Wyser-Pratte, who has invested with Mr. Rothschild. �I expect him to uphold the family tradition.� |
Z, I don't like this documentary. And I will tell you why. I tried watching it but it didn't fully dl so I just rented the film and watched it. It occured to me that this was nothing more than propaganda. Aaron Russo is a jew and the guy he interviewed was a jew. The film was nothing more than an "elitist" poking fun at you. At the end of the fucking film he was "now that you know the truth it is time for you to go and wake up the rest of the people and show them the truth". Like wtf? If he had this all on film wouldn't he had a very good chance of winning a court case against the federal government? Why can't he do the shit? Oh, i forgot he is a millionaire/jew/elitist that would loose a lot if he did try to do something. The man he interviewed threatened him. He could bring up a lawsuit for being threatened.
Sorry Z,
0/10
Awesome flag dude. Too pity you don't have anything common with it.
What you mean by that?
| quote: |
| Originally posted by metalgearsolid What you mean by that? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by metalgearsolid Z, I don't like this documentary. And I will tell you why. I tried watching it but it didn't fully dl so I just rented the film and watched it. It occured to me that this was nothing more than propaganda. Aaron Russo is a jew and the guy he interviewed was a jew. The film was nothing more than an "elitist" poking fun at you. At the end of the fucking film he was "now that you know the truth it is time for you to go and wake up the rest of the people and show them the truth". Like wtf? If he had this all on film wouldn't he had a very good chance of winning a court case against the federal government? Why can't he do the shit? Oh, i forgot he is a millionaire/jew/elitist that would loose a lot if he did try to do something. The man he interviewed threatened him. He could bring up a lawsuit for being threatened. Sorry Z, 0/10 |
.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by shaolin_Z There's better material going over many of the same topics yes, but this one isn't bad at all. So what if Russo's Jewish? C'mon now . |
damn. another jewish conspiracy? i knew it.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by metalgearsolid I don't care if hes a jew. But you know...the elitist are normally all jews? And yes it is bad. did you not see past what he was trying to do? |
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.