Page 5 of 6

Re: Citation Vs. Nonsuch (Apophis The Great vs. Citation)

Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:17 am
by [KMA]Avenger
well if that isn't the pot calling the kettle black?! :lol:


Jim, its not a kitty, its a lion ;)

Re: Citation Vs. Nonsuch (Apophis The Great vs. Citation)

Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:25 am
by Juliette
[KMA]Avenger wrote:well if that isn't the pot calling the kettle black?! :lol:

There's hope for you yet. :lol: That was good.

Re: Citation Vs. Nonsuch (Apophis The Great vs. Citation)

Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:28 am
by Legendary Apophis
[KMA]Avenger wrote:well if that isn't the pot calling the kettle black?! :lol:


Jim, its not a kitty, its a lion ;)

It isn't, because it's "common knowledge" that those conspiracies regarding Rotschild family and evil jew bankers, were indeed guided by antisemitic propagandists prior to WW2 in 1930s.


Denying something partly (or completly) false is not the same as something generally observed.

The "good" kind criticized alleged Jewish conspiracies to control newspapers, banks, and other institutions, to care only about accumulation of wealth, etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemiti ... th_century
Oh! Wait...that must be again lies! :roll:

Global Research.ca about Rotschild family wrote:By the late 19th century, the adventures of this illustrious family were depicted in many plays in various languages. They inspired films, were the focus of anti-Semitic propaganda in the Third Reich, and are still prominently featured in contemporary anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist propaganda.
(...)

In the wake of the Great Depression and mounting anti-Semitism, the Rothschilds' situation changed dramatically. The family never concealed its Jewish identity. In fact, Lionel Nathan de Rothschild became the first Jewish member of British Parliament, and many members of the family's French and British branches - especially Baron Edmond James de Rothschild - supported the Zionist enterprise and consequently provided considerable assistance to Jewish settlements in pre-1948 Palestine.

Back to the roots

The Nazis' rise to power ultimately forced the Rothschild brothers to flee Germany, Austria and France. The family emerged from World War II owning only three small banks: NM Rothschild & Sons in the U.K. (the bank is named after Nathan Mayer), Banque Rothschild in France, and a third bank in Switzerland. In the 1980s, when the socialists formed the government in France, the state nationalized the French branch and even forbid the family from using its last remaining and most precious asset: the name Rothschild. Later, when Jacques Chirac became president, the ban was lifted.

Re: Citation Vs. Nonsuch (Apophis The Great vs. Citation)

Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:31 am
by Juliette
No, no.. Jim. Avenger has an interesting point. Perhaps we *should* incinerate all the Jews, before they do it to us.
Wait?! What? No.. You could not possibly be suggesting that, G? :o

Re: Citation Vs. Nonsuch (Apophis The Great vs. Citation)

Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:43 am
by Legendary Apophis
Universe wrote:No, no.. Jim. Avenger has an interesting point. Perhaps we *should* incinerate all the Jews, before they do it to us.
Wait?! What? No.. You could not possibly be suggesting that, G? :o

Well, that's what the antizionistsemitic propaganda movements would attempt to convince us of.
Afterall, those racist people compare Israel's actions of today with Nazis actions against jews:

[spoiler]
La consultation de ce site révèle rapidement une autre activité récurrente du centre: la diffusion d'images et de déclarations "antisionistes" très virulentes. A la date du 20 février, on pouvait ainsi visionner, sous la rubrique Galerie photos, des images terrifiantes, comparant le sort réservé aux juifs par les nazis durant la Seconde Guerre mondiale à celui des Palestiniens face à l'armée israélienne actuelle. Le tout sous ce titre: "Le nazisme d'hier et le sionisme d'aujourd'hui". Un amalgame souvent utilisé pour propager la haine contre les juifs, et qui va bien au-delà de la seule critique du sionisme, parfaitement recevable.
[/spoiler]

Quoting my dear article (sarcasm) oh so biased and oh so lieing about the truth (/sarcasm)

Even translated for your lot who don't understand french!

Regarding the anti[s]zionist[/s]semitic party's site wrote:The consultation of this site quickly reveals another recurring activity of the center: the broadcasting of images and very virulent "antiZionist" statements(declarations). In the date of February 20th, we could so view, under the column(section) Photo gallery, terrifying images, comparing the fate reserved for the Jews by the Nazis during the Second World War to that of the Palestinians in front of the current Israeli army. The whole under this title: " the Nazism of yesterday and the current Zionism ". A mixture often used to propagate the hatred against the Jews, and which is well beyond the only criticism of the Zionism, perfectly acceptable.


Now now, aren't we both not trickable enough to fall for that? :P

Believing to octopuss-like antisemitic propaganda machine(s) is the downfall of self sanity. That's why I don't believe into the already-linked-to-antisemitic-movements conspiracies by my so-called-lieing-article.
Sorry for people who fall for it, well still the time to open your eyes before it's too late! Rather late than never! ;)

Scapegoating an enemy isn't a new move. It's a common trick to attract attention elsewhere while the true threat is installing itself. Determining the true threat isn't as easy as it seems. And well, more and more people are finding out. The lies & propaganda don't work anymore as well as it usedto in Europe! :P

Who's causing more troubles? Antisemitic people, or the ones antisemitic propagandists target with their lies?
Now that was an easy-to-answer question, unless you are already trapped into previously mentionned lies, obviously.

Re: Citation Vs. Nonsuch (Apophis The Great vs. Citation)

Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 9:14 am
by agapooka
You're all beside the point. It's not about the culture - it's about the particular people who have the key positions of power over financial and media institutions.

The media has the power to decide what information the general public has access to and control over the financial system certainly implies the ability to cause the collapse of a country's economy.

IF a lot of the people in these key positions of power over financial and media institutions are Jews, it would suit them if anyone opposing them can be labelled an "antisemite". People will brainlessly hate anyone who is labelled an "antisemite". Sheep sheep.

I have no qualm with Jews. I might have problems with the specific individuals who happen to be in positions of power that would directly affect me. I don't like wielding power over others and I expect the same in return. In fact, I demand it and I will seek to destroy that which stands in my way.

Agapooka

Re: Citation Vs. Nonsuch (Apophis The Great vs. Citation)

Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 9:18 am
by Legendary Apophis
Agapooka wrote:You're all beside the point. It's not about the culture - it's about the particular people who have the key positions of power over financial and media institutions.

The media has the power to decide what information the general public has access to and control over the financial system certainly implies the ability to cause the collapse of a country's economy.

IF a lot of the people in these key positions of power over financial and media institutions are Jews, it would suit them if anyone opposing them can be labelled an "antisemite". People will brainlessly hate anyone who is labelled an "antisemite". Sheep sheep.

What would be the antisemitic neo nazis and radical islamists then, considering said hypothesis? :roll:
Just curious.
You are using the anti-racism and victimization arguement (about sheeps), which happens to be used by few communities, and to which people like me aren't falling for because we see the tricks coming from them. There is racism, and "racism". The first would be not taking someone in a job because he's black. The second would be not taking a black person and instead a white person, BUT, because the white has a better CV than the black one. See, different motives are all what matter to find out real racism.

It's currently in effect as we speak, but, it doesn't mean people fall for it. There's the sheeps you mentionned, the ones described as "suffering from an alternative syndrom of Stockholm", or defending the ones who will cause their downfall (defending your "enemy" in the name of principles that cannot be applied all the time, and have their limits). Those, are indeed the sheeps.


I have no qualm with Jews. I might have problems with the specific individuals who happen to be in positions of power that would directly affect me. I don't like wielding power over others and I expect the same in return. In fact, I demand it and I will seek to destroy that which stands in my way.

Agapooka


Edited my post.

Re: Citation Vs. Nonsuch (Apophis The Great vs. Citation)

Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 9:48 am
by agapooka
Victimisation? Not at all. People do blindly hate others who have been labelled as antisemitic. I'm not defending people who actually are racist, as I believe that the practice of hating another based upon his or her culture is completely senseless and foolish. I'm saying that the term is used too liberally and when people hear it, they don't stop to think. They don't look at the alleged antisemite's actions and intentions. They just judge someone based upon a label that was given to them. That's just as immoral as judging someone based upon a cultural label.

I can only laugh at your attempts to "not fall for it". What, you won't fall for the idea of thinking for yourself based on adequate information? :razz: All I'm saying is that the antisemite label can be used to suppress undesirable opposition. I know it's not exclusively used to do that. By putting someone in the same category as a nazi genocidal maniac and neo-nazis, that person's reputation is ruined, regardless of what they did. Heck, people's careers have been ruined because they were falsely accused of paedophilia and then exonerated by DNA evidence, but that doesn't mean that there aren't real paedophiles as well. Accusing someone of being in the same category of "evil people like Hitler" has a similar effect.

Putting someone in a category and judging them because they are now in that category is a form of emotional manipulation. One's actions should speak for themselves and should be analysed objectively.

That is why I said that I have no problem with Jews. I look at the individual specifically and independently of which labels have been assigned to him. More people should do that.

Agapooka

Re: Citation Vs. Nonsuch (Apophis The Great vs. Citation)

Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 10:00 am
by Legendary Apophis
Agapooka wrote:Victimisation? Not at all. People do blindly hate others who have been labelled as an antisemite. I'm not defending people who actually are racist, as I believe that the practice of hating another based upon his or her culture is completely senseless and foolish. I'm saying that the term is used too liberally and when people hear it, they don't stop to think. They don't look at the alleged antisemite's actions and intentions. They just judge someone based upon a label that was given to them. That's just as immoral as judging someone based upon a cultural label.

I can only laugh at your attempts to "not fall for it". What, you won't fall for the idea of thinking for yourself based on adequate information? :razz: All I'm saying is that the antisemite label can be used to suppress undesirable opposition. I know it's not exclusively used to do that. By putting someone in the same category as a nazi genocidal maniac and neo-nazis, that person's reputation is ruined, regardless of what they did. Heck, people's careers have been ruined because they were falsely accused of paedophilia and then exonerated by DNA evidence, but that doesn't mean that there aren't real paedophiles as well. Accusing someone of being in the same category of "evil people like Hitler" has a similar effect.

Putting someone in a category and judging them because they are now in that category is a form of emotional manipulation. One's actions whould speak for themselves and should be analysed objectively.

That is why I said that I have no problem with Jews. I look at the individual specifically and independently of which labels have been assigned to him. More people should do that.

Agapooka

Read again what I said. There is racism, and "racism". I can be accused of "racism", but not of racism.
I explained the difference between both, won't be doing so again. :P

And people who are accused of being antisemitic whom I refer to are FAR from being "saints" (not literally talking of course), I mean, it's not "omg he's antisemitic because he doesn't support Israelian colonization!!!1!" people who I refer to. Heck, if I did so, I would have accused Avenger to be one to say Rotschild family is evil. I didn't do so, people taking short ways would have done so. But it happens to be part of antisemitic propaganda from 1930s, that's why I do warn countless times about it, despite being aware I wouldn't be listened to.

I try my best to differenciate "racism" and racism. If I use "" it's not for nothing!

Don't worry people, I'm not the kind of crying racism wolf on every case! ;) And also people, do NEVER forget that "counter information" is not telling the truth all the time just because it says differently from "official stance".

Re: Citation Vs. Nonsuch (Apophis The Great vs. Citation)

Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 1:19 am
by [KMA]Avenger
none of my posts have anything to do with race, creed or anti-Semitism, they have everything to do with a global cabal working towards their goals of total world domination and the destruction of most of mankind.

you think for 1 minute i don't know how that sounds? not a day goes by when i think at least once, "i must be out of my mind!".
when i first came across this info it was by chance, i was reading and studying history and recorded historical events, it then came to my attention that history has been altered, parts of the historical record have been altered and much of history has been streamlined and watered down to what we have now, to the point of absolute scorn and disdain from the mainstream academia for anyone researching alternate history.

that's when i discovered certain info and other info started to come my way, my first reaction (which stayed the same for quite some time before i accepted the truth) was "LMAO, anyone would have to be totally insane, a loser or the highest order, totally lacking any critical thought or an anarchist to believe this crap!"
so i went back to studying history, but the more i studied the more references i stated coming across of certain names and bloodlines, so i opened my mind and started sifting through all the bull-crap on the surface (and there is allot of bull-crap on the surface put there on purpose) and have arrived at my present train of thought.

today, we have a total intrusion of Govt in our daily lives, the majority of people hate their leaders and see no alternative and so they don't even bother to vote because they have no faith whatsoever in either our leaders or any of the party's, and yet, people refuse to open their eyes and instead choose to sit in front of the TV and ignore their own sense of logic...the elite have done an extraordinary job in dumbing down the worlds populace, so much so that the "dumbed down populace" engages in double think: [spoiler]According to the novel, doublethink is:
“The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them....To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies — all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth.”[/spoiler] (i can also use wiki Jim :razz: ).

here's an example of doublethink (or is it?) displayed on this forum by *cough* certain people, i claimed that the CIA are drug running and i was challenged on my claim, i provided mainstream BBC evidence of a crashed CIA plane used in renditions, which had on board at the time of crashing 3.2 tonnes of cocaine (or some other drug, i cant remember, go google the info yourselves). so i say, "the CIA are the drug runners of the world", all i get is "so what?!" or "who cares?!" and i'm called "a conspiracy nut" or "tinfoil hat wearing nut", but what i don't get, is a challenge on the facts, instead, the evidence is ignored.

anyways (how far off topic have we gone now?!), i have provided tonnes and tonnes of evidence to support what i say, instead of being challenged on the evidence, i get criticized for my sources. what does it matter where the info comes from so long as the info is accurate?
on top of that, i have provided god knows how many quotes from the elite themselves, and still the info is ignored, and i am supposed to accept mainstream sources saying their is no conspiracy accept in my head, while at the same time, those mainstream sources i have provided proving a conspiracy are ignored ](*,) #-o [-X

anyways:

[spoiler]The Illuminati and the House of Rothschild





Two-headed eagle emblem of the Byzantine Empire (Roman Empire) on a Red Shield - Today this is the Russian coat of arms.

Image


The "Illuminati" was a name used by a German sect that existed in the 15th century. They practiced the occult, and professed to possess the 'light' that Lucifer had retained when he became Satan.

In an attempt to document the origins of an secret organization which has evolved into a mastodonic nightmare, successfully creating and controlling a shadow government that supercedes several national governments, and in whose hands now lay the destiny of the world, one must carefully retrace its history. The lengths to which this organization has gone to create the political machinery, and influence public sentiment to the degree necessary to propel its self-perpetuating prophecy, are, quite frankly, mind boggling. Yet the facts provide for the undeniable truth of its existence.

In 1743 a goldsmith named Amschel Moses Bauer opened a coin shop in Frankfurt, Germany. He hung above his door a sign depicting a Roman eagle on a red shield. The shop became known as the Red Shield firm. The German word for 'red shield' is Rothschild.

Amschel Bauer had a son, Meyer Amschel Bauer. At a very early age Mayer showed that he possessed immense intellectual ability, and his father spent much of his time teaching him everything he could about the money lending business and in the basic dynamics of finance. A few years after his father's death in 1755, Mayer went to work in Hannover as a clerk, in a bank, owned by the Oppenheimers. While in the employ of the Oppenheimers, he was introduced to a General von Estorff for whom he ran errands. Meyer's superior ability was quickly recognized and his advancement within the firm was swift. He was awarded a junior partnership. Von Estorff would later provide the yet-to-be formed House of Rothschild an entré into to the palace of Prince William.

His success allowed him the means to return to Frankfurt and to purchase the business his father had established in 1743. The big Red Shield was still displayed over the door. Recognizing the true significance of the Red Shield (his father had adopted it as his emblem from the Red Flag which was the emblem of the revolutionary minded Jews in Eastern Europe), Mayer Amschel Bauer changed his name to Rothschild (red shield). It was at this point that the House of Rothschild came into being.

Through his experience with the Oppenheimers, Meyer Rothschild learned that loaning money to governments and kings was much more profitable than loaning to private individuals. Not only were the loans bigger, but they were secured by the nation's taxes.


Meyer Rothschild had five sons, Amschel, Salomon, Nathan, Karl and Jakob. Meyer spent the rest of his life instructing them all in the secret techniques of money creation and manipulation. As they came of age, he sent them to the major capitals of Europe to open branch offices of the family banking business. Amschel, stayed in Frankfurt, Salomon was sent to Vienna. Nathan was sent to London. Karl went to Naples, and Jakob went to Paris. Image
Five Sons, Five Arrows, Five Directions.

Although all the sons became astute branch managers, Nathan exhibited a superior affinity for the banking business. When he got to London, he became a merchant banker and began to cement ties between the House of Rothschild and the Bank of England.

The House of Rothschild continued to buy and sell bullion and rare coins. Through their shrewd business transactions they successfully bought out or dismantled most of the competition in Europe. In 1769, Meyer became a court agent for Prince William IX of Hesse-Kassel, who was the grandson of George II of England, a cousin to George III, a nephew of the King of Denmark, and a brother- in-law to the King of Sweden. Before long, the House of Rothschild became the go between for big Frankfurt bankers like the Bethmann Brothers, and Rueppell & Harnier.




In 1785, Meyer moved his entire family to a five story dwelling he shared with the Schiff family. In 1865 The Schiffs' not-yet-born grandson Jacob would move to New York and in 1917 become the mastermind behind the funding of the Bolshevik Revolution. This action would successfully instate communism as a major world movement, which was, (and still is), a basic tenet of the Illuminati and their collectivist agenda, (but more Jacob Schiff and the Illuminati agenda later). From this point on the Rothschilds and the Schiffs would play a central role in the rest of European financial history, and subsequently that of the United States and the world. ImageRotschild Coat of Arms - Concordia, Integritas, Industria = Unity, Integrity, Industry.

Meyer Rothschild began to realize that in order to attain the power necessary to influence and control the finances of the various monarchs in Europe, he would have to wrest this influence and power from the church, which would necessitate its destruction. To accomplish this, he enlisted the help of a Catholic priest, Adam Weishaupt, to assemble a secret Satanic order.

Adam Weishaupt was born February 6, 1748 at Ingoldstadt, Bavaria. Weishaupt, born a Jew, was educated by the Jesuits who converted him to Catholicism. He purportedly developed an intense hatred for the Jesuits. Although he became a Catholic priest, his faith had been shaken by the Jesuits and he became an atheist. Weishaupt was an ardent student of French philosopher Voltaire (1694-1778). Voltaire, a revolutionary who held liberal religious views, had written in a letter to King Frederick II, ("the Great"):

"Lastly, when the whole body of the Church should be sufficiently weakened and infidelity strong enough, the final blow (is) to be dealt by the sword of open, relentless persecution. A reign of terror (is) to be spread over the whole earth, and...continue while any Christian should be found obstinate enough to adhere to Christianity."

It is believed that, as a result of Voltaire's writings, Weishaupt formulated his ideas concerning the destruction of the Church. In 1775, when summoned by the House of Rothschild, he immediately defected and, at the behest of Meyer, began to organize the Illuminati. The 1st chapter of the order started in his home town of Ingolstadt.

As the name implies, those individuals who are members of the Illuminati possess the 'Light of Lucifer'. As far as they are concerned, only members of the human race who possess the 'Light of Lucifer' are truly enlightened and capable of governing. Denouncing God, Weishaupt and his followers considered themselves to be the cream of the intelligentsia - the only people with the mental capacity, the knowledge, the insight and understanding necessary to govern the world and bring it peace. Their avowed purpose and goal was the establishment of a "Novus Ordo Seclorum" - a New World Order, or One World Government.

Through the network of the Illuminati membership, Meyer Rothschild's efforts were redoubled and his banking empire became firmly entrenched throughout Europe. His sons, who were made Barons of the Austrian Empire, continued to build on what their father had started and expand his financial influence.

During the American Revolution, the House of Rothschild brokered a deal between the Throne of England and Prince William of Germany. William was to provide 16,800 Hessian soldiers to help England stop the Revolution in America. Rothschild was also made responsible for the transfer of funds that were to pay the German soldiers. The transfer was never made. The soldiers were never paid, which may account for their poor showing. The Americans prevailed. At this point Meyer Rothschild set his sights on America.


The "Illuminati" was a name used by a German sect that existed in the 15th century. They practiced the occult, and professed to possess the 'light' that Lucifer had retained when he became Satan. Image LCF Rothschild Group. The Group established by Edmond de Rothschild and presided over today by his son, Benjamin, is one of the most prominent organisations in the global financial sector.

Meanwhile Benjamin Franklin, having become very familiar with the Bank of England and fractional reserve banking, (see goldsmiths above), understood the dangers of a privately owned Central Bank controlling the issue of the Nation's currency and resisted the charter of a central bank until his death in 1791. That was the same year that Alexander Hamilton pushed through legislation that would provide for the charter of The First Bank of the United States. Ironically, the bank was chartered by the Bank of England to finance the war debt of the Revolutionary War. Nathan Rothschild invested heavily that first bank. He immediately set about to control all financial activity, between banks, in America.

There were a couple of problems, though. The U.S. Constitution put control of the nation's currency in the hands of Congress, and made no provisions for Congress to delegate that authority. It even established the basic currency unit, the dollar. The dollar was Constitutionally mandated to be a silver coin based on the Spanish pillar dollar and to contain 375 grains of silver.

This single provision was designed to keep the American money supply out of the hands of the banking industry. The Bank of England made several attempts to usurp control of the U.S. money supply but failed. Still, through their Illuminati agents, they continued to enlist supporters through bribery and kickbacks.

Any proponent of a fractional reserve banking system is an economic predator.

During the next twenty years the country would fall prey to contrived financial havoc as a result of the bankers policies of creating cycles of inflation and tight money. During times of inflation the economy would boom, there would be high employment, and people would borrow money to buy houses and farms. At that point the bankers would raise interest rates and incite a depression which would, obviously, cause unemployment. People who could not pay their mortgages would have their homes and farms repossessed by the bank for a fraction of their true value. This is the essence of the Illuminati ploy, and it would recur, time and time again. In fact, it's still happening today.

By 1810,The House of Rothschild not only had a substantial stake in the Bank of the United States, they were quietly gaining control of the Bank of England. Although foreign owners were not, by law, allowed a say in the day to day operations of the Bank of the United States, there is little doubt that the American share holders and directors were, if not affiliated, complicit in the aims and goals of the Illuminati and their central bankers.

In 1811 the charter for the First Bank of America was not renewed. As a result, the House of Rothschild lost millions. This enraged Nathan Rothschild so much that he, almost single handedly fomented the War of 1812. Using his formidable power and influence, he coerced the British Parliament to attempt to retake the Colonies. The first military attempt failed. The second strategy was to divide and conquer. Any serious historian will find that the Civil War was largely stirred up by Rothschild's illuminati agents in the United States.

Meyer Amschel Rothschild died on September 19, 1812. His will spelled out specific guidelines that were to be maintained by his descendants:

1) All important posts were to be held by only family members, and only male members were to be involved on the business end. The oldest son of the oldest son was to be the head of the family, unless otherwise agreed upon by the rest of the family, as was the case in 1812, when Nathan was appointed as the patriarch.

2) The family was to intermarry with their own first and second cousins, so their fortune could be kept in the family, and to maintain the appearance of a united financial empire. For example, his son James (Jacob) Mayer married the daughter of another son, Salomon Mayer. This rule became less important in later generations as they refocused family goals and married into other fortunes.

3) Rothschild ordered that there was never to be "any public inventory made by the courts, or otherwise, of my estate...Also I forbid any legal action and any publication of the value of the inheritance."

Nathan Mayer Rothschild, who, by 1820, had established a firm grip on the Bank of England stated:

"I care not what puppet is placed upon the throne of England to rule the Empire on which the sun never sets. The man who controls Britain's money supply controls the British Empire, and I control the British money supply."

The Second Bank of the United States, was also chartered by the Bank of England to carry the American war debt. When its charter expired in 1836, President Andrew Jackson refused to renew it, saying a central bank concentrated too much power in the hands of un elected bankers.

In 1838 Nathan made the following statement:

"Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws."

During the first quarter of the nineteenth century the Rothschilds expanded their financial empire throughout Europe. They crisscrossed the continent with railroads, which allowed the transport of coal and steel from their newly purchases coal mines and iron works. Through a loan to the government of England, they held the first lien on the Suez Canal. They financed the Romanov dynasty in tsarist Russia, provided the funding that allowed Cecil Rhodes the opportunity to plunder and sack South Africa as well as the funding that allowed the government of France to plunder and sack North Africa.

As I have stated many times before, "the Dark Side" has been on both sides of every war that has been fought in modern times. American and British Intelligence have documented evidence that the House of Rothschild has financed both sides of every war, since the American Revolution. Financier Haym Salomon, an Illuminati agent, supported the patriots during the American Revolution, then later made loans to James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, and James Monroe. As explained earlier, during the Napoleonic Wars, one branch of the family funded Napoleon, while another financed Great Britain, Germany, and other nations.

One of the most prominent Illuminati Orders in the U.S. was the secret "Order of Skull & Bones". Illuminati agents, William Huntington Russell and Alphonso Taft, founded Chapter 322, at Yale University in 1833. Then, in 1856 the Order was incorporated as the Russell Trust. William Russell became a member of the Connecticut State Legislature in 1846 and a General in Connecticut National Guard in 1862. Alphonso Taft became Secretary of War in the Grant Administration in 1876, U.S. Attorney General in 1876 and U.S. Ambassador to Russia in 1884. Alphonso Taft's son later became Chief Justice and United States President.

In the years preceding the Civil War, a number of "Skull and Bones" Patriarchs were to become leaders in the Secessionist movements of various Southern States. It has been suggested that these pressures exacerbated an already tenuous situation, and set the stage for the fomentation of the Civil War. The Rothschild Banks provided financing for both the North and the South during the war. After the civil war, the more clever method was used to take over the United States. The Rothschilds financed August Belmont, Khun Loeb and the Morgan Banks. Then they financed the Harrimans (Railroads), Carnegie (Steel) and other industrial Titans. Agents like Paul Warburg, Jacob Schiff, Bernard Baruch were then sent to the United States to effect the next phase of the takeover.

By the end of the 19th. Century, the Rothschilds had controlling influence in England, U.S., France, Germany, Austria and Italy. Only Russia was left outside the financial sphere of world domination. England, through the Bank of England, ruled most of the world. Jacob Schiff, president of Khun Loeb Bank in New York was appointed by B'nai B'rith (A secret Jewish Masonic Order meaning "Bothers of the Convenent") to be the Revolutionary Leader of the Revolution in Russia. A cartel, made up of the Carnegies, Morgans , Rockefellers, and Chases would contribute to the manifestation of communism. On January 13, 1917, Leon Trotsky arrived in the United States and received a U.S. Passport. He was frequently seen entering the palatial residence of Jacob Schiff.

Jacob Schiff, and his supporters, financed the training of Trotsky's Rebel Band, comprised mainly of Jews from New York's East Side, on Rockefeller's Standard oil Company property in New Jersey. When sufficiently trained in the techniques of guerrilla warfare and terror, Trotsky's rebel band departed with twenty million dollars worth of gold, also provided by Jacob Schiff, on the ship S.S. Kristianiafjord bound for Russia to wage the Bolshevik revolution.

After the Bolshevik Revolution and the wholesale murder of the entire Russian royal family, Standard Oil of New Jersey brought 50% of the huge Caucasus oil field even though the property had theoretically been nationalized. In 1927, Standard Oil of New York built a refinery in Russia. Then Standard Oil concluded a deal to market Soviet Oil in Europe and floated a loan of $75 million to the Bolsheviks. Jacob Schiff and Paul Warburg at the Kuhn Loeb Bank started a campaign for a central bank in the United States. They then helped the Rothschild's to manipulate the financial Panic of 1907.

Then, the panic of 1907 was used as an argument for having a central bank to prevent such occurrences. Paul Warburg told the Banking and Currency Committee: 'Let us have a national clearing house'."

The Federal Reserve Act was the brainchild of Baron Alfred Rothschild of London. The final version of the Act was decided on at a secret meeting at Jekyll Island Georgia, owned by J.P. Morgan. Present at the meeting were; A. Piatt Andrew, Assistant secretary of the Treasury, Senator Nelson Aldrich, Frank Vanderlip, President of Kuhn Loeb and Co., Henry Davidson, Senior Partner of J.P. Morgan Bank, Charles Norton, President of Morgan's First National of New York, Paul Warburg, Partner in Khun Loeb and Co. and Benjamin Strong, President of Morgan's Bankers Trust Co.


Jekyll Island, Georgia, USA
A Talk by G. Edward Griffin Author of The Creature from Jekyll Island

The Federal Reserve Act of 1913, brought about the decimation of the U.S. Constitution and was the determining act of the international financiers in consolidating financial power in the United States. Pierre Jay, Initiated into the "Order of Skull and Bones" in 1892, became the first Chairman of the New York Federal Reserve Bank. A dozen members of the Federal Reserve can be linked to the same "Order."

The Rothschilds operate out of an area in the heart of London, England, the financial district, which is known as 'The City', or the 'Square Mile.' All major British banks have their main offices here, along with branch offices for 385 foreign banks, including 70 from the United States. It is here that you will find the Bank of England, the Stock Exchange, Lloyd's of London, the Baltic Exchange (shipping contracts), Fleet Street (home of publishing and newspaper interests), the London Commodity Exchange (to trade coffee, rubber, sugar and wool), and the London Metal Exchange. It is virtually the financial hub of the world.


What You Didn't Know About Taxes & The 'Crown'

Positioned on the north bank of the Thames River, covering an area of 677 acres or one square mile (known as the "wealthiest square mile on earth"), it has enjoyed special rights and privileges that enabled them to achieve a certain level of independence since 1191. In 1215, its citizens received a Charter from King John, granting them the right to annually elect a mayor (known as the Lord Mayor), a tradition that continues today.

Des Griffin, in his book Descent into Slavery, described 'The City' as a sovereign state (much like the Vatican), and that since the establishment of the privately owned Bank of England in 1694, this financial center has actually become the last word in England's national affairs. He contends that the country is run by powers in 'the City' and that the throne, the prime minister, and parliament are simply fronts for the real power. E. C. Knuth, in his book Empire of the City, suggests that when the queen enters 'The City,' she is subservient to the Lord Mayor (under him, is a committee of 12-14 men, known as 'The Crown'), because this privately-owned corporation is not subject to the Queen, or the Parliament. The Rothschilds have traditionally chosen the Lord mayor since 1820.

The last national election in the United States provided its citizenry with a choice between two known members of a the same Satanic cult. And even then, the outcome of this election has come under extreme scrutiny.

"Those who vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything."
- Joseph Stalin[/spoiler]

i suggest everyone go study the subject of "The Empire of the City"...but i wont hold my breath!

Re: Citation Vs. Nonsuch (Apophis The Great vs. Citation)

Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 1:50 am
by Juliette
I love the story. :D Magnificent intellect and exceptional long-term planning ability, combined with incredible adaptivity and creativity, and the daring to take risks.
I have to say, if that story is true, I applaud the gifted Rothschilds. Congratulations!


(G, you believe all this. How can you not be amazed at the superior intellect and adaptivity of the Rothschilds?)

Re: Citation Vs. Nonsuch (Apophis The Great vs. Citation)

Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 2:10 am
by [KMA]Avenger
i can only believe in the superior stupidity of all of us to hand these animals all of our money and then have them lend it back to us at interest...

Re: Citation Vs. Nonsuch (Apophis The Great vs. Citation)

Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 2:45 am
by Juliette
[KMA]Avenger wrote:i can only believe in the superior stupidity of all of us to hand these animals all of our money and then have them lend it back to us at interest...

That stupidity was a given since our first ancestor decided to stand upright..

Re: Citation Vs. Nonsuch (Apophis The Great vs. Citation)

Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 2:53 am
by Legendary Apophis
today, we have a total intrusion of Govt in our daily lives, the majority of people hate their leaders and see no alternative and so they don't even bother to vote because they have no faith whatsoever in either our leaders or any of the party's, and yet, people refuse to open their eyes and instead choose to sit in front of the TV and ignore their own sense of logic...

I dislike those people, moaning about politics and avoiding them...Do not even think of comparing me with them. :evil:
I however like the "majority of people" assuming. You are probably talking about the UK there...because hmmm in France we had about 85% of participating in last presidential elections lol.


Anywayyyy. After reading this interesting piece of work, what am I meant to do?
Stop to vote, revolt against the system, spread the word, join controversed movements, and then fall into the influence of a ultraradical candidate surfing into people's fear of a shadow governement, satanist leaders, corrupted bankers and no idea what else horrible hidden things rampant around us?

No. :-D

[KMA]Avenger wrote:i can only believe in the superior stupidity of all of us to hand these animals all of our money and then have them lend it back to us at interest...

Oh and I wonder how loans (I don't see anything else implying interests regarding banking lol) could be given without interest. Seriously, I wonder how it could work if there wasn't interests! It's not family loans dude, if there was no interests, then it would be literally for them give money and get it back, same amount, that would work in a SMALL society, where people know each others and can trust each others completly (and even, it wouldn't be banks doing loans, but individuals). Now we got beyond this because of the marvellous rabbit like way of reproducing, which went out of limits for some time already. There are risks that people can take the "money" then disappear (well it's not the biggest risk), also banks need to generate income, and interests are among them. Otherwise, what would be the point for them to do loans?
Money doesn't exactly fall from sky. Banks create money for loans, they don't literally take from our bank accounts to loan to someone, so it needs to be repayed, and there comes interests, same for bonds, would you buy bonds if it was 500£ in exchange of 500£? Banks also risk that people withdraw their money, because they heard a rumour or something (it happend recently in the UK if I'm not mistaken). If people withdraw all their funds, it's the end of the bank, because banks rarely nowadays have in reserve exactly same amount we gave them. That's why "trust" is somehow used in this.

If it was back to individual loans, well, it still exists, and that's where people are extorted (unless it's people knowing each others well such as friends/families).

Re: Citation Vs. Nonsuch (Apophis The Great vs. Citation)

Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 3:42 am
by [KMA]Avenger
Apophis The Great wrote:Anywayyyy. After reading this interesting piece of work, what am I meant to do?
Stop to vote, revolt against the system, spread the word, join controversed movements, and then fall into the influence of a ultraradical candidate surfing into people's fear of a shadow governement, satanist leaders, corrupted bankers and no idea what else horrible hidden things rampant around us?

No. :-D


no Jim, your not supposed to join some radical group, left or right.
you can do what i do, talk to people, spread the info in order to wake others up till a point of critical mass is achieved and these banking, eugenicist, murderous, satan worshipping, nazi, drug dealing, child kidnapping scum bags are brought to justice, or you can do nothing in the hopes i'm mad and all of this is a fantasy (much like your doing now :wink: ). the choice is obviously yours, but i don't expect you to drop everything and run round the streets of France shouting conspiracy at the top of your voice, nor do i expect you to rubbish my sources simply because you don't understand the info being presented and then declaring i am naive and in denial.


Apophis The Great wrote:Oh and I wonder how loans (I don't see anything else implying interests regarding banking lol) could be given without interest. Seriously, I wonder how it could work if there wasn't interests! It's not family loans dude, if there was no interests, then it would be literally for them give money and get it back, same amount, that would work in a SMALL society, where people know each others and can trust each others completly (and even, it wouldn't be banks doing loans, but individuals). Now we got beyond this because of the marvellous rabbit like way of reproducing, which went out of limits for some time already. There are risks that people can take the "money" then disappear (well it's not the biggest risk), also banks need to generate income, and interests are among them. Otherwise, what would be the point for them to do loans?


the church a few hundred years ago declared that usery (Usery is charging interest on top of interest) evil and banned it. the money changers (the first bankers) at the time cried that there was risk in making loans, so the church allowed the charging of small fees to cover the money changers expenses and to allow them to make a small profit as well.

the charging of interest is an evil practice Jim, you also failed to understand exactly what we have done to ourselves...we have given private bankers control of our nations money and they in turn lend it back to us and our Govts at interest...JUST WHOSE MONEY IS IT IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!

i'll make it simple so language barriers wont get in the way...what we have done is allow a thief into our homes, stood there while he helped himself to our possessions and then smiled and considered them a friend for selling our goods back to us at 100 times (if not more...much more) the original purchase price.

Apophis The Great wrote:Money doesn't exactly fall from sky. Banks create money for loans, they don't literally take from our bank accounts to loan to someone, so it needs to be repayed, and there comes interests


wrong jim, we have in place global fractional reserve banking, that means they literately create "Debt Notes" (debt notes=money) out of thin air. all they do to make a loan is put some numbers into your bank account...that's fact!


Apophis The Great wrote:"trust" is somehow used in this.

blind trust is what has gotten the world into the mess its in, the difference between us is that i do not accept it, where as, you do accept it as "that's the way things are" or "its a conspiracy theory" or "what am i supposed to do about it?!".

we have a duty to question everything our Govts do, because people have blindly trusted their leaders and Govts and stopped questioning, we have given up our fortunes, sovereignty, lands and Govts to the bankers.

i'm not preaching to you, or trying to convert you, i don't expect you to go kill your leaders all in the name of freedom or whatever.

consider this, if what i say is just a "theory" then you have lost nothing reading any of this except a few mins of your time, in that case, i hope i have sufficiently entertained you :smt047 :-D

but if the info i have given has any amount of truth to it???