[history of money] three hours thirty five well spent

What's the betting you won't look at this video above. If you have just clicked into this site for a few seconds, then you can access the vid here and watch it later at your leisure, if you would.

The major obstacle in getting the message out about Them is that, though not invisible in their day jobs, they are invisible in what they have historically been up to. Deep Throat, in the Woodstein affair, was right in saying, "Follow the money."

That's what it's all about and all it's ever been about, in the Civil Wars, in the States Rights push, in everything. And the masters of money manipulation are the international bankers who DO collude because it is in their financial interests to do so and people DO follow their financial interests.

There's nothing wrong with following one's own calling. Money is just as respectable a trade as metal working or agriculture but what sets Them apart is not only the rampant greed which has something vaguely satanic in its madness, its mindless pursuit of "ever more and more" but their willingness to perpetrate enormous fraud upon the people, the "sheeple", worldwide and for so long, then sit back and enjoy admiration from a community who looks up to them [or used to], where they're well ensconced and institutionally protected.

Python's sketch puts it well:



I'm no socialist because I don't accept State intervention but the bit about "I am your king - how did you get that then, I didn't vote for you" is very much to the point.

People who make money because they're clever at it are one thing but people gaining in a fixed system which is designed to shut out all opposition and works on insider trading [which would have an ordinary mortal thrown out of the exchange] whilst perpetrating gross fraud and who have a maniacal devotion in their eyes in what they're doing are Them or Them's devotees.

Capitalism - the difference between Them and the small venturer

It's in the last paragraph.

The benign socialist, the average woolly, feelgood, let's be kind to everyone, all must have prizes social democrat or even socialist is just that little too willing to allow the State to correct things for him/her. He/she sees an injustice and how many times do you read, "They should make it so that ..." or, "There should be a law about that ..."?

"They" means the State here. What these essentially kindly folk often don't realize is that the wolves, Them, are so closely sitting behind the State and playing on sympathies and thoughts like these. The person whose political philosophy allows him or her to accept the stealing of my nest egg to give to someone else whom the social doctrine says is more deserving is no better than Them and the two work very well together.

This is not incompatible with international socialism - same principle - steal from those who've done the work and made the nest egg, giving to someone else the High Council determines should be given to.

The small venturer, the small "c" capitalist, on the other hand, sets up a business, buys at wholesale and sells at retail, pays his taxes and overheads and carries the risk. He might manufacture something and set a price on it. And what? He provides a service and feeds his family at the same time.

He or she is the small or medium businessman.

He then expands and expands and diversifies until a point is reached where most would be satisfied but some are not. That's the point where one can cross the line into "Themness". Christie had one of her characters, wife of a steel magnate, state the following, explaining her husband to another man:

“He's got on wonderfully in the world and naturally he wants something to show for it but many's the time I wonder where it will all end. It's like a runaway horse,” said Lady Coote. “Got the bit between its teeth and away it goes.

He's got on and he's got on and he’s got on until he can't stop getting on. He's one of the richest men in England - but does that satisfy him? No, he still wants more. He wants to be - I don't know what he wants to be! I can tell you, it frightens me sometimes!” [“The Seven Dials Mystery”, 1929]

The Left decries anyone at all who sets up a business and makes money, as though that in itself is a crime or else sees it as some new source of cash to seize and redistribute. No, it is not a crime - it's called incentive and it recognizes human nature but not only that, it allows a benign way of accommodating human nature and no one in good times worries about his local chippy or craft shop doing business on the main street of the town. No one looks at the proprietor with envy when buying the fish'nchips.

If I set up a coffee shop down the road, am I a wicked capitalist, exploiting the workers? I need assistants and I pay for them. If I mistreat them, the words gets out and there's a falling off of my business.

It's not the system, it's the exponents of it

The bottom line is not whether idealistic utopias like social justice or benign capitalism are right or wrong. The bottom line is whether the practitioners of either are normal, sane people or are exploitative, mad, driven monsters, indifferent to the suffering of others around them. Naturally, that's a sliding scale, isn't it?

History of Them

These are far more than parasites - they are behind the misery in the world.

In 1836, following a long fight to the death between Jackson, Biddle and the banks over the rechartering of the 2nd Bank of the United States, Nicholas Biddle was quoted as saying:

"Nothing but widespread suffering will produce any effect on Congress ... Our only safety is in pursuing a steady course of firm restriction - and I have no doubt that such a course will ultimately lead to restoration of the currency and the re-charter of the bank."

Andrew Jackson, whom I consider America’s greatest president ever, did have the beast chained for some time and They didn’t properly recover until 1877 and get back in the driving seat until 1913.

The famous greenback dialogue between Abraham Lincoln and Colonel Dick Taylor over how to finance the war saw Lincoln in despair and Taylor saying:

Why Lincoln, that is easy – just get Congress to pass a bill authorizing the printing of full legal tender treasury notes … and pay your soldiers with them and go ahead and win your war with them also.

Lincoln reminded Taylor that it was an impossibility under the current system but Taylor replied:

The people or anyone else will not have any choice in the matter, if you make them full legal tender. They will have the full sanction of the government and be just as good as any money; as Congress is given that express right by the Constitution.

This was the most serious setback for the bankers since Andy Jackson and had repercussions across the world. The oft quoted Times editorial of 1865 seems to be authentic:

“If that mischievous financial policy which had its origin in the North American Republic during the late war in that country, should become indurated down to a fixture, then that Government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off its debts and be without debt. It will become prosperous beyond precedent in the history of the civilized governments of the world. The brains and wealth of all countries will go to North America. That government must be destroyed or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe.”

The almighty struggle between the central bankers and the government continued and was even reported reasonably accurately by what was still a relatively free press. The two issues in those days were the greenback and silver but greenbacks were the most necessary to stamp out because they represented the Government issuance to the people, debt free, of legitimate currency and THAT the banks were not going to tolerate.

In 1877, a circular was issued by authority of the Associated Bankers of New York, Philadelphia, and Boston, signed by James Buel, secretary, and sent out from 247 Broadway, New York, to the bankers in all of the States. It read:

“Dear Sir: It is advisable to do all in your power to sustain such prominent daily and weekly newspapers, especially the agricultural and religious press, as will oppose the greenback issue of paper money; and that you also withhold patronage from all applicants who are not willing to oppose the Government issue of money. Let the Government issue the coin and the banks issue the paper money of the country, for then we can better protect each other.

To repeal the Act creating bank notes, or to restore to circulation the Government issue of money, will be to provide the people with money and will therefore seriously affect our individual profits as bankers and lenders. See your Congressman at once and engage him to support our interests, that we may control legislation.”

Garfield, weeks before his assassination on July 2nd, 1881, said:

Whoever controls the volume of money in any country is absolute master of all industry and commerce … And when you realize that the entire system is very easily controlled, one way or another, by a few powerful men at the top, you will not have to be told how periods of inflation and depression originate.

Since the open admissions of Biddle around 1836, the central bankers had kept a pretty low profile in terms of anything which could have been used against them but they slipped up in 1891, in a memo sent out by the ABA. This memo is listed in the congressional record of April 29th, 1913 and is worse than the October, 2006 FOMC report in revealing the future intention of meddling with the economy:

On September 1st, 1894, we will not renew our loans under any consideration. On September 1st we will demand our money. We will foreclose and become mortgagees in possession. We can take two-thirds of the farms west of the Mississippi, and thousands of them east of the Mississippi as well, at our own price … Then the farmers will become tenants, as in England.

As the googletube goes on for 3 hours 35 minutes and some of these quotes came from there, you’d gather there could be two dozen other quotes as well, along much the same lines.

Not only does the international money own the government but all economic cycles are taken advantage of or else induced, all wars result from their machinations or their cleverness in playing one side against the other - e.g. Napoleon and the forces arrayed against him - and the motive is both profit and then something else more sinister, which it is beyond the remit of this post to encompass but will come into later posts.

Again, it is staggering to observe how people can not recognize Them for who they are in this day and age. The history of the United States is jam-packed with references to Them and many presidents have spoken out or written later about this pernicious influence. The problem is that we, today, have largely not seen this material, have not read it, have not been exposed to it, except on little blogs like this one or hidden in great long tomes secreted away in the Conspiracy Theory section of bookshops.

It's very real, it's there and it's into yet another cycle of misery and war right now, even as we read this.
.