Watch "The Secret of Oz", the sequel of "The Money Masters" here!

[Shami-Amourae]

http://i50.tinypic.com/n5pqa8.jpg (http://www.theopensource.tv/the-money-masters/the-secret-of-oz-video_82fa50cc4.html)

Watch here:
http://www.theopensource.tv/the-money-masters/the-secret-of-oz-video_82fa50cc4.html
or
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U71-KsDArFM

_________________________________________________

I've owned a legitimate copy of this film for a while, and think it's better than the original since it discusses better solutions.

You can buy the documentary directly from the director Bill Still (http://www.secretofoz.com/), or buy it on Amazon (http://www.amazon.com/Secret-Oz-James-Robertson-UK/dp/B002WLS890).

[Horn]

Hey thanks, watching it now.

[Steal]

Thanks for posting, applaud givin and watching now. good vid.

[Shami-Amourae]

I'm wondering what you guys think. I mean, at GIM1, there was a permanent link to the original Money Master's film literally built into the forum template. At the end of the Money Masters, Bill Still warned that the Gold Standard WASN'T the solution, but he really didn't elaborate much on why it was such a bad system. Many of us Gold-bugs literally overlooked this in the sense we liked how the film exposed the bankers/elites. In this new film, Bill Still pretty much explains why the Gold Standard and the current Private Central Banks systems are both bad, and how the problems we face have historically been alleviated (government run Central Banks.)

Is Bill Still right? I don't know for sure, but his argument is very compelling; compelling enough it shook my opinion about Gold/Silver. North Dakota is probably the best example of a government run Central Bank, in that it's the only state in the union that hasn't really been effected much by the current economic depression. Bill Still doesn't think precious metals are necessarily bad, it's just only bad when you have a money unit that is of a small quantity that can easily be controlled by the elites. This is why he suggests that if we do go with a precious metal standard it should be silver, since silver is so common that it really can't be controlled by the elites as easily as gold is.

I do believe Bill Still is mostly right, but I'm still a Gold/Silver bug. Gold is still a great way to insure your money against inflation, while silver is great since the elites don't really control it that much.

Whatever the right solution is, we need to forever remember that when the money supply is no longer under the control of the People, then the People will always get tyranny in due time.

[Steal]

I also noticed it was not a gold positive video. This may be due to if majority of gold is owned by the elite, any money backed by, they would still control. Plan on doing some digging on Bill Still later when I have time to see what the hell his motivation is. Did learn alot of history though. Did make me wonder what would happen to the price of gold if his wishes came true. I am sure it would always have worth, but over 1k?, I wonder.

[Steal]

http://www.freedomforceinternational.org/freedomcontent.cfm?fuseaction=meetstill

MEET BILL STILL, FIAT-MONEY ADVOCATE
An analysis of the documentaries Money Masters and Capital Crimes
© 2006 by G. Edward Griffin

The purpose of this analysis is to evaluate two video documentaries on monetary issues that were written and produced by Bill Still. One is The Money Masters and the other is Capital Crimes. They are excellent productions with a great deal of history and professionally created images. They tell the story of our debauched monetary system based on fractional-reserve banking. There is just one problem. They offer a false solution – which is to say they offer no solution at all. The alleged solution is that we abandon our present fiat money system and adopt another one similar to it. Yes, they actually advocate FIAT money! The proposal is that we should take the power to create money-out-of-nothing away from big, bad bankers and turn it over to nice, trustworthy politicians. In my view, it is very naïve to think that politicians are more trustworthy than bankers. The problem with money created out of nothing is not who does it but that it is done at all.

These documentaries remind me of William Greider's book, Secrets of the Temple, which was offered to the public as a scathing exposé of the Federal Reserve System. Greider’s history was excellent, but his conclusion was fatally flawed. After having proved that the Fed was conceived as a weapon of the banking elite against the common man and having shown that this is exactly the function it has always served, his conclusion was, not to abolish the Fed or even to make serious changes to it. His “call to action” was simply to stop worrying about it. The Fed has made mistakes, he said, but we have learned many lessons along the way. All we need now are wiser men to run it! That is the kind of solution that made his book acceptable to the giant publishing house, Simon and Schuster. It is no solution at all. The elite do not care what we know about a problem they have created if we do nothing to solve it. They are good at putting forth their own opposition – writers like Greider – who will sound the alarm and rally the troops but lead them – nowhere.

More recently, Simon and Schuster published another book in this same genre, Day of Deceit; The Truth about FDR and Pearl Harbor, by Robert Stinnett. It is a blockbuster of facts and previously hidden documents proving conclusively that FDR, Secretary-of-War Henry Stimson, General George Marshall, and many others in the Roosevelt Administration secretly plotted to cause Japan to successfully Attack Pearl Harbor. They did this to create an excuse for bringing the United States into World War II, which they desired for political reasons. So, what was Stinnett's conclusion? Was it to condemn these men for their treachery? Not at all. It was that this act was justified because it helped put a stop to Hitler in Europe. In other words, to halt totalitarianism in Europe, it was necessary to adopt totalitarianism in America, and to do so was an act of statesmanship! Once again, Simon and Schuster provided the American people with a false opinion leader. What's the point of getting all frothed up over a president lying to the voters and deliberately causing thousands of Americans to be killed if we are then to decide that he was a hero for dong so?

That is exactly what Bill Still has done in his documentaries. The solution to fiat money is not MORE fiat money. It is REAL money based on tangible assets, and none has yet been discovered that serves as well as gold or silver. The assertion in the videos that wooden sticks were successfully used in England as money is grossly misleading. Tally sticks were occasionally used like government-issued script that could be applied to the payment of taxes, but at no time in history were they ever used as a medium of exchange for substantial economic transactions. To propose that we now can live with fiat money based on that myth is a non-solution of the highest order.

Still points with admiration to some of the darkest days of the American Republic. He praises Lincoln for issuing debt-based money, called Greenbacks, during the Civil War even though this was a blatant violation of the Constitution. His argument is not that this was a desperate expediency required by the urgency of war, but that it was an act of brilliant monetary statesmanship. In a similar vein, he approvingly surveys the early colonial period in which colonial governments resorted to printing-press money without silver or gold backing. It led to disastrous inflation and was devastating to the common man; but he says this was caused, not by flooding the colonies with fiat money, but by England forcing the colonies to STOP the practice! He relies on the words of Benjamin Franklin to support his case, and, indeed, Franklin speaks forcefully. Still does not explain that, although Franklin was an advocate of fiat money in the early years, after the experience of rampant inflation had taught its painful lesson, such a view was in the extreme minority. Still makes it appear that Franklin was expressing the consensus of the Founding Fathers when, in fact, it was just the opposite.

Still claims that it would be a mistake to return to a gold-backed monetary system because most of the world’s gold now is held by the bankers. This is a deceptively appealing argument. First, it is not true. Central banks do hold more gold than any other single entity; but the total inventory of gold in the hands of private citizens, as bullion or coins or jewelry or known deposits in working mines, is much larger. If money were to be restored to a precious-metal base, this largely invisible reserve would be more than adequate to supply the demand. We must remember that the limited supply of gold as a monetary base is an advantage, not a disadvantage. If it were not scarce, it would not have utility as money. The smaller the supply, the more valuable it is. As pointed out in The Creature from Jekyll Island, any amount of gold or silver will work just as well as any other amount. The only difference is how valuable each unit of measure will be. The argument that “we don’t have enough gold in the world” is without foundation, and those who say this do not understand the fundamental mechanics of money.

Bill Still does not make this argument but he comes close when he says that most of the world’s gold is held by the bankers. Even if this were true (which it is not) we need to ask a question: If gold is so useless as a backing for money, why are the bankers trying to acquire it as fast as they can? And why are central bankers so strongly opposed to gold or silver-backed currencies? The answer is obvious. It is because precious metals still are, and will continue to be, a universally recognized storehouse of value, and that value cannot be manipulated by bankers OR free-spending politicians. But fiat money CAN be – and always will be.

This brings us to the crux of the matter. Still claims that, because the bankers have operated a gigantic monetary scam for hundreds of years, it is time to break their grip over our lives and establish a fair and honest monetary system We could not agree more on that point. But then, in the tradition of Greider and Stinnett, he attempts to lead us to a non-solution. He claims that we should take this power from the bankers and give it to the politicians, because they are chosen by the people and, therefore, can be trusted.

In my view, this is the most naïve concept since Adolph Hitler won the elections in Austria as “the man you can trust.” We must not forget that politicians gave this monopoly to the bankers in the first place. Politicians continue to cooperate with the system in all of its corruption. Politicians derive huge benefits from this system and repeatedly place their careers above the public good. Politicians vote the bills that spend more than comes in from taxes and thereby create that hidden tax called inflation. Politicians write the laws that take away our liberty in the name of fighting terrorism or crime or drugs. It is the height of folly to design a plan of monetary reform based on the assumed wisdom and incorruptibility of politicians.

If this morning we were to give politicians the right to create money out of nothing, by noon they would be swarmed by lobbyists from the banking industry, and by nightfall, most of them would have sold their souls. Nothing would change except appearances. The only solution that the power brokers fear is a system that does not allow bankers OR politicians to manipulate the money supply – and the only system that prevents that is one based on something of tangible value, something that, itself, cannot be created out of nothing. The only way to remove the temptation from both bankers AND politicians is to restrain them with a money system that is backed 100% by precious metal. Period! And all the half-truths about Talley Sticks and Greenbacks and Ben Franklin quotes cannot change that.

Incidentally, in 2005, Liberty International Entertainment released a made-for-TV documentary that echoed this same call for a new American fiat money to be issued by the government. That’s not surprising inasmuch as Bill Still was one of the writers and also appeared as an on-camera expert. The program included a segment devoted to Hewey Long in which he passionately advocates the classic Marxist nostrum of redistribution of wealth as a solution to the ills of society – and no one challenged it. Lincoln’s issuance of fiat money, called Greenbacks in violation of the Constitution, once again was presented as an act of statesmanship. There were numerous other flaws that seriously marred this otherwise excellent production, including the acceptance of the myth that JFK was assassinated because he opposed the international bankers. (For an analysis of this myth, go to www.freedom-force.org/freedomcontent.cfm?fuseaction=jfkmyth&refpage=issues.) If someone wanted to derail a movement for true monetary reform, they could not do better than to promote myths like this coupled with the ultimate non-solution called fiat money.

It is not my intent to attack Bill Still as a person. I have met him on several occasions and, although we are at opposite poles regarding our view of fiat money, I consider him to be well informed and sincere. Nor do I have any desire to become embroiled in endless debate on this topic. The publications and recordings listed below present just about everything I have to say on the topic. If I haven’t made my case by now, it is unlikely that further verbiage would help. My purpose in preparing this analysis is simply to accommodate those who have contacted me and wanted to know my opinion of these documentaries. My short answer is this: Fiat money is the problem, not the solution.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Book]

Bill Still doesn't think precious metals are necessarily bad, it's just only bad when you have a money unit that is of a small quantity that can easily be controlled by the elites.


That's the problem. Our rulers still own most of the gold and silver and guns.

[Ash_Williams]

I didn't watch this but no, I don't believe the gold standard is the solution.

First, we already had a gold standard. Who is to say another try will work out better?

Second, we don't have any gold anymore.

Third, a gold standard or fiat will both work fine when the government is working in the interests of the people. This will never be the case though, not ever. Power inevitably leads to corruption. Because of that, the flaws of both systems become apparent.

[Shami-Amourae]

MEET BILL STILL, FIAT-MONEY ADVOCATE
An analysis of the documentaries Money Masters and Capital Crimes
© 2006 by G. Edward Griffin


Thank you. I really have to think about all of this. It's really hard for me to understand what the best solution, considering government issued money would open the flood gates even more to huge government expansions, never seen before. There's flaws in all systems, but, as Ash_Williams points out, it's who controls the game the really matters at the end of the day.

[Jenna]

For those interested in learning more about Bill Still's viewpoints, here's a presentation he gave during a Tax Freedom Rally in 2006.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7027020665149585773#

[steveoc]

I do think this is a correct solution - issue money debt free and spend it into existence on public works programs.

Its been done before dozens of times. The only downside to this approach in the current environment is that does tend to earn you character assassination in the international press, followed by war, devastation and assassination ... examples of this are many.

The video above covered the American experience well, with the untimely assassinations of many a US president who dared to rock the boat and put the interests of their country before the interests of the banks.

Here is another more recent example of another country trying the exact same approach :

http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/bankrupt-germany.php



THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX:
HOW A BANKRUPT GERMANY SOLVED ITS INFRASTRUCTURE PROBLEMS

Guernsey wasn't the only government to solve its infrastructure problems by issuing its own money. (See E. Brown, "Waking Up on a Minnesota Bridge," www.webofdebt.com/articles/infrastructure-crisis.php, August 4, 2007.) A more notorious model is found in post-World War I Germany. When Hitler came to power, the country was completely, hopelessly broke. The Treaty of Versailles had imposed crushing reparations payments on the German people, who were expected to reimburse the costs of the war for all participants — costs totaling three times the value of all the property in the country. Speculation in the German mark had caused it to plummet, precipitating one of the worst runaway inflations in modern times. At its peak, a wheelbarrow full of 100 billion-mark banknotes could not buy a loaf of bread. The national treasury was empty, and huge numbers of homes and farms had been lost to the banks and speculators. People were living in hovels and starving. Nothing quite like it had ever happened before - the total destruction of the national currency, wiping out people's savings, their businesses, and the economy generally. Making matters worse, at the end of the decade global depression hit. Germany had no choice but to succumb to debt slavery to international lenders.

Or so it seemed. Hitler and the National Socialists, who came to power in 1933, thwarted the international banking cartel by issuing their own money. In this they took their cue from Abraham Lincoln, who funded the American Civil War with government-issued paper money called "Greenbacks." Hitler began his national credit program by devising a plan of public works. Projects earmarked for funding included flood control, repair of public buildings and private residences, and construction of new buildings, roads, bridges, canals, and port facilities. The projected cost of the various programs was fixed at one billion units of the national currency. One billion non-inflationary bills of exchange, called Labor Treasury Certificates, were then issued against this cost. Millions of people were put to work on these projects, and the workers were paid with the Treasury Certificates. This government-issued money wasn't backed by gold, but it was backed by something of real value. It was essentially a receipt for labor and materials delivered to the government. Hitler said, "for every mark that was issued we required the equivalent of a mark's worth of work done or goods produced." The workers then spent the Certificates on other goods and services, creating more jobs for more people.

Within two years, the unemployment problem had been solved and the country was back on its feet. It had a solid, stable currency, no debt, and no inflation, at a time when millions of people in the United States and other Western countries were still out of work and living on welfare. Germany even managed to restore foreign trade, although it was denied foreign credit and was faced with an economic boycott abroad. It did this by using a barter system: equipment and commodities were exchanged directly with other countries, circumventing the international banks. This system of direct exchange occurred without debt and without trade deficits. Germany's economic experiment, like Lincoln's, was short-lived; but it left some lasting monuments to its success, including the famous Autobahn, the world's first extensive superhighway.1

Hjalmar Schacht, who was then head of the German central bank, is quoted in a bit of wit that sums up the German version of the "Greenback" miracle. An American banker had commented, "Dr. Schacht, you should come to America. We've lots of money and that's real banking." Schacht replied, "You should come to Berlin. We don't have money. That's real banking."2

Although Hitler has rightfully gone down in infamy in the history books, he was quite popular with the German people, at least for a time. Stephen Zarlenga suggests in The Lost Science of Money that this was because he temporarily rescued Germany from English economic theory — the theory that money must be borrowed against the gold reserves of a private banking cartel rather than issued outright by the government.3 According to Canadian researcher Dr. Henry Makow, this may have been a chief reason Hitler had to be stopped: he had sidestepped the international bankers and created his own money. Makow quotes from the 1938 interrogation of C. G. Rakovsky, one of the founders of Soviet Bolsevism and a Trotsky intimate, who was tried in show trials in the USSR under Stalin. According to Rakovsky, Hitler had actually been funded by the international bankers, through their agent Hjalmar Schacht, in order to control Stalin, who had usurped power from their agent Trotsky. But Hitler had become an even bigger threat than Stalin when he had taken the bold step of printing his own money. Rakovsky said:

[Hitler] took over for himself the privilege of manufacturing money and not only physical moneys, but also financial ones; he took over the untouched machinery of falsification and put it to work for the benefit of the state . . . . Are you capable of imagining what would have come . . . if it had infected a number of other states . . . . If you can, then imagine its counterrevolutionary functions.4

Economist Henry C K Liu writes of Germany's remarkable transformation:

The Nazis came to power in Germany in 1933, at a time when its economy was in total collapse, with ruinous war-reparation obligations and zero prospects for foreign investment or credit. Yet through an independent monetary policy of sovereign credit and a full-employment public-works program, the Third Reich was able to turn a bankrupt Germany, stripped of overseas colonies it could exploit, into the strongest economy in Europe within four years, even before armament spending began.5

In Billions for the Bankers, Debts for the People (1984), Sheldon Emry commented:

Germany issued debt-free and interest-free money from 1935 and on, accounting for its startling rise from the depression to a world power in 5 years. Germany financed its entire government and war operation from 1935 to 1945 without gold and without debt, and it took the whole Capitalist and Communist world to destroy the German power over Europe and bring Europe back under the heel of the Bankers. Such history of money does not even appear in the textbooks of public (government) schools today.

....

These facts do not appear in any textbooks today. What does appear is the disastrous runaway inflation suffered in 1923 by the Weimar Republic, which governed Germany from 1919 to 1933. Today’s textbooks use this inflation to twist truth into its opposite. They cite the radical devaluation of the German mark as an example of what goes wrong when governments print their own money, rather than borrow it from private cartels.

In reality, the Weimar financial crisis began with the impossible reparations payments imposed at the Treaty of Versailles. Hjalmar Schacht [who was never a Nazi Party member either and now it appears clear why that was the case] – the Rothschild agent who was currency commissioner for the Republic — opposed letting the German government print its own money…
“The Treaty of Versailles is a model of ingenious measures for the economic destruction of Germany. Germany could not find any way of holding its head above the water, other than by the inflationary expedient of printing bank notes.”

Schacht echoes the textbook lie that Weimar inflation was caused when the German government printed its own money. However, in his 1967 book The Magic of Money, Schacht let the cat out of the bag by revealing that it was the PRIVATELY-OWNED Reich bank, not the German government, that was pumping new currency into the economy. Thus, the PRIVATE BANK caused the Weimar hyper-inflation.

Like the U.S. Federal Reserve, the Reich bank was overseen by appointed government officials, but was operated for private gain. What drove the wartime inflation into hyperinflation was speculation by foreign investors, who sold the mark short, betting on its decreasing value. In the manipulative device known as the short sale, speculators borrow something they don’t own, sell it, and then “cover” by buying it back at the lower price.

Speculation in the German mark was made possible because the PRIVATELY OWNED Reich bank (not yet under Nazi control) made massive amounts of currency available for borrowing. This currency, like U.S. currency today, was created with accounting entries on the bank’s books. Then the funny-money was lent at compound interest. When the Reich bank could not keep up with the voracious demand for marks, other private banks were allowed to create marks out of nothing, and to lend them at interest. The result was runaway debt and inflation.

Thus, according to Schacht himself, the German government did not cause the Weimar hyperinflation. On the contrary, the government (under the National Socialists) got hyperinflation under control. The National Socialists put the Reich bank under strict government regulation, and took prompt corrective measures to eliminate foreign speculation. One of those measures was to eliminate easy access to funny-money loans from private banks. Then Hitler got Germany back on its feet by having the public government issue Treasury Certificates.

Schacht , the Rothschild agent, disapproved of this government fiat money, and wound up getting fired as head of the Reich bank when he refused to issue it. Nonetheless, he acknowledged in his later memoirs that allowing the government to issue the money it needed did not produce the price inflation predicted by classical economic theory, which says that currency must be borrowed from private cartels.

What causes hyper-inflation is uncontrolled speculation. When speculation is coupled with debt (owed to private banking cartels) the result is disaster. On the other hand, when a government issues currency in carefully measured ways, it causes supply and demand to increase together, leaving prices unaffected. Hence there is no inflation, no debt, no unemployment, and no need for income taxes.

Naturally this terrifies the bankers, since it eliminates their powers. It also terrifies the internationalists, since their control of banking allows them to buy the media, the government, and everything else.



Whilst this allowed Germany to break free from the game, and enjoy economic prosperity - the resultant backlash from the banking community was predictable :

http://patdollard.com/wp-content/uploads/dresden.jpg

[Libertarian_Guard]

MEET BILL STILL, FIAT-MONEY ADVOCATE
An analysis of the documentaries Money Masters and Capital Crimes
© 2006 by G. Edward Griffin


Thank you. I really have to think about all of this. It's really hard for me to understand what the best solution, considering government issued money would open the flood gates even more to huge government expansions, never seen before. There's flaws in all systems, but, as Ash_Williams points out, it's who controls the game the really matters at the end of the day.

Hayek:The trouble is, in the mechanical system what forces politicians is the gold standard. The gold standard, even if it were nominally adopted now, would never work because people are not willing to play by the rules of the game. The rules of the game that the gold standard requires [say] that if you have an unfavorable balance of trade, you contract your currency. That's what no government can do--they'd rather go off the gold standard. In fact, I'm con- vinced that if we restored the gold standard now, within six months the first country would be off it and, within three years. it would completely disappear.


The gold standard was based on what was essentially an irrational superstition. As long as people believed there was no salvation but the gold standard, the thing could work. That illusion or superstition has been lost. We now can never successfully run a gold standard. I wish we could. Its largely as a result of this that I have been thinking of alternatives.

Reason: You have, at various times, championed a commodity-reserve monetary system and competition in the money supply. Are these practical alternatives to a govemment con- trolled central banking system?

Hayek: Yes. I have been convinced that while the idea of the commodity-reserve system is a good one, practically it is unmanageable. The idea of accumulating actual stocks of com- modities as reserves is so complex and impractical that it just cannot be done.


http://reason.com/archives/1992/07/01/the-road-from-serfdom/2

[Large Sarge]

oine thing that was fascinating, and new to me, was that colonial script was destroyed by British Counterfeiting.

I had always heard the war destroyed it.

Good Program.

The one thing all FIAT's risk is counterfeiting, the talley sticks solved it, but most other forms of FIAT do not.

Gold and silver are easily recognized, and except for tungsten slugs, almost impossible to counterfeit.

[Horn]

Many of us Gold-bugs literally overlooked this in the sense we liked how the film exposed the bankers/elites.

Is/was always on my mind, but when brought up on the old GIM it received very few replies. ;)

Perhaps there'll be more debate here as I think the crowd is a bit more rebellious & realize when your playing with gold your under the boot of the bankers.

Silver is a little different though.

I still have to watch the rest, only got about 20 minutes in.

[Horn]

Gold and silver are easily recognized, and except for tungsten slugs, almost impossible to counterfeit.


Could it be the bankers actually worked against themselves this time. ;D

[hoarder]

The solution is not any kind of system. The problem is not systemic. The problem is Khazars and the only way to solve it it by exposing it.
As Ponce once said "turn on the light in the kitchen and the cockroaches will scurry and hide".
Untill and unless the true history of the Khazars and their banking legacy is standardized in all history books and taught in all schools, no systemic solution will fix the problem once and for all.

[Horn]

The solution is not any kind of system. The problem is not systemic. The problem is Khazars and the only way to solve it it by exposing it.
As Ponce once said "turn on the light in the kitchen and the cockroaches will scurry and hide".
Untill and unless the true history of the Khazars and their banking legacy is standardized in all history books and taught in all schools, no systemic solution will fix the problem once and for all.


As stated the longest lasting currency in the history of man was the tallystick. Then there's the Roman example given.

Alls that needs to be done, is the door remained closed after instated.

[Libertarian_Guard]

The solution is not any kind of system. The problem is not systemic. The problem is Khazars and the only way to solve it it by exposing it.
As Ponce once said "turn on the light in the kitchen and the cockroaches will scurry and hide".
Untill and unless the true history of the Khazars and their banking legacy is standardized in all history books and taught in all schools, no systemic solution will fix the problem once and for all.


As stated the longest lasting currency in the history of man was the tallystick. Then there's the Roman example given.

Alls that needs to be done, is the door remained closed after instated.


But the door will never remained closed.

Just one example of why, is war. What government would be upstanding enough to raise the white flag of surrender, rather than devalue their currency?

Back to the drawing board.

[Horn]

There could be a plan for war too, alls that need be done is written down.

Maybe why the founders left it open for revision.

They could retrace the steps taken after war was won.

And again, I'm still wondering why the founders didn't detail the steps neccessary for the people to repeal a sitting representative of congress, or the entire bunch.

[singular_me]

I also noticed it was not a gold positive video. This may be due to if majority of gold is owned by the elite, any money backed by, they would still control. Plan on doing some digging on Bill Still later when I have time to see what the hell his motivation is. Did learn alot of history though. Did make me wonder what would happen to the price of gold if his wishes came true. I am sure it would always have worth, but over 1k?, I wonder.


I posted a video a while back that made a interesting statement... where did all the gold go since mankind began its extraction... someting to chew on.

My guess is that the day a real answer pops up, gold might cease to exist as money.

Without considering wild specualtionsm (it was taken way from earth), if it is just like in the diamond indystry regulating the price by concealing prodcution because diamonds are not as rare. it could get very ugly for the gold market.

will we ever find out in our life time?

[Ifyouseekay]

-

[Ash_Williams]

The solution is not any kind of system. The problem is not systemic. The problem is Khazars and the only way to solve it it by exposing it.
As Ponce once said "turn on the light in the kitchen and the cockroaches will scurry and hide".
Untill and unless the true history of the Khazars and their banking legacy is standardized in all history books and taught in all schools, no systemic solution will fix the problem once and for all.

That won't change things.
We'll be in 2015, all the textbooks are rewritten and kids will see the bankers of the 1900's as villains like hitler. Then what? They'll be grateful their new masters saved them from the evil banking masters. They're new oppressive tax system will be fair, unlike the old evil bad one.

Tax freedom day comes much later for us then it came for the peasants under the old feudal system, yet we believe they were practically slaves as opposed to how free we are now.

The name of the oppressors can change but nothing else will change until the masses stop appealing to authority for guidance and security.

Just look at all the people who don't mind the massive war spending now that the new figurehead is president instead of the old one. Torture is fine now. They cheer for a very republican method of health care reform, while if Bush had suggested forcing people to buy private insurance they would have booed.

People will always be preyed upon and ruled over because they demand it.

[Libertarian_Guard]

The solution is not any kind of system. The problem is not systemic. The problem is Khazars and the only way to solve it it by exposing it.
As Ponce once said "turn on the light in the kitchen and the cockroaches will scurry and hide".
Untill and unless the true history of the Khazars and their banking legacy is standardized in all history books and taught in all schools, no systemic solution will fix the problem once and for all.

That won't change things.
We'll be in 2015, all the textbooks are rewritten and kids will see the bankers of the 1900's as villains like hitler. Then what? They'll be grateful their new masters saved them from the evil banking masters. They're new oppressive tax system will be fair, unlike the old evil bad one.


People will always be preyed upon and ruled over because they demand it.


True that.

People insist on a hierarichal system, and perfef to be placed somewhere in the middle, or perhaps a little closer to the top. But it seldom works out like that, and only for brief moments of time.

[singular_me]

People insist on a hierarichal system, and perfef to be placed somewhere in the middle, or perhaps a little closer to the top. But it seldom works out like that, and only for brief moments of time.

I for one believe that money will foever be a problem and a cause of divide. Hierachy is the problem, masses are lazy to think for themselves.

I watched the whole video and it is appalling that population didnt rebel when going from one system that was propserous to one that left them in deep depression several years later.

Masses may need to see a total demise of the world economy to finally wake up, in the best case scenario.

The worse case scenario is...

[Dave Thomas]

So instead we should entrust our entire money supply to those in Washington who can issue money at their will?

And we would then have a money system administered by those in Congress as opposed to a Federal reserve system?

HA HA!

What lofty goals we place on our elected officials.

I'd leave money creation to the labor of man, and the scarcity of some good, before I give that right to some profundus maximus elected by the "Populace".

Because once you put the control of "Money" in anyone's hands it will continue to be manipulated.

Doesn't matter if it's made debt free, doesn't matter if it's printed by the billions.

There is no democracy in money creation.

[Apocalypto]

Thank you! Good stuff.

[Ash_Williams]

Hey Apocalypto! I didn't know you made it over here.
Welcome aboard.

[Shami-Amourae]

Bill Still himself just posted his film up on YouTube for everyone to see for FREE!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U71-KsDArFM

LINK UPDATED OCTOBER 28, 2010!

[JohnQPublic]

I think his conclusion in the Money Masters was that something more like a bimetallic system (gold and silver) or just gov. issued money would be preferable to a gold standard because the gold market can be manipulated by a few powerful people/organizations.

I will watch this when I have some time. Thanks for posting.

[synbi]

Thank you. I really have to think about all of this. It's really hard for me to understand what the best solution, considering government issued money would open the flood gates even more to huge government expansions, never seen before. There's flaws in all systems, but, as Ash_Williams points out, it's who controls the game the really matters at the end of the day.


Government issued money is definetely not the answer. It cannot be controlled nor put into good use because, fundamentally, it's a broken system. The state currently has a monopoly on money itself, so what do you reckon should be the common-sense approach to making it less broken and inefficient?

I think dismantling the state of this monopoly, the power to issue debt-based money, would be a great starting point. This can be easily done if anyone is allowed to compete against state monopoly on money itself, by letting people form their competing currencies and money systems without fear of getting harassed, censored or silenced by the state or the mass media.

[JohnQPublic]

Thank you. I really have to think about all of this. It's really hard for me to understand what the best solution, considering government issued money would open the flood gates even more to huge government expansions, never seen before. There's flaws in all systems, but, as Ash_Williams points out, it's who controls the game the really matters at the end of the day.


Government issued money is definetely not the answer. It cannot be controlled nor put into good use because, fundamentally, it's a broken system. The state currently has a monopoly on money itself, so what do you reckon should be the common-sense approach to making it less broken and inefficient?

I think dismantling the state of this monopoly, the power to issue debt-based money, would be a great starting point. This can be easily done if anyone is allowed to compete against state monopoly on money itself, by letting people form their competing currencies and money systems without fear of getting harassed, censored or silenced by the state or the mass media.


When the country first started, foreign gold and silver coin was regularly and legally circulated.

[DMac]

Competing monetary systems at the nation to state level is the answer, IMO, and is a revolutionary change in thinking from our current paradigm.

Monopoly practices in monetary systems seem to have always ended poorly.

[Book]

Still claims that it would be a mistake to return to a gold-backed monetary system because most of the world’s gold now is held by the bankers. This is a deceptively appealing argument. First, it is not true. Central banks do hold more gold than any other single entity; but the total inventory of gold in the hands of private citizens, as bullion or coins or jewelry or known deposits in working mines, is much larger. If money were to be restored to a precious-metal base, this largely invisible reserve would be more than adequate to supply the demand.

http://www.jrbooksonline.com/jew-bwa-ha-ha.gif

Yeah...the Khazars are gonna just donate all their private gold so we can all use it as "real" money...lol.

:ROFL:

[Silver Rocket Bitches!]

No money standard can survive as long as the greed standard prevails.

Not the fiat standard, not the gold standard, not the bi-metallic standard.

Like Ron Paul said, we can barely maintain the zinc standard...

[Horn]

Bill Still himself just posted his film up on YouTube for everyone to see for FREE!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D22TlYA8F2E

LINK UPDATED AUGUST 14, 2010!


Thanks again, now just Gold may be a mistake... include Silver, or even copper & everything would be much better.

Besides large tracks of Earth being subject to strip mining (ie: Orcs - Lord of the Rings) there'd be little to worry about.

[Twisted Titan]

Still claims that, because the bankers have operated a gigantic monetary scam for hundreds of years, it is time to break their grip over our lives and establish a fair and honest monetary system We could not agree more on that point. But then, in the tradition of Greider and Stinnett, he attempts to lead us to a non-solution. He claims that we should take this power from the bankers and give it to the politicians, because they are chosen by the people and, therefore, can be trusted.


Absolute superb analysis by Griffin and dead on.

Gold and Silver in the hands of the Citzen is the most effective means of protecting ones labor and prosperity.

Anybody advocating anuthing else is either one of two things:

Delusional or a Agent of behalf of those to wish to remain Masters of us all.

T

[Horn]

Well there are some places where the Governing body is Constitutionalized so that it is inherently trusted.

Somewhere over the "Double Rainbow". :D

[Silver Rocket Bitches!]

Thank you. I really have to think about all of this. It's really hard for me to understand what the best solution, considering government issued money would open the flood gates even more to huge government expansions, never seen before. There's flaws in all systems, but, as Ash_Williams points out, it's who controls the game the really matters at the end of the day.


Government issued money is definetely not the answer. It cannot be controlled nor put into good use because, fundamentally, it's a broken system. The state currently has a monopoly on money itself, so what do you reckon should be the common-sense approach to making it less broken and inefficient?

I think dismantling the state of this monopoly, the power to issue debt-based money, would be a great starting point. This can be easily done if anyone is allowed to compete against state monopoly on money itself, by letting people form their competing currencies and money systems without fear of getting harassed, censored or silenced by the state or the mass media.


Fail.

Like that one jew said, "give me control of a nation's currency and I care not who makes its laws."

Once upon a time, we had competing currencies in this country. They were absorbed by the FED.

[Ponce]

Wowwwwwww wowwwwww WOWWWWWWWWWWWWWW........Shami? I would like to have given you three stars instead of only one.......thank you.

This film should be seen by all those living in the US by being shown on all TV channels........long ago I knew what was happening but not the mechanics of it....... "The past is the present and the present is the past and could be the future, unless something is done about it"

My mind is now in a swimming pool of knowledge where either I must think or sink.....the kind of dilemma that I love.

If what is going on in actuality is allowed to proceed, as in the past, the the future will be of one controlled by the money lenders were you all will become slaves to the new system.

Another movie that comes to mind is "Dune" where we can also see what is going on today.

[Horn]

Wowwwwwww wowwwwww WOWWWWWWWWWWWWWW........Shami? I would like to have given you three stars instead of only one.......thank you.


https://www.aabookings.ie/img/selfcater3star.jpg

[Awoke]

tag

[Horn]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeTkT5-w5RA

"You shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns, you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold."

http://projects.vassar.edu/1896/crossofgold.html

[Book]

This may be due to if majority of gold is owned by the elite, any money backed by, they would still control.



That's the problem of a gold standard. They possess most of the gold.

[Horn]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U71-KsDArFM&feature=player_embedded

What a great piece of work this was, the presentation was so much better than the original.

Crank it up to 480p & go full screen.

If it were a tad bit shorter, most of the sheep might even be able to sit through it.

Should be required viewing in all schools.