Log in

View Full Version : Slaying the Debt Spider



Large Sarge
19th July 2010, 02:37 AM
Slaying the Debt Spider

Slaying the Debt Spider

July 17, 2010


The webs of deception and debt are controlled by an evil spider that is seldom seen.

"There are two ways to conquer and enslave a nation. One is by the sword. The other is by debt."
- U.S. President John Adams

"Britain is the slave of an international financial bloc."
- British Prime Minister David Lloyd George, June 20, 1934


"If the American people only understood the rank injustice of our money and banking system, there would be a revolution before morning."
- U.S. President Andrew Jackson, 1829

"The few who understand the system will either be so interested in its profits or so dependent upon its favors that there will be no opposition from that class while, on the other hand, the great body of people, mentally incapable of comprehending…will bear its burdens without complaint."
- The Rothschild brothers of London writing to associates in New York, 1863

"There is a much larger group behind these [9/11 attacks] which is the international banking cartel which controls trillions of dollars and which has an interest in controlling countries in the Middle East which are not under their control."
- Professor Steven E. Jones on KUER (Salt Lake City's NPR affiliate), September 5, 2006

I have recently been listed in something called the Encyclopedia of American Loons, which is being put together (in alphabetical order) by Ryan Nathaniel Lake, a 33-year-old post-graduate student of philosophy at the University of Miami. Lake, originally from Muskegon, Michigan, lives in Miami Beach and teaches on the virtual college website of Miami Dade College.


The Pacific Loon is a strong swimmer

By definition, a loon is one of the fish-eating, diving birds of the genus Gavia of northern regions, but "loon" is also used informally to mean a person who "is crazy or deranged", which is apparently how Ryan Lake views me. At the bottom of my entry he provides this "diagnosis".

Diagnosis: Complete loon and master at interpreting the fact that anyone disagrees with him, for whatever reason, as evidence for the truth of his conspiracy theories. Specific impact uncertain, but his views are apparently relatively widespread and must be considered dangerous.

Dangerous to whom? Exactly to whom are my views dangerous? To the American people who are suffering under a mountain of debt and whose loved ones are made to fight an utterly fraudulent war in Afghanistan and Iraq? My views about what happened on 9-11 are based on documented facts and evidence that are in the public domain. The evidence from 9-11, such as the discovery of super-thermite in the dust of the World Trade Center, is certainly dangerous to the Zionist criminals who carried out the false-flag terror attacks and the Elders of Zion from the House of Rothschild who control them, because it liberates us from their web of deception about what really happened - and why.



A large amount of super-thermite was found in the dust of the pulverized World Trade Center. This extremely powerful explosive coating was made using nanotechnology and evidently applied to the floor pans of the Twin Towers. This scientific evidence exposes the government and media explanation of 9-11 as nothing but a pack of lies. Who profits from America's extremely costly wars in the Middle East? Ask the Rothschild Debt Spider.

Although he is clearly hostile to my thesis, Lake does a fair job summing it up:

9-11 was the product of a Zionist conspiracy (in particular organized by the Rothschild family) – the Zionist conspiracy that controls the US government and media. They have also infiltrated the Senate, as shown by Bollyn’s razor-sharp and fearless investigations, e.g. “Arlen Specter - The Elder of Zion in the U.S. Senate”. Henry Kissinger is at the top of the conspiracy, and “still a key player in the crimocracy as seen by the conspicuous fact that he was sent by the new Obama administration to meet with the leadership of Russia, although the nominal Secretary of State was Hillary Clinton.” I guess you can’t argue with evidence like that.

SLAYING THE DEBT SPIDER


The second part of "The Coming American Revolution" will be my next article. It may be titled "Slaying the Spider" because it will deal with identifying the spider which has woven the web of deception and debt in which we find ourselves and our nation(s) trapped.


The American people are clearly enraged by the Rothschild criminal "banksters" and their corruption of the government and media monopoly. Even the most conservative Encyclopedia Britannica article on the Rothschild family describes it as a criminal enterprise.

Americans are deeply enraged and the revolutionary zeal is clearly palpable. The U.S. population was against the bail-out of Zionist banksters 1,000 to 1, but public opinion didn't slow down the trillion dollar transfer of wealth to the criminals for one minute. How do we wage a revolution if we don't even know who we are fighting against? We need to know exactly who the enemy is before we can take effective action of any kind.

Our American republic is in an extreme debt crisis that has been caused by the Rothschild bankers who control the world by controlling the money supply and keeping the governments of the world in deep debt. Ellen Hodgson Brown, the author of an excellent book entitled The Web of Debt, says this about the coming revolution in the chapter "Stepping from Scarcity into Abundance":

Wars, competition and strife are the inevitable results of this scarcity-driven system. The obvious solution is to eliminate the parasitic banking scheme that is feeding on the world's prosperity. But how? The Witches of Wall Street are not likely to release their vice-like grip without some sort of revolution, and a violent revolution would probably fail, because the world's most feared military machine is already in the hands of the money cartel. Violent revolution would just furnish them with an excuse to test their equipment.

I agree with Ellen Brown, who refers to the familiar Wizard of Oz allegory throughout her most readable work, that it is the Debt Spider that must be vanquished. Our nation(s) and our lives are stuck fast in a very sticky web of debt while our minds are trapped tightly in the controlled-media web of deception. These webs both belong to a spider that remains out of sight. Although we can see those who are caught in the web, we don't see the spider.

In the allegorical Wizard of Oz, the courageous Lion killed the great spider, who symbolizes the head of the international banking cartel: "With one blow of his heavy paw, all armed with sharp claws, he knocked the spider's head from its body."

To free ourselves from the ocean of debt that is drowning our nation and killing prosperity we must kill the Debt Spider. How is the Rothschild debt spider to be slain in the real world?

Hans Schicht, author of "The Death of Banking and Macro Politics", explains how:

If prime ministers and presidents would only be blessed with the most basic knowledge of the perversity of banking, they would not go onto their knees to the Central Banker and ask His Highness for loans…With a little bit of brains they would expropriate all banking institutions.

The first banking institution that needs to be nationalized is the Federal Reserve System. To return the control over the supply and value of money to the U.S. government is the only realistic solution to the debt crisis.


As financial writer John Hoefle wrote:

This is not an academic question, as the Fed is actively involved in looting the American population for the benefit of giant U.S. and global financial institutions, and the global casino. Few Americans have any idea the extent to which the Fed and its system reach into their pockets on a daily basis, and the extent to which their standard of living has been eroded by the financier-led deindustrialization of the United States.

VULTURE CAPITALISM

Louis T. McFadden, Chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee filed a Petition for Articles of Impeachment against the Federal Reserve Board in 1934. He told Congress:

This evil institution has impoverished and ruined the people of these United States, has bankrupted itself, and has practically bankrupted our Government. It has done this through the defects of the law under which it operates, through the maladministration of that law by the Fed, and through the corrupt practices of the moneyed vultures who control it.

The struggle between the people of the United States and the House of Rothschild is older than the American republic. The Rothschild banking cartel and its desire to control the money supply was actually behind the American Revolution of 1776, the War of 1812, and the Civil War. This same international banking cartel is certainly behind the current debt crisis and the costly wars in the Middle East, which are the root causes of the revolutionary fervor in America today. The coming revolution is not against the U.S. government per se but should be targeted against the specific agent which has corrupted our government. As Ellen Brown says, "What has allowed government to become corrupted today is that it is actually run by the money cartel."

William Jennings Bryan, the Democratic candidate for the presidency in 1896, won the nomination with his famous "Cross of Gold" speech, in which he aimed his criticism squarely at the international banking cartel. Bryan explained the problem - and the solution - in plain English:

I stand with Jefferson…and tell them, as he did, that the issue of money is a function of the government and that the banks should go out of the governing business...when we have restored the money of the Constitution, all other necessary reforms will be possible, and...until that is done there is no reform that can be accomplished.

1970 silver art
19th July 2010, 04:56 AM
The "Debt Spider" is growing and getting fatter and eventually that "Debt Spider" will collapse under its own weight when the dollar completely collapses in value. That is the way that I see it. Just my opinion.

jetgraphics
19th July 2010, 05:38 AM
Debt is not the problem.
Usury is the problem.
That the debt is magnitudes greater than the sum of money tokens is the problem (thanks to usury).
BTW - Congress has no power to issue money. See Art.1, Sec. 8. It can coin money (stamp bullion) or borrow money. If it had the power to create money, why need to borrow it?

1970 silver art
19th July 2010, 05:49 AM
Debt is not the problem.
Usury is the problem.
That the debt is magnitudes greater than the sum of money tokens is the problem (thanks to usury).
BTW - Congress has no power to issue money. See Art.1, Sec. 8. It can coin money (stamp bullion) or borrow money. If it had the power to create money, why need to borrow it?


It will not matter in the end because it (debt and usury) is so out of control and there seems to be no turning back. None of this is sustainable. The end result is still going to be a completely collapsed dollar.

jetgraphics
19th July 2010, 07:18 AM
Debt is not the problem.
Usury is the problem.
That the debt is magnitudes greater than the sum of money tokens is the problem (thanks to usury).
BTW - Congress has no power to issue money. See Art.1, Sec. 8. It can coin money (stamp bullion) or borrow money. If it had the power to create money, why need to borrow it?


It will not matter in the end because it (debt and usury) is so out of control and there seems to be no turning back. None of this is sustainable. The end result is still going to be a completely collapsed dollar.

The dollar bill is not a dollar.
See Title 12 USC sec. 411.
Since 1933, a dollar bill has been worthless (no par value). In fact, it is a minus value. You can't get any lower than less than zero.
However, if you are one of the enumerated "human resources" pledged as collateral on that debt, you are in deep kimchee!

1970 silver art
19th July 2010, 07:50 AM
Ok Jetgraphics. Fair enough. I take your word for it. I stand corrected.

Phoenix
19th July 2010, 11:18 AM
DEFAULT - the most effective pesticide for the debt spider.

sirgonzo420
19th July 2010, 11:20 AM
DEFAULT - the most effective pesticide for the debt spider.


And if you're gonna default, be a Ruthless Defaulter!

;) ;D

Phoenix
19th July 2010, 11:25 AM
Debt is not the problem.
Usury is the problem.


Both are a problem, especially when the debt is used for an "investment" that will not return far more than the debt owed.




BTW - Congress has no power to issue money. See Art.1, Sec. 8. It can coin money (stamp bullion) or borrow money.


Of course it does. Yours is a misreading of the Constitution. It has every right to print DEBT-FREE, USURY-FREE United States Notes, preferably backed with tangible goods (precious metals usually). If you insist on taking "coin" fully literally, then the First Amendment only applies to hand presses and quill pens, and the Second, only to muskets.




If it had the power to create money, why need to borrow it?


It has the power to create money...the problem is that (mostly Jewish) banksters have PURCHASED the US Government, and force the Congress to borrow fake "money" from the "Federal" Reserve.

Phoenix
19th July 2010, 11:26 AM
DEFAULT - the most effective pesticide for the debt spider.


And if you're gonna default, be a Ruthless Defaulter!

;) ;D




http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/26/weekinreview/26streitfeld.html

When Debtors Decide to Default

By DAVID STREITFELD
Published: July 25, 2009

Those on the front lines of the debt industry say there is a small but increasingly noticeable group of strapped consumers who, like Ms. Birks, are deciding they will simply stop paying. After loading up on debt eagerly provided by the card companies during the boom times, these people now find themselves trapped in an endless cycle where they are charged interest on interest and fees upon fees while the lenders get government bailouts.

They are upset — at the unyielding banks and often at their free-spending selves — and are pre-emptively defaulting. They could continue to pay for a while longer but instead are walking away. “You reach a point where you embrace the darkness of default,” said Adam Levin, chairman of the financial products Web site Credit.com.

The lending industry term for these people is “ruthless defaulters.” In a miserable economy where paychecks, savings and expectations are all diminished, their numbers will surely grow.

“They’ve done the math on their account and they’re very angry,” said Corey Calabrese, a Fordham Law student who is an administrator of the school’s walk-in clinic for debtors at Manhattan Civil Court. Public sentiment is on their side, she added: “For the first time, Americans are no longer blaming the borrower but are looking at the credit card companies.”

(That’s certainly true in the mortgage crisis. According to a Quinnipiac University poll in February, 62 percent of those polled blamed lenders “who loaned the money to people who may not be able to pay it back.” Only a quarter blamed homeowners.)

The deteriorating relationship between Americans and their creditors has not yet reached the level of Shays’ Rebellion, the 1786 uprising by poor farmers in western Massachusetts during a recession. But the basic issues are strikingly similar, suggesting an eternal tension between creditor and consumer.

Boston merchants, who were suffering themselves, aggressively sought payment from their customers. When the folks could not pay, which was often, they were jailed. The incensed farmers sought “reforms that would permit repayment on less destructive terms,” writes Bruce H. Mann in “Republic of Debtors,” a history of bankruptcy in early America. “Creditors replied with lectures on frugality, luxury, virtue and the sanctity of obligations.”

Shays’ Rebellion provoked mixed reactions, then and now. Were the rebels trying to remedy grievous wrongs in the spirit of the Revolutionary War, or were they threatening public order and the fledgling state — acting as terrorists, in the modern parlance? Shays’ followers were quickly arrested and quickly pardoned, although two were hanged.

Ruthless defaulters today face different perils. Delinquency destroys credit scores, can prompt a lawsuit and guarantees a very large number of hostile calls from collection agencies.

Still, all that can seem the better alternative. Like many who default, Ms. Birks first asked her credit card company to lower her 19 percent interest rate. No dice, Bank of America responded. After she tried to get the bank’s attention by skipping a payment, it immediately raised her rate to 25 percent. As Ms. Birks’ debt swelled, so did a sense of injustice mingled with helplessness.

Bank of America has its hands full, with a June default rate of 13.8 percent, up from 12.5 percent in May. The other major credit card companies are in a similar fix. Estimates of the total industry losses are over $100 billion for the current recession.

Collectors are noticing a shift not only in ability but in willingness to pay. “With all the bailouts the government is giving everyone, no one has any personal accountability about their own debts,” said Roger Knauf, who runs a trade group of debt-buying firms.

Many of today’s debtors were maxed out long before the recession. Much of this debt was of course in the form of junky mortgages on wildly overpriced houses, and it was here that people first began to rebel.

Countrywide Financial, the country’s biggest and most aggressive lender, surveyed its customers about why they were defaulting in the summer of 2007. One of the leading reasons was “low regard for property ownership.” In other words, people concluded that owning these houses was a bad deal.

That people would intentionally default on loans they never should have gotten in the first place took lenders by surprise. “I’m astonished that people would walk away from their homes,” Bank of America chief executive Kenneth Lewis said in late 2007.

Nineteen months later, walking away from mortgages is widespread if impossible to quantify, and no cause for embarrassment. Rather the opposite: it shows savviness. “I’ll walk away before I take a loss,” a Dallas financier recently boasted to Barron’s magazine about his efforts to sell his $6 million vacation estate.

With credit cards, this type of chest-pounding seems less evident, at least so far. Ms. Birks, 43, readily admits that no one forced her to use her cards. “Some people are good with money,” she said. “I was stupid.”

Still, just about everyone made mistakes during the boom — regulators, Congress, Wall Street. If Bank of America got a bailout for making bad loans, Ms. Birks figured, she deserved a bailout for accepting them.

“You have to start looking at the future,” says Ms. Birks, who has been a writer and editor for various publications. “I already feel horrible because I can’t find a good job.” She earns $15 an hour as a copy editor for a magazine and does other part-time work.

In previous downturns, Ms. Birks’ only recourse would have been a debt management plan, where she would restructure her payments with the help of a counselor, or bankruptcy. Now there is a third option: debt settlement. This means going on strike until the lender accepts a partial payment.

Ms. Birks asked Bank of America about a settlement this spring. Since her account was up to date, she was told she didn’t qualify. She stopped paying, the bank started calling.

When Bank of America finally got her on the phone, it agreed for the first time to drastically reduce her interest rate. She did not take the deal, but considered it progress.

» A version of this article appeared in print on July 26, 2009, on page WK6 of the New York edition.

Hatha Sunahara
19th July 2010, 11:28 AM
Default means a slave rebellion--a modern version of what Spartacus did. Here's why people are so reluctant to default:

http://99percentspace.wordpress.com/2010/07/18/the-modern-slaves-guide-to-modern-slavery/

Most people don't recognize debt as slavery. What their willingness to be slaves has done is to make it so that slavery is imposed also on people who have no debt.

It just means you can't say no. If we all learn to say no, we're free.


Hatha

sirgonzo420
19th July 2010, 11:49 AM
Debt is not the problem.
Usury is the problem.


Both are a problem, especially when the debt is used for an "investment" that will not return far more than the debt owed.




BTW - Congress has no power to issue money. See Art.1, Sec. 8. It can coin money (stamp bullion) or borrow money.


Of course it does. Yours is a misreading of the Constitution. It has every right to print DEBT-FREE, USURY-FREE United States Notes, preferably backed with tangible goods (precious metals usually). If you insist on taking "coin" fully literally, then the First Amendment only applies to hand presses and quill pens, and the Second, only to muskets.




If it had the power to create money, why need to borrow it?


It has the power to create money...the problem is that (mostly Jewish) banksters have PURCHASED the US Government, and force the Congress to borrow fake "money" from the "Federal" Reserve.


I think the only reason the gov't could lawfully print United States Notes is because of a declared EMERGENCY.

They were intended to COIN money (from metal) not PRINT it - unless there was some overriding emergency.

TPTB sure love their damn emergencies! >:(

7th trump
19th July 2010, 11:58 AM
Debt is not the problem.
Usury is the problem.


Both are a problem, especially when the debt is used for an "investment" that will not return far more than the debt owed.




BTW - Congress has no power to issue money. See Art.1, Sec. 8. It can coin money (stamp bullion) or borrow money.


Of course it does. Yours is a misreading of the Constitution. It has every right to print DEBT-FREE, USURY-FREE United States Notes, preferably backed with tangible goods (precious metals usually). If you insist on taking "coin" fully literally, then the First Amendment only applies to hand presses and quill pens, and the Second, only to muskets.




If it had the power to create money, why need to borrow it?


It has the power to create money...the problem is that (mostly Jewish) banksters have PURCHASED the US Government, and force the Congress to borrow fake "money" from the "Federal" Reserve.

I think you are wrong on the printing of money. I beleive money came from the state level not the federal level.

Phoenix
19th July 2010, 10:47 PM
Most people don't recognize debt as slavery. What their willingness to be slaves has done is to make it so that slavery is imposed also on people who have no debt.


Debt is slavery only when they can force you to pay. For all but the upper middle-class and better, that's not possible...at this point in time.

Phoenix
19th July 2010, 10:49 PM
I think the only reason the gov't could lawfully print United States Notes is because of a declared EMERGENCY.

They were intended to COIN money (from metal) not PRINT it - unless there was some overriding emergency.

TPTB sure love their damn emergencies! >:(


I agree that the US Government should coin gold or silver money, but, if the US Mint merely coins base metals, what's the difference between, say, a $1 United States Note, and a $1 aluminum, bronze, or even copper coin? A few cents?

jetgraphics
20th July 2010, 07:58 PM
It [Congress] has every right to print DEBT-FREE, USURY-FREE United States Notes
First, government has delegated powers - NOT rights.
Second, Congress has no power to print "debt-free" debt.

In the law, in the public record, lawful money is defined as gold and silver coin.
In the law, a note is NOT money. (It may be tender, but it is NOT money)
A Federal Reserve note is a promise to pay money - in the future.
If the Congress emits "debt-free" US Notes, from whom will they get all that gold / silver coin to redeem that debt that you claim does not exist?

If you can show a law or court decision that supports your claims, please present it.

jetgraphics
20th July 2010, 08:12 PM
I agree that the US Government should coin gold or silver money, but, if the US Mint merely coins base metals, what's the difference between, say, a $1 United States Note, and a $1 aluminum, bronze, or even copper coin? A few cents?

The law says there is a difference.

Part of the problem stems from "money madness" and the belief that a money token must have intrinsic value independent of the marketplace.

Frankly, money is a "nothing" - an abstraction - an accounting symbol for the reality in the marketplace.

The banksters / usurers / TPTB rely on fooling the people into seeking after money, and miss the thievery done with it.

In my humble opinion, only creators of surplus goods and services have the power to create the medium of exchange with which to trade that output.

Governments, being consumers, should never have power to create money .. .. which the USCON does not grant to Congress.

What I discerned from reading the law, and seeing the curious small print on "free" coupons (1/20 cent cash value), is that a private promissory note (i.e., coupon) has a value denominated in a service or product - but not recognizable as money in a court of law.

Therefore, it is reasonable for private people (not chattel "human resources") to issue private notes denominated in anything but money**, and use those notes as an accounting system, a medium of exchange with which to facilitate trade.

**(Since 1933, no dollars have circulated. So anyone signing a promissory note denominated in dollars is probably guilty of fraud.)