PDA

View Full Version : All Wars Are Bankers Wars



Cebu_4_2
18th April 2014, 02:26 PM
All Wars Are Bankers Wars in Documentaries (http://csglobe.com/documentaries/) January 13, 2014 703 Views


All Wars Are Bankers Wars: United States had almost ruined the nation’s economy, while enriching the bankers
http://youtu.be/5hfEBupAeo4
http://youtu.be/5hfEBupAeo4

All Wars Are Bankers Wars: The United States fought the American Revolution primarily over King George III’s Currency act, which forced the colonists to conduct their business only using printed bank notes borrowed from the Bank of England at interest. After the revolution, the new United States adopted a radically different economic system in which the government issued its own value-based money (http://csglobe.com/former-presidents-warn-about-invisible-government/), so that private banks like the Bank of England were not siphoning off the wealth of the people through interest-bearing bank notes.

“The refusal of King George 3rd to allow the colonies to operate an honest money system, which freed the ordinary man from the clutches of the money manipulators, was probably the prime cause of the revolution.” — Benjamin Franklin, Founding Father But bankers are nothing if not dedicated to their schemes to acquire your wealth, and know full well how easy it is to corrupt a nation’s leaders. Just one year after Mayer Amschel Rothschild had uttered his infamous “Let me issue and control a nation’s money and I care not who makes the laws”, the bankers succeeded in setting up a new Private Central Bank called the First Bank of the United States, largely through the efforts of the Rothschild’s chief US supporter, Alexander Hamilton.


http://csglobe.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/bankers-wars-2.jpg

“I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is now controlled by its system of credit. We are no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.” — Woodrow Wilson 1919

Founded in 1791, by the end of its twenty year charter the First Bank of the United States had almost ruined the nation’s economy (http://csglobe.com/25-fast-facts-about-the-federal-reserve/), while enriching the bankers. Congress refused to renew the charter and signaled their intention to go back to a state issued value based currency on which the people paid no interest at all to any banker. This resulted in a threat from Nathan Mayer Rothschild against the US Government, “Either the application for renewal of the charter is granted, or the United States will find itself involved in a most disastrous war.” Congress still refused to renew the charter for the First Bank of the United States, whereupon Nathan Mayer Rothschild railed, “Teach those impudent Americans a lesson! Bring them back to colonial status!”


The British Prime Minister at the time, Spencer Perceval was adamantly opposed to war with the United States, primarily because the majority of England’s military might was occupied with the ongoing Napoleonic wars. Spencer Perceval was concerned that Britain might not prevail in a new American war, a concern shared by many in the British government. Then, Spencer Perceval was assassinated (the only British Prime Minister to be assassinated in office) and replaced by Robert Banks Jenkinson, the 2nd Earl of Liverpool, who was fully supportive of a war to recapture the colonies.


Financed at virtually no interest by the Rothschild controlled Bank of England, Britain then provoked the war of 1812 to recolonize the United States and force them back into the slavery of the Bank of England, or to plunge the United States into so much debt they would be forced to accept a new private central bank. And the plan worked. Even though the War of 1812 was won by the United States, Congress was forced to grant a new charter for yet another private bank issuing the public currency as loans at interest, the Second Bank of the United States. Once again, private bankers were in control (http://csglobe.com/who-really-runs-the-world/) of the nation’s money supply and cared not who made the laws or how many British and American soldiers had to die for it.

mick silver
18th April 2014, 02:32 PM
knew this for many many years now all wars are for the very rich

Libertarian_Guard
18th April 2014, 07:32 PM
Andrew Jackson, 1834:

Gentlemen! I too have been a close observer of the doings of the Bank of the United States. I have had men watching you for a long time, and am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves. I have determined to rout you out, and by the Eternal, (bringing his fist down on the table) I will rout you out!

PatColo
4th June 2014, 08:06 PM
The Jew Hand Behind the World Wars (http://inconvenienthistory.com/archive/2013/volume_5/number_2/the_jewish_hand_in_the_world_wars.php) Thomas Dalton
Inconvenient History (http://inconvenienthistory.com/archive/2013/volume_5/number_2/the_jewish_hand_in_the_world_wars.php)
June 1, 2014


In 2006, an inebriated Mel Gibson allegedly said this: “The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world.” There followed the predicable storm of anti-anti-Semitism, ad hominem attacks, and various other slanders against Gibson’s character. But virtually no one asked the question: Is he right? Or rather this: To what degree could he be right?


Clearly Jews can’t be responsible for all the world’s wars, but might they have had a hand in many wars—at least amongst those countries in which they lived or interacted? Given their undeniable influence in those nations where they exceed even a fraction of a percent of the population, Jews must be responsible, to some degree, for at least some of what government does, both good and bad. Jews are often praised as brilliant managers, economists, and strategists, and have been granted seemingly endless awards and honors. But those given credit for their successes must also receive blame for their failures. And there are few greater failures in the lives of nations than war.


To begin to evaluate Gibson’s charge, I will look at the role Jews played in the two major wars of world history, World Wars I and II. But first I need to recap some relevant history in order to better understand the context of Jewish policy and actions during those calamitous events.


Historical Context

more: http://inconvenienthistory.com/archive/2013/volume_5/number_2/the_jewish_hand_in_the_world_wars.php

Santa
4th June 2014, 10:49 PM
A, men to that.

Cebu_4_2
5th June 2014, 05:28 AM
Andrew Jackson, 1834:

Gentlemen! I too have been a close observer of the doings of the Bank of the United States. I have had men watching you for a long time, and am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves. I have determined to rout you out, and by the Eternal, (bringing his fist down on the table) I will rout you out!

Somehow he failed.

Libertarian_Guard
5th June 2014, 01:19 PM
Somehow he failed.

No. President Jackson succeeded, he kept his word.

dook everl
5th June 2014, 01:58 PM
How does a goy become Jewish?? That would be like an Asian becoming a Negro.

The Jewish World, December 14th, 1922: "The Jew remains a Jew, even when he changes his religion; a Christian who adopts the Jewish religion would not thereby become a Jew, because the quality of the Jew does not lie in the Religion, but in the Race, and a Jew free-thinker atheist remains as much a Jew as any Rabbi."

"We Jews regard our race as superior to all humanity, and look forward, not to its ultimate union with other races, but to its triumph over them." (Goldwin Smith, Jewish Professor of Modern History at Oxford University, October, 1981)