DC Lawmaker Claims ‘Rothchilds control the Federal Government’ & The World Bank

a reply to: BotheLumberJack

This is so obvious but the problem is enough people don't seem to care.

How come we never see people marching their @s53$ to their house in France to protest?

So how do we bring them down without wrecking the entire world economy to do so?

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

You wreck the world economy and blame them.

Its fake and entirely theirs anyways.

Wreck away. The next day there will be a new system forming everywhere a power vacuum is felt.

a reply to: liejunkie01

Are you confused or surprised? I'm not.

a reply to: tadaman

Wreck away. The next day there will be a new system forming everywhere a power vacuum is felt.

This is it....get some!!

blockonomi.com...

I have to link this thread again. I think it is one of the most eye opening threads I've seen on ATS.

Their Own Words Tell the Story.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The Rothschild's are the ones that own all the reserve banks around the world. They are Trillionaires, they own Associated Press, they bough Reuters around 1875.

It was their plan to return the Jews to Palestine over 100 years ago, it wasn't about the Bible and the Jew's it was about having a oil platform in the middle east.

After WWll, someone ask the Rothschild's what were they going to do with the Jewish refuges, their response was well would you want them living next door to you.

And Hitler was ready to release all of the Jews for a dollar a head, but the Jews in charge said no , they wanted the blood sacrifice.

The Rothchilds are Satanist, in the Movie "Eyes wide shut" it wasn't far off it was filmed in one of the Rothschild mansions. When they have parties they have all the macabre, such as plastic baby dolls ripped apart and strewn around for decor.

These are the worst of the money changers, they run the World, and they believe there are to many Eaters on the planet, wasting the natural resources. They no longer need workers they have the machine.

Why is this in 'breaking alternative news'?

This stuff has been "reported" constantly for over 60 years at least. The Rothchilds are not the only 'owners' of big institutions. There are also Saudis, Murdochs, Koch's, Morgans, etc, etc, etc.

There is nothing breaking about it.

There is nothing alternative about it.

There is nothing news about it.

The Rothchilds are only targets of this non-sense because they are Jewish. It is stupid and childish to keep rolling this gumph around all the time.

Sheesh.

It was essentially a non-story until the Washington Post got ahold of it and ran a story calling his remarks “anti-semitic.”

Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie;

Is that 'anti-semitic'?

a reply to: rnaa

Sorry, but you a who that knows nothing. Rothschild, are number ONE, Morgan don't even make first call, and you did dent even mention the, Thomson's.

The Rothschild's who cause Israel, are not even allowed there. You call Rothschild Jewish, but they could care less about the Jews . Being a Jew is only a means to a end for them. They are Satanist, they use the Bible to their convenience.

Why don't you hear more about them, because they have been covering up stories about them for way over 60 years, they own all the major news agencies and dictate was is said about everything in the world. They control the gold in the world.

They are the ones that brought the U>S>A> into WWl.

You don't know anything about Rothschild, they run the Bilderberg group, plus all the central banks. Putin hates them.

If anything your just a Rothschild stooge.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: BotheLumberJack

Tear out the banking system and we would have to destroy the stock markets as well. Indeed, to take down the banks and wall street we would have to toss off the entire capitalist system don't you think? And we have nothing to replace that system that I can see. When anyone can propose a system to replace this current capitalist system, I will listen, but I have been now for a while and I have heard little in that way.

I agree with that statement, however, it is not the capitalism itself. Free Market Capitalism is actually the best form of markets in the world.

Definition: an economic system in which prices are determined by unrestricted competition between privately owned businesses.

In other words consumers determine the success or failure of the companies.

Now outside of some health and safety regulations on products, the federal government should stay out of the markets and let the public dictate who succeeds and who fails.

Now on to the banking part.

The US has enough precious metals, especially silver, that we could base it off of gold/silver standard. This will be painful, and yes the markets will plummet, the rest of the world will be hacked off at us to no end; but if we do it as you would with a bandage it will be quick and painful at first, but better in the long run. The US needs to do away with a central bank as do all nations, there is no need for someone to charge anyone for their own money.

Grim

I think the biggest problem people had with trayon's statements is that he made a blanket statement about a group that was only meant for part of the group.

So some jews may control the weather.

Not all of them do.

a reply to: Grimmley

Definition: an economic system in which prices are determined by unrestricted competition between privately owned businesses.

Now, don't freak on me here, ok? That definition should be agreeable to all, I know it is to me. That definition was and is taken one step farther in socialist philosophy. That prices, and supply should be determined by unrestricted competition by privately owned businesses.....and the owners of those business should be the very people who work there. The workers should own the businesses that compete. How would we get there from here? A miracle maybe.

And even as capitalism is such a motor for a strong economy, there is no ''inbuilt'' regulations with in it to insure against a winner take all outcome. This is a historical truth isn't it? New technologies such as railroads or steel manufacture etc lead to the robber barons and tycoons of a century ago?

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

This is how I see it.

Firstly I do believe that the owner/founder of a business should work at their said business, but realistically speaking there are a multitude of reasons why they might not. This to me would give them more meat sort speak in the outcome of their business. Now with that being said, I am also not against boards and such running businesses, however, I am against monopolies, companies own other companies etc. This is major problem that there is now in this world. All these mega corporations that own other corporations, they need to bring back the anti-monopoly laws and do away with corporations owning others.

That to me is only regulations needed in businesses. Safety for workers and of products, and anti-monopoly laws.

a reply to: Grimmley

That socialist model of businesses being owned by the workers themselves is unrealistic from where we stand now. Maybe in some other life.

i like the idea of an owner working within the business as a manager type thing. Running the day to day company. I have worked at a number of operations like that and in most cases it was good. But that kind of regulation would be an infringement on indidvual rights or freedoms and would get nowhere.

i agree about your thought about limited regulations and would most definitely add adherence to environmental laws like spewing toxins and stuff.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

Thats what I was referring to, owners actually running their businesses, not the workers own the business, unless it is a company owned by more than one person.

I am still adamantly opposed to corporations owning other corporations, this creates monopolies as we see now, less choice with the illusion of choice.

a reply to: Grimmley

Andrew Jackson got rid of the Rothschild central bank. Lincoln, and Kennedy trod to get rid of the, but they got rid of themselves.

a reply to: OOOOOO

Aye, and somewhere recently Trump made the statement that he wanted to go back to the gold standard

originally posted by: Grimmley
a reply to: OOOOOO

Aye, and somewhere recently Trump made the statement that he wanted to go back to the gold standard

He has a picture of Andrew Jackson in his office, but there is no way he will go against the Fed, at least not till the Bond market fails.

originally posted by: CharlesEric

[SNIP]

This is not a black market organ selling website. But perhaps we should find out who ya are somehow and get the authorities involved