Tax Day April 15, 2010 the London Banker’s Celebration of the Anniversary of Lincoln’s Death

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


Much thanks for the eye opening history lesson. Funny they don`t teach that in our public schools, oh wait, the national curriculum is gonna be dictated by these very same people. I`d rather have school like the old days where you have one teacher for years, so you actually have time to build a trust and get to know one another. There`s no respect because you only see this person for 45 minutes at a time and that time is spent franticly trying to get "work" done. Memorizing names, places, and dates does not prepare you for the world. Back in the day your parents would know the teacher pretty well and visa versa. But the government doesnt want that because if the teacher spent time with you and your family outside of school, he/she would no longer be under the restraints put on him by the gov and they might share with you knowledge not contained within the mandatory curriculum. Divide and conquer. It`s literally EVERYWHERE you look. Even hate crime laws are designed to promote racism. It`s gonna cause people to think to themselves that they better not defend themselves or their property against this certain group because it will be a hate crime if the story gets turned around (by false testimony or misperception on part od witnesses, for example). That will probably lead some people to think that oh these people are always trying to get extra favoritism, even though they didn`t make the lawe. Plus it forces us to recognise small petty differences like color, orientation, religion etc instead of looking at people as the same.

awesome awesome job
concise and well-written

i hope i'ts ok to share this......

peace

reply to post by Rockpuck

Because I am a Mason, I cannot talk about history.. because I belong to a historical organization.

I also have a degree in history.

Sure you can, and please feel free to TALK about it on this DISCUSSION thread instead of attempting to lecture and ridicule people those who are discussing it honestly.

Do keep in mind that some people would consider a degree in history to simply be a degree in dogma, because any credible student of history knows, that history is constantly rewritten by the victors, and those in power.

Being able to parrot those things, no matter how virulently does not necessarily make them true or valid, or even insightful.

Whether or not you believe Masonry its self had any hand in the framing of the country, I suppose its a matter of perspective.. which came first, Masonry or enlightened ideas? I believe the Enlightened ideas came first.

Who says that they are enlightened ideas, the Masons who keep them secret as part of an organization, or the masses that those things are largely kept from?

As a drummer I can say all drummers have the best sense of humor, it doesn’t make it true, until you gauge every drummer and non-drummer in a joke telling contest.

Yet that presumption of non-gauged and non-measured ‘enlightenment’ to some would come off more as arrogance, based on a group of like minded people patting each other on the back and claiming that they are enlightened.

Considering you seem to abhor the notion that anything like a Post you don’t agree with, becomes valid in some people’s minds, just because others agree with it in mass, is kind of then hypocritical, for a person to believe that they are enlightened simply because a like minded group of people told them so.

That would in fact go to objectivity by the way!

True.. except nothing I've mentioned in my previous posts was about Freemasonry at all .. it was about the Holy Roman Empire, which you were woefully ignorant of.

You haven't been able to prove anything I have said about the Holy Roman Empire is false.

All you have tried to do is explain why you don't think based on your logistical understanding of how you believe the Holy Roman Empire worked, that there is nothing to my contention it did the things that it did, acquired the things that it did, and entities today are still the beneficiaries of those contracts.

Did I personally know Charlemagne or King George? No, but neither do you. We both must rely on a certain degree of conjecture and theory to frame our perspectives, you just feel the best way to present your argument is by claiming that the other person is wrong, while I feel the best way to present my argument, is to consider the possibilities and the various outcomes as a means to discern a more accurate reflection than the dogmas propagated by the same institutions and organizations and descendants of the principals.

If everyone considered the Yale or Harvard version valid, we would be at Yale and Harvard, and not on ATS.

Some would say some of us are here looking for different and or better answers, some would say others are here, to insist that we accept the same old answers, just with a side of scorn and ridicule for daring to question and honestly and openly investigate.

Why any credible scholar would see such an endeavor as condemnable, probably speaks more to their own methodology than it does to those they are criticizing.

I have put significant research into these things and so have some other members.

Debating it is one thing, trying to ridicule is another.

The Holy Roman Empire was endorsed by the Pope, way back in the 900's .. however there was a bitter relationship that eventually destroyed all ties with the church.

The Holy Roman Empire was a front for the same Roman Empire that existed before it, just as the Vatican is. It's very simple my friend, it's called follow the money, not the bouncing ball on the religious book!

Follow the contracts, follow the affiliations, follow the random coincidences that aren't random.

The fact that some people fall for the ruses, decptions, subplots and intriques meant to take people's eyes off the money, and the principal players, doesn't mean everyone suffers from this.

Not at all, all organizations and it's members are, or should be, open to critique. You can insult the organization I belong to all you want, it's a bit unbecoming of you

No one has insulted the Masons but you. I have simply questioned to what extent they are involved, and the fact that typically any questioning of their involvement is considered by Masons to be an insult.

So rather than discuss their involvement we end up discussing your sensibilities.

Rather than discuss what is, or could be, you will focus on 'what isn't, and couldn't be'.

It's all deflection.

None of which is objective.

These other ignorant fools might inflate your ego, and you might feel secure in this bubble you build around your self that with any quip you can dispell anything said against you. Fact is: You were wrong. I point out yet another topic that you are completely wrong about. You take issue with it. THAT is what I find amusing. And sad.

My wife thinks I am wrong about a lot of things too, in fact I have never won an argument with her, why? Because she refuses to believe she can never be wrong about anything.

Love the glass slippers by the way!

Thanks for posting.

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by anglodemonicmatrix

 

Wouldn't it be great if everyone realized it though. All that money, we have been paying so long, just to build a prison of lies and illusions.

It shouldn't always have to be that way. There must be a better way?

Thanks for posting.

there is a better way

a letter to the new zealand minister for finance


I would like to pass on this form of financing to Hon Bill English

Before I start let me state one thing when it comes to the issuance of money the group who gets to use that money first benefits from its creation the most

First set up a bank holding company called state highway infrastructure
Issue from government treasury bonds for the creation of money (in electronic form) to this entity

The bank then can create private loans to the citizens and companies that will undertake the project (at interest)
When these loans are repaid with interest, the interest is on top of the original amount loaned (ie income)

When enough loans have been repaid with interest, the interest is used to finance the infrastructure project without having to borrow the money at interest from overseas banks

The infrastructure is paid for by the fact that the state highway infrastructure has received interest on money it loaned and interest on these loans could be much lower than the current bank interest rates as the money is returned to the state highway infrastructure it is destroyed against the bond used to create it returning the bond to the government
at the completion of the project

In this manner the people and government gets to use the money first and retain the wealth within the country instead of offshore banks

Who benefits

1. The people who take out the loans at lower interest rates (paying the loan back sooner)
2. The government who constructs infrastructure for the public good from the interest obtained (no loans at interest to repay for gov)
3. And because the loans are destroyed against the treasury bonds after the repayment, the original bonds are repaid at no cost (the people of new Zealand are the collateral of the loan made to themselves and get first use and benefit of those loans)
4. Inflation is kept in check by destroying the money upon repayment of loans against treasury bonds

The banks preform this on a daily basis every time they make a loan only difference is they loan against reserves not treasury bonds
And the banks get the interest on top for their private shareholders instead of paying for infrastructure development for everbody

Yours sincerely

edited for privacy

XPlodER

reply to post by Rockpuck


I've mentioned in other threads but I think it merits mention here. While cleaning a very old house, I found a very old book. Orders to the leaders of some 50 plus organizations, masons and skull and bones etc, included. This book, the Instructions from the European Commandery to the American General Commandaries, was a coded book. After decoding it to read it (the code being in the front of the work) I came to a part after the stories of Ch'Hiram A' Biff (they're spelling, not mine) and his four tortures (not three) and discussing the levels built beneath the Temple of Solomon to mimic the false levels above where the public dwelt wherein the True Ark was housed as opposed to the false one above. The book tells about how the initiates are to be handled. If you commit an unpatriotic or scariligeous act, the act was unimportant, only the response mattered, three suggestions were reciting the lords prayer backwards, spitting on the crucifix or urinating on the flag, you were told you had the right mindset to not be bound to worldly ideas and were ushered into the inner lodge (which I do not name because I like breathing) and ithe other members would simply be informed that you had failed and were removed and not allowed into the order. If you could not bring yourself to do such things, as many of the masons on ATS must not have been able to do judging by their words on here, you were told that you did the right thing and were worthy of the blue lodge path of the massons. It is the blue lodge masons, as well as, the Shriners, who do all the good and public works. You are not privy to the inner workings of the other path as a blue lodge member. I'd love to show you the book, it is full of the signs, symbols, and regalia, as well as the dance movements for greetings and such. Other organizations were the Rebukkah's, Long Fellows, Grangers, and itmentioned a certain college fraternity who was cast out of the Order of the Orders, the Illustrious Order of the I. (the IOI) in the 60's for being to open about their affiliation. It also metioned how the ARK and the Dove are honorary only.

The point being that if you are a blue lodge mason, shriner, etc. who would not perform a sacriligeous or unpatriotic act, etc. for your initiation then you are not in the know.

Edit:

1) The book is in safekeeping with others found and will not be disclosed, so no, I'd like you to read it, but, I can not stress how much I like breathing. So, you'll just have to believe it or not. I know what's true and that's good enough for me.

2) For those who can add, I call it a very old book, then state it mentions a fraternity thrown out in the sixties. The error is in my wording. The book was written in the 70's, it states that it was reprented from other works written in the 14 and 16 and 18th centuries, with only up to date revisions. So, not that the book is old, just that it is an old work.


[edit on 15-4-2010 by PhyberDragon]

Originally posted by Rockpuck
Another history lesson for you (since you obviously slept through your history lessons) .. In Rome, the Thumbs Down meant "live" (or more precisely 'sword down') Thumbs UP meant "kill".

That's really very interesting. I did not know that. So then your use of said symbol here was in effect an indication of support for the thread. That's very fair minded and Masonically brotherhoodish of you

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Do keep in mind that some people would consider a degree in history to simply be a degree in dogma

I completely agree.. however somethings are well known, while others are speculative.. usually the rule of thumb is the further back the murkier it gets. The Holy Roman Empire is well documented, and it ended not long ago, so it's last days are even more well documented. Their issues with the Church are also very clearly documented because, well, when a confederacy goes against the supreme power of the World.. people pay attention.

Being able to parrot those things, no matter how virulently does not necessarily make them true or valid, or even insightful.

Right, but me saying something 99% of people believe, compared to what it is you say, which is highly outlandish and has absolutely no sourcing what so ever... also, does not make it true?

Who says that they are enlightened ideas, the Masons who keep them secret as part of an organization, or the masses that those things are largely kept from?

Dunno what your talking about? The Age of Enlightenment was a set of ideological doctrines that were considered radical. Today we would call it "Progressive". Freemasonry being Deistic for starters made it apart of the Enlightenment ideology, along with other social standings, such as not paying heed to laws regarding "Freemen" (which is where Freemasonry gets it's name, you did not need social status to join the guild)

Yet that presumption of non-gauged and non-measured ‘enlightenment’ to some would come off more as arrogance

Yes, saying "Enlightened" is perspective.. saying "The Age of Enlightenment" .. is a historical reference to a specific time period???

You haven't been able to prove anything I have said about the Holy Roman Empire is false.

I did not source, as you did not source.. however my information I can list hundreds of sources for if you'd like me to? .. Where are your sources? you have not even porven what you your self has said to be true?

Burden of proof is on you.. since you made the thread, the story, etc.

The way you talk your basically saying that the official version of events cannot be right simply because it's the official version of events.. that you are right, simply because you're "different"..

It's all deflection.

Nice spin buddy. I refute your facts and you shrugged it off "well your a Mason so you cant have a say"



Talk about deflection. Or deflection of your deflection even lol...

reply to post by PhyberDragon


I'd have to personally read it, because what you're saying makes no sense. The vast majority of what you say is actually 100% against Masonic teaching (and often code) .. for instance, murder and treason are the only laws specifically designated by Masonry that if you were to commit it is a Masonic offense.

But what do I know, I've never pissed on a flag.

Ahh.. a weird digression from the conversation..

This has some extraordinary stuff in it, OP. Very well done. SnF

reply to post by MrDesolate


The truth is none of us really know the truth, whether your speculation comes from a book where you are reading all the lines, or your speculation comes from trying to read between the lines, the real truth probably lies somewhere in between the two.

When a topic is discussed as a conspiracy, and I am putting this forward as a conspiracy, and that's why it is in the conspiracy theory, the discussion really is much about cause and effect, and who had the most to gain, and could manipulate cause and effect, to that outcome.

There is a reason why I publish my work on ATS as conspiracy theories and not in History journals, and that's because it does involve a real degree of speculation and conjecture, garnered from cause and effect, and outcome, and trying to reconstruct events to look for better explanations than the ones that are officially given.

Invariably that upsets a number of people, for different reasons, that are personal to them.

Put it really isn't about personalities, it's about what happened, it's about trying to understand better what happened and why.

I like to feel my opinions and perspectives are based on critical questioning and examination, having my own mind, and my own right to form them, and my own desire to then share them.

That's what conspiracy discussion forums are all about.

Thanks for posting, and thanks for reading the thread.

reply to post by MrDesolate


The western connection to the movement is completely lost.. I could go into huge details about it because while writing my replies I was reading some rather interesting articles about it (slow day..)

The thumbs up/down we use today most likely did not originate in Italy (Rome) .. because people have done studies (really lame) that shows of all European states, Italy uses the gesture the least. It's more widely used in Northern Europe, particularly Northern France and Britain. This would suggest it was probably a military gesture, probably something to do with archery? anyways, the Anglo Saxon way is thumbs up good, thumbs down bad. That's what we use, and in all probability has nothing at all to do with the gladiators of Rome.

Don't care much about the character assassination.

Go ahead and refute every fact I've posted. People seem to be mad I called him a bigot because the very first thing he did was belittle me for my involvement with Freemasonry. Typical ATS though.

reply to post by PhyberDragon


I would do just about anything to see this book.

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


Here's a question for ye.. since I think we can both agree international banking = bad news for everyone but the bankers... Why do the Bankers need secret covered up contracts, treaties, etc ... when they already control the world? .. This isn't even modern.. this goes all the way back to the Templars (who invented banking) .. Kings, Republics, Confederacies.. littered throughout history have been in major debt to banking institutions. So why all this extra work? All they have to do is buy our Treasuries and they have us by the short n' curlies right? Why do the bankers have to be Masons/Illuminati/black church/satan worshipers etc etc etc...... why not normal, very greedy people who found a perfect way to exploit society for easy money?

Theres a massive banking conspiracy in the World.. they own our governments, and likely us .. I know I'm worth more dead than alive anyways.. I just cannot see the logic in them needing all these massive conspiracies.

reply to post by Rockpuck


It would be alot better if you could read it, I agree, but I no longer have them. After I read them a friend of mine, a mormon Preist of the Order of Melchizedech took them with him to the Mormon Temple at Salt Lake City, Utah to be held in safekeeping in their vaults. Therefore, sadly, I can only give you an account. I realize it violates your codes and teachings, that was the reason I chose to at least try and tell people it does exist.
Kudos to you for being one of the masons who do the true Good Works in our society.

Edit: I've heard that you have strict codes against harbouring murderer's and treasonous people, but, one of the other books I found, began by the brother detailing his crime of murder and being on the run and how he was housed by other members and recieved funds from an account designed for just that. So, believe me or not, but, question everything.

[edit on 15-4-2010 by PhyberDragon]

Originally posted by Rockpuck
People seem to be mad I called him a bigot because the very first thing he did was belittle me for my involvement with Freemasonry.

Typical ATS though.

Wow. Thin skin much? It's a conspiracy site. Masonry will get the occasional mention. If you're that sensitive to it, maybe you shouldn't fly all the Masonic regalia in your avatar? You might as well wear a Yankees hat to Fenway Park.

bigot - a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own

Not atypical, or rare. Speaking of typical. (Pot, meet kettle).

Sorry, back to topic.

Thanks, this was really enlightening. I am going to do my own research on this and see where it gets me, you've inspired me to look into this subject of subjugation in plain sight.

Slavery was never abolished and our property isn't really ours (imminent domain). We are still in a feudal system if what you're saying is all true, thanks for the eye opener!

Now you've forced me to remember tax day as a "day of enlightenment" btw.

Originally posted by UMayBRite!
Wasn't it Henry VIII that created the Church of England and threw off the "Yoke of Rome"?

It that case, why would his successor go to the trouble to calling himself
Elector of the Holy Roman Empire? Perhaps the King of England wasn't as independent
as some think..

Maybe the OP's history isn't as Butchered as our European Friend claims...

You're quite right about Henry V111. The answer to your question is that being Elector of the Roman Empire had nothing whatsoever to do with being King of England. George got his German titles from his German ancestry and his royal title from the other side of the family. The idea that the Electoral title came from something William the Conqueror did was quite accurately described as a butchering of history, because it isn't true.






[edit on 15-4-2010 by DISRAELI]

reply to post by Rockpuck

Theres a massive banking conspiracy in the World.. they own our governments, and likely us .. I know I'm worth more dead than alive anyways.. I just cannot see the logic in them needing all these massive conspiracies.

First anyone who follows my posts on the Roman power structure would happily tell you, I am not big on the religious angles or the divide and conquer angles. There are no witches at black masses conducting coven like ceremonies, or space aliens, or inter-dimensional beings involved in my theories.

I have been to the Bohemian Grove, and most of what goes on there, is over entertained, very rich and jaded people, doing incredibly silly things at times, because…they can!

I always caution people to keep it on a purely human, and human nature level.

So we are basically in agreement there.

Now why the secrecy?

One is the fine art of the Deal, often requires having a competitive edge born of the power of possessing information no one else has.

You want to get there first, you want to do it quietly, you want to do it before competition drives up the cost, and you want to do it when people feel they have no, or limited options, and not all the options in the world.

There is an old saying, those who can do, do, those who can’t teach, so having a degree in some things, and a desire to teach others about them, in fact says a few things, unbeknownst to the teacher.

The second element to secrecy and manipulation is motivation. Productivity has largely always been affected by carrots and sticks, yet manipulation exists too.

As a young boy I got tricked into playing Merry Poppins in a Cub Scout Performance because my crafty Den Mother told me, that every other boy in the den was dying to get the role but she liked me the best, and wanted me to have first crack at it.

A couple months later after the performance of Supercalifragilous means expialidotious at a Nursing Home that had no place for me to change back into boys clothes, and I sat there having to eat dinner in drag, for hours, I realized I had been manipulated. The other boys confided in me they had all been approached first and turned down the role, she simply changed her approach with me, and decided to lie about that.

The secretive nature of manipulation is to get people to do things that they would not do as enthusiastically or even at all if they knew the truth is a big part of how the Powers that Be motivate the masses to be productive.

What most people don’t understand about Bankers is we are their excuse to buy and acquire everything; they simply end up with it by default, after they manipulate the markets to make sure we do default.

So in reality they are tricking us, into giving to them, through our desire to have it, and have it first and keep it, what they in fact want, or property, our businesses, our valuables and resources, all of which they are willing to loan money on and then hopefully acquire after we subsidize the purchase of it.

Secrecy is a huge part of the formula, information means options, and options mean freedom, they want us to always head in the direction they want us to go, limit the options, by limiting the information that creates options, and well, we always will.

Thanks for asking.


[edit on 15/4/10 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]

What did the Federal Reserve Banks do in the first great depression?

Bought everything they could at cut rates.

What did the Federal Reserve do in the second great depression?

Bought everything they could at cut rates.

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

You want to get there first, you want to do it quietly, you want to do it before competition drives up the cost, and you want to do it when people feel they have no, or limited options, and not all the options of the world.

In most industries yes.. however when it comes to banking, it was always automatic. Hell, America was discovered on a loan. When the first settlers were coming to this land, they were indentured (kinda like today ) .. they worked for so many years to get their land, the loan covering the cost of moving across the Atlantic.

The Dutch, British, French, Italians, Spanish etc etc etc .. banks from everywhere were already profiting.

So ... why the big conspiracy? WHO is the one making out on it?

Then we have to remember that today, banks are owned entirely by stock (except Private Investment Banks, but those are rather rare) ..so no one person owns the banks. For instance, the largest share holder of Citigroup is some sultan I forget his name from Saudi Arabia.

The second element to secrecy and manipulation is motivation. Productivity has largely always been affected by carrots and sticks, yet manipulation exists too.

Banking is self propelled tho.. no need for carrots. If you begin offering loans, people will borrow to improve their station in life, even if it's only through appearances (like, I own a house and a car, but could never pay em off) .. as soon as some people take the loans, they have more money, so prices increase. Eventually everyone needs a loan. Banking is the easiest industry ever devised to operate. And, on top of that, has some of the lowest expense to profit ratios (especially when you remove bonuses)

and I sat there having to eat dinner in drag, for hours, I realized I had been manipulated.

Sounds traumatizing..

So in reality they are tricking us, into giving to them, through our desire to have it, and have it first and keep it, what they in fact want, or property, our businesses, our valuables and resources, all of which they are willing to loan money on and then hopefully acquire after we subsidize the purchase of it.

I agree 100% (I am against any form of usury) .. but in America there was no 1 bank that suddenly showed up and began loaning.. our largest banks being constructed right here in the US .. Britain has the largest international presence.. but that's all corporate base. The Shareholders are spread over dozens of countries. Ultimately, I don't see any single source profiting.. except the greedy bankers, who imo don't see National boundaries.

Secrecy is a huge part of the formula

The crux of our disagreement .. the banks own us.. and when they want to, they will unite, hold our hands behind our backs and rape us. On tv. While explaining in great detail what they have done, are doing, and about to do. And what will we do? Revolt? Can't get our fat asses off the couch to protest anymore. Complain.. elect another red/blue candidate?

They financially raped us.. then publicly post outrageous profits, hell JP posted the largest ever profit increase year over year for a major bank.. and cheer about it, throwing lavish parties. Ask anyone on the streets, they will tell you, no one will disagree.. the banks own us, took advantage of us, and have 0 regard for our well being. But ask em what they will do about it... nothing.

People are stupid. Easily manipulated.. easily convinced.. it's the biggest reason Democracies fail .. banks know this.. they love it.

reply to post by DISRAELI

You're quite right about Henry V111. The answer to your question is that being Elector of the Roman Empire had nothing whatsoever to do with being King of England. George got his German titles from his German ancestry and his royal title from the other side of the family. The idea that the Electoral title came from something William the Conqueror did was quite accurately described as a butchering of history, because it isn't true.

His electoral title did come from the German part of the family...

His ARCH-TREASURER TITLE DIDN'T.

This is called butchering of a thread, because if you had actually retained what I wrote, you would know that I was referring specifically to his ARCH-TREASURER TITLE because of the way England has to Bank Rome's Money thanks to William the Conquerer.

I know it was a long opening post, but it says ARCH-TREASURER in regards to William the Conquerer, his Prince Elector Title does come from Berlin though.

Thanks.