The Absolute Truth About The Tea Party!

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


if it was always partisan politics then look at todays politics.

do you even think any republican idea will ever get to obamas desk? no

things always stay the same.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
It was close to what you said, however you failed to show the specific changes which turned it from a private enterprise to a mandatory public/private partnership.

I did not feel that it was relevant as both parties wanted a reserve system. I do think the move to include the public was wise as a purely private Federal Reserve may have been even worse.

Originally posted by neo96
if it was always partisan politics then look at todays politics.

do you even think any republican idea will ever get to obamas desk? no

things always stay the same.

Yes, it does appear that this is indeed the case.

dunno if wikipedia is an acceptable source but here goes.

en.wikipedia.org...

After months of hearings, debates, votes and amendments, the proposed legislation, with 30 sections, was enacted as the Federal Reserve Act. The House, on December 22, 1913[7], agreed to the conference report on the Federal Reserve Act bill by a vote of 298 yeas to 60 nays, with 76 not voting. The Senate, on December 23, 1913, agreed to it by a vote of 43 yeas to 25 nays with 27 not voting. The record shows that there were no Democrats voting "nay" in the Senate and only two in the House. The record also shows that almost all of those not voting for the bill had previously declared their intentions and were paired with members of opposite intentions.[8]

notice that not one democrat voted no in the senate and only two in the house

Originally posted by neo96
notice that not one democrat voted no in the senate and only two in the house

True, but many of the 'yeas' were Republicans.

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
It was close to what you said, however you failed to show the specific changes which turned it from a private enterprise to a mandatory public/private partnership.

I did not feel that it was relevant as both parties wanted a reserve system. I do think the move to include the public was wise as a purely private Federal Reserve may have been even worse.

So let's talk about who was behind this act besides Nelson Aldrich. For the record, the banksters have been both Democrat and Republican. To indicate otherwise would be foolhardy. One of the original Jekyll Island conspirators was a banker for JP Morgan, Henry Davison. Then there was Paul Warburg, a German born banker whose firm helped finance Hitler and joined forces with Solomon Loeb. Does Kuhn, Loeb, and co. sound familiar? Jacob Schiff was a partner in this firm as well. According to wikipedia, Warburg was pro central banking. We know that centralized control is a huge aspect of communist economic factors. Warburg was also a director of the CFR and served as a member of the advisory council of the Federal Reserve Board. source: wikipedia en.wikipedia.org...
Finally, let's look at the Rothschilds
www.scionofzion.com...

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


the 63rd united states congress who had the presidency and both houses of congress were held by democrat majorities.

Originally posted by neo96
the 63rd united states congress who had the presidency and both houses of congress were held by democrat majorities.

Yes, but the Democrats did not have a super majority in the Senate and the bill could have been fillibustered. The Republicans chose to abstain and the bill was passed. The only reason the Republicans were against the bill was that it was not their version of the reserve system, they would have passed a similar system if they could.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


Again, what does Jeneane Garofolo have to do with any of the evidence I presented in my comments? If you want to lie and link her to the evidence I posted throughout this thread, go ahead, but at least admit you are being dishonest about it. Also, what does any of the things you mention (i.e. democratic corporate funding), have to do with actual conservatives acknowledging the corporate backing of the tea party? Do these people have a liberal agenda as well? Is Ron Paul a "shill" for the liberal party because he points out the Tea Party has been taken over by corporate interests?

Also, I never denied that Democrats are also backed by corporatist wealthy elites...nor do I endorse or support their agenda...you can read my post history if you don't believe me, but you should at least be able to realize that pointing out that the Republican and Tea Party are funded by the same wealth elites and corporations is not by default agreeing with "the opposite" or the Democrats/Obamas agenda. Pointing out corporate funding in the Republican / Tea Party does not make one a supporter of the Democratic agenda, George Soros, or any of the other people you mention. This is a red herring, and you are again, trying to distract and deflect from the original point of this thread, which is the corporate funding and backing of the Tea Party. You and some others want to latch on to this simplistic logic that any intellectually honest debater can recognize is full of fallacies. Ad hominems, Poisoning the well, False dichotomies, blatant lying and mischaracterization of statements etc. etc. I am not going to fall for any of these. My agenda is the truth, which can be backed up with objective verifiable evidence, of which I have already posted on this thread...and so far what I am seeing is Tea Party people unwilling or refusing to acknowledge these facts, i.e. who is funding these rallies that they are attending (Freedom Work, AFP) and who is putting out these "instructional brochures" for protests, town halls, meetings etc. including specific questions to ask and positions to take.

The writing had been on the wall about the Tea Party for a long time, it has been co opted by corporate interests, anyone who subscribes to this type of political tribalism, thinking this party is somehow different from the Republican Party is again, ignoring the evidence. Even an article on Reason (also funded by Koch brothers) called the Tea Party "a rabidly right-wing phenomenon with a shaky grasp of history, a strain of intolerance and xenophobia, a paranoia about Barack Obama, and an unhealthy reverence for Fox News." source Lamenting that there lacks a true libertarian movement and so the "Tea Party will have to do" for now.

If you want to know my personal feelings, I used to support the Tea Party when it was associated with Ron Paul/grassroots, however it quickly was co opted by corporate interests and became basically just another reincarnation of neo-con/neo-liberal / Republican / Democrat values., Many Tea Party candidates have opposed cuts to ideas they ideologically agree with, (i.e. corporate welfare & war), while on the civil libertarian front many of the tea party backed candidates support government intervention into people's lives in areas that they disagree with such as abortion, gay marriage, the right for workers to form a union, and the new "financial marshal law bill" cropping up in several states. Again, these are not true libertarian values, and anyone familiar with the libertarian platform would understand this, and are rightly leery of these candidates, the Tea Party, and these policy positions. Source

But go ahead, if labeling me as a "democrat / soros / communist" supporter helps fit things into your narrow view of the "left vs. right" world that you subscribe to, so be it, you are entitled to your own opinion and how you see things is entirely up to you...there's plenty of people who buy into the neo-con/neo-liberal world globalist agenda, I don't hate these for being asleep or for voting for the democrat/republican/t-party corporatist servants, rather I will keep politely presenting the facts and it's entirely up to them what they choose to do with the evidence. Extremism on any side is bad, however the solutions to the world problems have nothing to do with "left vs. right" ideologies, rather they are a matter of recognizing some basic human rights and dignities and agreeing on outcomes that are best for the people as a whole (as opposed to a select few who profit off the current system)

Originally posted by meeneecat
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Again, what does Jeneane Garofolo have to do with any of the evidence I presented in my comments? If you want to lie and link her to the evidence I posted throughout this thread, go ahead, but at least admit you are being dishonest about it. Also, what does any of the things you mention (i.e. democratic corporate funding), have to do with actual conservatives acknowledging the corporate backing of the tea party? Do these people have a liberal agenda as well? Is Ron Paul a "shill" for the liberal party because he points out the Tea Party has been taken over by corporate interests?

Also, I never denied that Democrats are also backed by corporatist wealthy elites...nor do I endorse or support their agenda...you can read my post history if you don't believe me, but you should at least be able to realize that pointing out that the Republican and Tea Party are funded by the same wealth elites and corporations is not by default agreeing with "the opposite" or the Democrats/Obamas agenda. Pointing out corporate funding in the Republican / Tea Party does not make one a supporter of the Democratic agenda, George Soros, or any of the other people you mention. This is a red herring, and you are again, trying to distract and deflect from the original point of this thread, which is the corporate funding and backing of the Tea Party. You and some others want to latch on to this simplistic logic that any intellectually honest debater can recognize is full of fallacies. Ad hominems, Poisoning the well, False dichotomies, blatant lying and mischaracterization of statements etc. etc. I am not going to fall for any of these. My agenda is the truth, which can be backed up with objective verifiable evidence, of which I have already posted on this thread...and so far what I am seeing is Tea Party people unwilling or refusing to acknowledge these facts, i.e. who is funding these rallies that they are attending (Freedom Work, AFP) and who is putting out these "instructional brochures" for protests, town halls, meetings etc. including specific questions to ask and positions to take.

The writing had been on the wall about the Tea Party for a long time, it has been co opted by corporate interests, anyone who subscribes to this type of political tribalism, thinking this party is somehow different from the Republican Party is again, ignoring the evidence (including what intellectual conservatives and true libertarians have been saying about the Tea Party). Even an article on Reason (also funded by Koch brothers) called the Tea Party "a rabidly right-wing phenomenon with a shaky grasp of history, a strain of intolerance and xenophobia, a paranoia about Barack Obama, and an unhealthy reverence for Fox News." source Lamenting that there lacks a true libertarian movement and so the "Tea Party will have to do" for now.

If you want to know my personal feelings, I used to support the Tea Party when it was associated with Ron Paul/grassroots, however it quickly was co opted by corporate interests and became basically just another reincarnation of neo-con/neo-liberal / Republican / Democrat values., Many Tea Party candidates have opposed cuts to ideas they ideologically agree with, (i.e. corporate welfare & war), while on the civil libertarian front many of the tea party backed candidates support government intervention into people's lives in areas that they disagree with such as abortion, gay marriage, the right for workers to form a union, and the new "financial marshal law bill" cropping up in several states. Again, these are not true libertarian values, and anyone familiar with the libertarian platform would understand this, and are rightly leery of these candidates, the Tea Party, and these policy positions. Source

But go ahead, if labeling me as a "democrat / soros / communist" supporter helps fit things into your narrow view of the "left vs. right" world that you subscribe to, so be it, you are entitled to your own opinion and how you see things is entirely up to you...there's plenty of people who buy into the neo-con/neo-liberal world globalist agenda, I don't hate these for being asleep or for voting for the democrat/republican/t-party corporatist servants, rather I will keep politely presenting the facts and it's entirely up to them what they choose to do with the evidence. Extremism on any side is bad, however the solutions to the world problems have nothing to do with "left vs. right" ideologies, rather they are a matter of recognizing some basic human rights and dignities and agreeing on outcomes that are best for the people as a whole (as opposed to a select few who profit off the current system)

edit on 24-4-2011 by meeneecat because: (no reason given)

I do not have a narrow view of left and right. Although I am Republican, I recognize the place Bush and his cronies have in the NWO. I have never been for the PATRIOT ACT or any of the wars. And please see my comments and links regarding Bush and others in funding Hitler. I have known the Bushes were Skull and Bones for decades. I am not excusing their involvement.
The Intl conspiracy does involve both Republicans and Democrats, as well as people of foreign countries. But you have to face the truth that Soros bought the Democrat Party for all intents and purposes, albeit after the Democrat Party had mostly turned socialist. The Republican Party itself is still the Party which most closely resembles the original Republic. The Shadow Party has installed itself as the defacto ruling party, which consists of members of both Republican and Democrat. The CFR also has members of both parties.
Also, Soros has attended Bilderberg secret meetings. It is clear he is a big player in this whole NWO thing, even if he did declare his desire to ruin Bush and keep him from winning in 04. One has to wonder why one member of the NWO declares their opposition to another. Again, we have to liken it to different factions of the same organization, as in the Mafia.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus

 

it doesn't matter to me who comes up with the trash its who signs it in to law

the buck stops with the president so wilson has the blame here

edit on 24-4-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

Wilson embraced fascism at that time, which is really and always has been nothing but leftism and Socialism.

SOCIALISM IS CENTRISM! How many times does this need repeating

It is just a variant of the Left. the Democrats like to obfuscate this by calling Fascism an element of extreme right. There is nothing right about it at all. Even Hitler named his party The National Socialist Party, which is what NAZI really stands for.

Actually he named his party "national socialist workers party"...at least THAT is what they taught us at high school! Those that say fascism is extreme right wing are either lying or ignorant. The conspiracy is NOT with socialism or communism, its with capitalism.

Just look at the corporate mergers and aquisitions happening on a global basis almost everyday. Europe used to be full of nationalised industry just 2-3 decades ago but governments decided they can't efficiently run them(and I guess some bribery goes a longgg wayyy) so they soldout everything to the highest bidder.

Let us not forget that Soros himself confiscated the wealth of the people for the National Socialist Party during Hitler's reign, and without remorse.

What are you talking about? I know he was a hungarian jew but how is any of this rellevant to the tea party

Yes hitler was a socialist and yes I dislike him because besides a socialist he was also an ultra-nationalist and jew hater and killer. Hitler cannot account for socialism, just like stalin does not account for communism...just like bush and reagan do not account for capitalism. There are bad apples in each and every group you can think of so please no strawman arguements!

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


Socialism is a bridge between Capitalism and Communism. If you want to call that centrism then so be it. Fabian Socialists know that communism is the endgame. Even the Communist Party says it on their websites.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


Oh yah I forgot the Workers part of that NAZI engram. Thank you for that!

Originally posted by neo96

"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it comes strong than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or any controlling private power."

the left has become the most powerful group in american history from unions to education to hollywood and film and television.

any group that has accumulated that much power it will and has corrupted them.

Capitalism=everything is private
Socialism=major industry is public, everything else is private
Communism=everything is public

In america everything is PRIVATE thus we have CAPITALISM, EVEN THE GOVERNMENT IS PRIVATE

Entity Details
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THIS IS NOT A STATEMENT OF GOOD STANDING

File Number: 2193946 Incorporation Date / Formation Date: 04/19/1989
(mm/dd/yyyy)
Entity Name: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INC.
Entity Kind: CORPORATION Entity Type: NON-PROFIT OR RELIGIOUS
Residency: DOMESTIC State: DE

REGISTERED AGENT INFORMATION

Name: THE COMPANY CORPORATION
Address: 2711 CENTERVILLE ROAD SUITE 400
City: WILMINGTON County: NEW CASTLE
State: DE Postal Code: 19808
Phone: (302)636-5440

JESUS people...wake up! The USA government is a coporation and corporations are the major branch of capitalism. Yes corporations started off with socialism because its an intermediate system BUT THEY FLOURISHED UNDER CAPITALISM IN AMERICA.............................

George Soros' $30M Welfare CheckBy: Jeff Johnson

reply to post by EarthCitizen07

What are you talking about? I know he was a hungarian jew but how is any of this rellevant to the tea party

Soros involvement with MoveOn.org, Tides Foundation, Organizing For America, Code Pink, which are all radical LEFTIST organizations is what he has to do with the Tea Party, which opposes extreme left policies of the Obama admin. This is why Soros and Pelosi both hate and demonize the Tea Party and Glenn Beck as well. Soros admitted in an interview to confiscating the wealth of the jewish population for the NAZI party and in that interview he declared that he had ZERO remorse for his actions. He was a Socialist then and is still an Intl Socialist. That list of operations is by no means an entire representation of the Soros clearinghouse. I can find a more extensive listing for you though.

The Open Society Institute, a private foundation controlled by liberal billionaire and political activist George Soros, received more than $30 million from U.S. government agencies between 1998 and 2003. Last year, Soros donated at least $20 million of his own money to such liberal groups as Moveon.org, in a failed attempt to block the re-election of President George W. Bush.

OSI has apparently applied this strategy in the U.S., as well. The foundation received 1.4 to 4.4 percent of its annual contributions between 1998 and 2003 from American taxpayer funding. Various State Department documents indicate that OSI has been paid to run what the department describes as "democratization programs" in a number of countries.

archive.frontpagemag.com...

So, ironically, this organization got both public funds from US taxpayers(unbeknownst them them of course) and Soros himself. That source was from 2005.

Groups in this category typically oppose mining and logging initiatives, commercial fishing enterprises, development and construction in wilderness areas, the use of coal, the use of pesticides, and oil and gas exploration in "environmentally sensitive" locations. Moreover, they claim that human industrial activity leads to excessive carbon-dioxide emissions which, in turn, cause a potentially cataclysmic phenomenon called "global warming." Examples of such Soros donees include Earthjustice, Green For All, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Alliance for Climate Protection, Friends of the Earth, and the Earth Island Institute.

www.discoverthenetworks.org...

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

 

Socialism is a bridge between Capitalism and Communism. If you want to call that centrism then so be it. Fabian Socialists know that communism is the endgame. Even the Communist Party says it on their websites.

If we have communism then we might as well have capitalism. Both suck balls!

Why do you think hitler attacked russia if socialism and communism were the same thing?

Hint: Hitler hated jews, communists and gypsies. Read Mein Kampf

Originally posted by Shadowfoot
reply to post by cushycrux

 

I am behind you people really need to be aware, that is why I was remarking on the lack of responses, there is a concerted effort to all Tea Bag puppets to not bring any attention to this thread they cannot as yet attempt to obscure with half truths and baiting.

Or maybe because after a year or two of arguing with brain dead marxist traitors it just gets redundantly tiring. Sure there are shills in the tea party movement, every movement has them. But the "tea party" isn't a singular organism. It is more like local militia's then anything else.

Besides the tea party movement sprung up from Ron Pauls 2008 campaign for the presidency.

As for racism, you are all way off the mark and exposing yourselves for the white haters you really are. It must be a knee-jerk leftist thing I guess yous just can't help yourselves in indulging.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus



it's basically a republican hijacked cause...

remember when the tea party first started?

remember how it was all good and then "they" whoever "they" are, lol...put what's her name on the show..they put her at all of the tea party rallies..

the bridge to nowhere lady....yeah, lol...that cause got hijacked...

i could post a few links, but it would be a waste of my energy...

i suggest for all of my brothers and sisters to use thier intuition on this subject..




anything that is not love and light for all humans is not in service to our highest good..

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

 

Socialism is a bridge between Capitalism and Communism. If you want to call that centrism then so be it. Fabian Socialists know that communism is the endgame. Even the Communist Party says it on their websites.

If we have communism then we might as well have capitalism. Both suck balls!

Why do you think hitler attacked russia if socialism and communism were the same thing?

Hint: Hitler hated jews, communists and gypsies. Read Mein Kampf

I am well aware of the fact that Hitler imprisoned both Jews and Communists. This is just classic Hegelian left vs right, only both Socialism and Communism are factions of the Left, it's just that Socialism is a tad less violent. Fascism is a false right, in that Fascism is set up as the right wing of the communism vs fascism fight. Communism, Socialism and fascism are all facets of the left, it's just that fascism is a tad to the right of communism. That is all.
Excerpt from Antony Sutton on Left vs Right

Probably the most difficult task in this work will be to get across to the reader what is really an elementary observation: that the objective of The Order is neither "left" nor "right." "Left" and "right" are artificial devicces to bring about change, and the extremes of political left and political right are vital elements in
a process of controlled change. The answer to this seeming political puzzle lies in Hegelian logic.
Remember that both Marx and Hitler, the extremes of "left"
and "right" presented as textbook enemies, evolved out of the same
philosophical system: Hegelianism. That brings screams of
intellectual anguish from Marxists and Nazis, but is well known to
any student of political systems.

Originally posted by cornucopia
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

it's basically a republican hijacked cause...

remember when the tea party first started?

remember how it was all good and then "they" whoever "they" are, lol...put what's her name on the show..they put her at all of the tea party rallies..

the bridge to nowhere lady....yeah, lol...that cause got hijacked...

i could post a few links, but it would be a waste of my energy...

i suggest for all of my brothers and sisters to use thier intuition on this subject..




anything that is not love and light for all humans is not in service to our highest good..

RINO Republicans do not embrace Palin anymore than the liberal Left