GoldmanSachs666 Message Board

According to the Collins English Dictionary 10th Edition fraud can be defined as: "deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage".[1] In the broadest sense, a fraud is an intentional deception made for personal gain or to damage another individual; the related adjective is fraudulent. The specific legal definition varies by legal jurisdiction. Fraud is a crime, and also a civil law violation. Defrauding people or entities of money or valuables is a common purpose of fraud, but there have also been fraudulent "discoveries", e.g. in science, to gain prestige rather than immediate monetary gain
*As defined in Wikipedia

Tuesday, December 27, 2011

The House of Rothschild

 Eustace Mullins by all accounts was a very controversial figure and author.  While his religious and political beliefs could be questioned - he was called anti-semetic - this particular work of his was well researched, footnoted and referenced in the bibliography.  He spent years researching this topic.  This book was burned publically in Germany in 1955 and also was banned in the United States.  It exists through a web site that has published it in their effort to preserve it.
Regardless of his alleged beliefs and affiliations, I have always believed that his writing and research was valid.  I therefore offer up the link to the entire book but focus here on Chapter 5.  I believe you will see as I do the similarities in what I call the Rothschild manifesto to the social and economic occurrences here and abroad.  I believe it is the blueprint for the "New World Order" first publicly spoken of by Pres. George H.W. Bush.  It is also interesting to note that the Bush family was also connected to the Rothschilds as was J.P. Morgan whose company still maintains a large control over our Federal Reserve.
Secrets of the Federal Reserve
by Eustace Mullins

From Chapter 5 - The House of Rothschild
Rothschild turned to a manuscript and proceeded to read a carefully prepared plan of action.

1. He argued that LAW was FORCE only in disguise. He reasoned it was logical to conclude ‘By the laws of nature right lies in force.’
2. Political freedom is an idea, not a fact. In order to usurp political power all that was necessary was to preach ‘Liberalism’ so that the electorate, for the sake of an idea, would yield some of their power and prerogatives which the plotters could then gather into their own hands.
3. The speaker asserted that the Power of Gold had usurped the power of Liberal rulers.... He pointed out that it was immaterial to the success of his plan whether the established governments were destroyed by external or internal foes because the victor had to of necessity ask the aid of ‘Capital’ which ‘Is entirely in our hands’.
4. He argued that the use of any and all means to reach their final goal was justified on the grounds that the ruler who governed by the moral code was not a skilled politician because he left himself vulnerable and in an unstable position.
5. He asserted that ‘Our right lies in force. The word RIGHT is an abstract thought and proves nothing. I find a new RIGHT... to attack by the Right of the Strong, to reconstruct all existing institutions, and to become the sovereign Lord of all those who left to us the Rights to their powers by laying them down to us in their liberalism.
6. The power of our resources must remain invisible until the very moment when it has gained such strength that no cunning or force can undermine it. He went on to outline twenty-five points.
Number 8. dealt with the use of alcoholic liquors, drugs, moral corruption, and all vice to systematically corrupt youth of all nations.
9. They had the right to seize property by any means, and without hesitation, if by doing so they secured submission and sovereignty.
10. We were the first to put the slogans Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity into the mouths of the masses, which set up a new aristocracy. The qualification for this aristocracy is WEALTH which is dependent on us.
11. Wars should be directed so that the nations engaged on both sides should be further in our debt.
12. Candidates for public office should be servile and obedient to our commands, so that they may readily be used.
13. Propaganda--their combined wealth would control all outlets of public information.
14. Panics and financial depressions would ultimately result in World Government, a new order of one world government."

The Rothschild family has played a crucial role in international finance for two centuries, as Frederick Morton, in The Rothschilds writes:

"For the last one hundred and fifty years the history of the House of Rothschild has been to an amazing extent the backstage history of Western Europe." 38 (Preface)... Because of their success in making loans not to individuals, but to nations, they reaped huge profits, although as Morton writes, p. 36, "Someone once said that the wealth of Rothschild consists of the bankruptcy of nations." 43
Read more and see footnotes and here 


Secrets of the Federal Reserve
by Eustace Mullins
From Web Archive Sources

Chapter One — Jekyll Island
Chapter Two — The Aldrich Plan
Chapter Three — The Federal Reserve Act
Chapter Four — The Federal Advisory Council
Chapter Five — The House of Rothschild
Chapter Six — The London Connection
Chapter Seven — The Hitler Connection
Chapter Eight — World War One
Chapter Nine — The Agricultural Depression
Chapter Ten — The Money Creators
Chapter Eleven — Lord Montagu Norman
Chapter Twelve — The Great Depression
Chapter Thirteen — The 1930's
Chapter Fourteen — Congressional Expose
Appendix I
Questions and Answers

This HTML Edition of "Secrets of the Federal Reserve" by Eustace Mullins, as controversial as it may seem to some, is placed on the web as a valid and well researched viewpoint of the history of U.S. and World Banking manipulations, and to keep it from disappearing,.
Reproduction of all or any parts of the above text may be used for general information.
This HTML presentation is copyright by Barefoot, 2006

Enhanced by Zemanta


The plan worked said...

But as we’ve been learning all too well, with greater wealth comes greater control over the political system.

1913: In that year, the year know as Rockefeller’s Year, four pieces of fraud legislation were passed.

(1) The Aldrich Act, latter to be renamed the Federal Reserve Act (Sen. Aldrich had married into the Rockefeller family and was John D. Rockefeller’s son-in-law) which set up 12 credit monopolies, the Federal Reserve System — who created the money, then lent it to the US Treasury, thusly putting the American government and people in debt to the private banksters. The private banks which own the Fed receive a guaranteed 6% dividend.***

(2) The 16th Amendment, creating the federal income tax, which was created to pay the Federal Reserve the interest owed on the money they lent the US government. (Originally, the federal income tax went directly to the Federal Reserve Bank.)

(3) The oil depletion allowance, which subsidized the oil companies, chiefly Rockefeller’s Standard Oil. (But also Morgan, Harriman and Mellon’s businesses.)

(4) Tax exemptions for foundations and churches. Foundations, although probably used somewhat for this reason previously, were highly structured through this legislation to be the principal source to hide both wealth and ownership, while avoiding taxation, of the senior plutocrats (supposed to have been structured by Rockefeller’s law firm which originally created the holding company structure).

***Thusly, the banksters were subsidized, their oil companies were subsidized, they avoided taxation while hiding the true amount of their wealth and vast holdings. William Jennings Bryan, who was against such a move, was fooled into believing the government would print the money (which it does and pays for, via the US Bureau of Engraving and Printing) without being shown the entire legislation. Robert Owens, the coauthor of this legislation, was connected to the plutocrats as his father was president of the Virginia and Tennessee Railroad.

Houses can fall said...

How Anger Took Elites by Surprise

And everywhere, this year of mass defiance wrong-footed those who were supposed to be in the know. The experts had thought the Arabs were getting richer and were too scared of their autocrats, that the Russians were apathetic and quite liked their neo-czar, that the Indian middle class was politically disengaged, that West Europeans were too old for outrage, that Americans didn’t care about the class divide and that the Chinese comrades were too effective at suppressing dissent.

 But everywhere, the conventional wisdom was turned upside down by people who turned out to be angrier than their elites had suspected, and better able to channel that dissatisfaction into mass protest and even revolution.

 The first surprise was the strength and near universality of the public discontent. Like Tolstoy’s unhappy families, the motivations of protesters in each country were unique. But there was a common thread to the uprisings and a common reason why the elites were taken by surprise.

 The unifying complaint is crony capitalism.

But the notion that the rules of the economic game are rigged to benefit the elites at the expense of the middle class has had remarkable resonance this year around the world and across the political spectrum. Could the failure of the experts to anticipate this anger be connected to the fact that the analysts are usually part of the 1 percent, or at least the 10 percent, at the top?

 The second surprise was how easy it has become to transform mass dissatisfaction into mass protest. That was true both in chillingly repressive regimes and in ones where the hurdle to collective action had been thought to be public apathy.

Shut off MSM said...

Ron Paul Did Not "Walk Out" of CNN Interview; Blatantly Biased Headline by Time Magazine; Six Reasons to Vote for Paul

Fair to Say?!

It's certainly not fair to make that claim. Can I see a poll please? Moreover, Libertarians do not hold the racial beliefs stated by David Frum.

If someone wants to talk about ethics, it's just as easy for me to claim "It's fair to say the vast majority of those following the Paul story understand that CNN writers like Gloria Borger, David Frum, and Wolf Blitzer do not care about the news, they only care about generating sensational headlines, any way they can. Moreover, CNN openly support wars, regardless of the ethics of war, because war is good for ratings."

I do believe that's "fair to say", although like David Frum I do not have a poll to prove it.

While on the theme of "fair to say" I would like to point out this comment made by "EasyRhino" to Frum on the CNN blog: "Keep in mind Frum is a 5 star chicken hawk who defended the invasion of Iraq and advocates regime change in Iran and Syria, everything Paul is against."

Contact CNN

I might also point out that it's "fair to say" the CNN writers must be cowards because they do not have a direct way to contact them via email.

You can however, Send a General Email to CNN and let them know what you think of their reporting.
Six Reasons to Vote for Paul

    Paul is the only one for a balanced budget and a plan to get there
    the only one who would bring US troops home immediately
    the only one who would end the Fed
    the only one who believes in the free market
    the only one who believes gold should be money
    the only one who would dismantle entire government departments

Corporatized said...

Mainstream Media: Dumbing it Down

Between corporate sponsorship and pretty big paychecks, are news anchors and their networks really offering up a fair take on what’s at stake? Georgetown University’s Chris Chambers talks to us about how the mainstream media sneaks slants into their broadcast and brings a bias to the big stories.

Childs play said...

How Banks Cheat Taxpayers

It gets even worse in the derivatives markets, where banks routinely overcharge state and local governments for things like interest rate swaps, for one very obvious reason – swaps are not traded on open exchanges, so only the banks know how to price them.

Imagine what NFL gambling would be like if the casinos didn’t publish the point spreads every week, and you’ll get a rough idea of how the swap market works. If you couldn’t look it up, how many points would you give the Dolphins against the Jets next week? Two? Five? Seven? The big casinos know, because they’re taking all that action, that the real number is one point.

In the same vein, exactly how accurately do you think some local county treasurer might be able to guess the cost of an interest rate swap for his local school system?  Answer: he’d probably do about as well as you or I would, guessing the odds on a Croatian soccer match.

The big banks know this, which is why there should never, ever be non-competitive bids for those sorts of financial services. In a sole-source contract for a swap deal, you’re trusting a (probably corrupt) Too-Big-To-Fail bank to give you a good deal for a product whose price is not publicly listed anywhere.

Read more:

So happy together said...

MF Global chief missing $1.2B is financial adviser to EPA

During two days of recent congressional hearings into how as much as $1.2 billion disappeared from MF Global customer accounts, the chief operating officer of the imploding investment firm responded again and again that he did not know.
Yet as the House and Senate interrogated Bradley I. Abelow and other top executives at MF Global Holdings Ltd., lawmakers did not mention Mr. Abelow’s role as a financial adviser for the Environmental Protection Agency, which as of Tuesday listed him as the chairman of its financial advisory board.
as he finds himself the public face of a bankruptcy and admitted to
lawmakers that he had no idea how client funds disappeared, Congress and the administration have voiced no public concern about Mr. Abelow’s role advising the $8.6 billion government agency on its finances.

He has ties to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson through former New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine. Each served at different times as the governor’s chief of staff. When Mr. Corzine lost his bid for re-election and later joined MF Global, Mr. Abelow followed.

Swapped to death said...

Former Fed VP Accuses Bernanke Of Bailing Out Europe Via Currency Swaps

First it was Zero Hedge. Then Ron Paul joined in. Now it is the turn
of a former Dallas Fed Vice President, Gerald ODriscoll, to outright
accuse the Fed of bailing out Europe courtesy of "incomprehensible"
currency swaps, and implicitly accusing Bernanke of lying that he
would not bail out Europe even as he has done precisely that. And not
only that: by cutting the USD swap spread from OIS+100 to OIS+50, the
Fed has made sure it gets paid less than ever for extended Europe the
courtesy of bailing it out all over again. Incidentally, O'Driscoll
says, "America's central bank, the Federal Reserve, is engaged in a
bailout of
European banks. Surprisingly, its operation is largely unnoticed
here." One thing we can say proudly - it has been noticed loud and
clear here...

against the wind said...

MSNBC "If Ron Paul Wins Iowa, We Just Take It Out"

All ploys said...

Bill Black: What if the SEC investigated Banks the way it is investigating Mutual Funds?

The Wall Street Journal ran a story yesterday (12/27/11) entitled “SEC Ups Its Game to Identify Rogue Firms.” “Rogue” is an interesting word with a range of definitions. When it is used as an adjective its meaning is: “a playfully mischievous person; scamp.” The trivialization of the most destructive elite frauds is one of the most common forms of what criminologists call “neutralization” of the moral content of wrong doing. Neutralization increases crime.The actual story makes it clear that the criminals that the SEC was identifying were not “rogues.” They were the CEOs of seemingly legitimate firms. The SEC is identifying “accounting control frauds” – the frauds that cause greater financial losses than all other forms of property crime combined. The SEC is not identifying a few rotten apples, but roughly 100 hedge funds likely to have engaged in accounting fraud.

The SEC should be applauded for finally understanding that “if it’s too good to be true; it probably isn’t true.”
The most interesting aspects of the WSJ story, however, are two unexamined topics that should have been central to the story. First, there is not a word in the article about criminal prosecutions for the frauds the SEC has identified. The frauds, as described in the article, are so blatant that they would make relatively simple to prosecute. There is no indication that the SEC wanted the WSJ to know that they had made well over a hundred criminal referrals against hedge fund CEOs and senior officers. There is no indication that the WSJ reporters were interested in whether the SEC had made criminal referrals against these moderately elite felons. As a result, we have no information on whether the SEC has in fact made hundreds of criminal referrals against the senior officers at the hedge funds that they have identified as having engaged in likely fraud. Indeed, we have no evidence that they have made any criminal referrals. Neither the SEC nor the WSJ reporters indicated that any prosecutions, or even Department of Justice investigations, resulted from the SEC hedge fund investigations.

Worth a listen said...

Robert David Steele - Changing the Trajectory of the US Security State

For many years, Robert was in the Republican Party until Dick Cheney hijacked both the party and the White House. He briefly joined the Libertarian Party and considered running for Congress as a Libertarian (VA-11) but ended up focusing on Electoral Reform as the "one thing" that could mobilize all of us who are now shut out of the election and governance system. The two large parties have captured ballot access at the state level which allows them to control the public treasury at the national level.

Raw deal said...

Wall Street - a raw deal for the 100 percent

The stunning reality is that five years into the financial meltdown, it's business as usual on Wall Street - outlandish rewards for insiders with downside for almost everyone else. Occupy Wall Street protesters are right - something is wrong - but they're not sure what. Here's what I say: A rigged game affects not just the 99 percent, but everyone, and with global repercussions.
The radio show host wanted his listeners to hear from a Wall Street "soldier" who had broken ranks to publicly challenge his industry's out-of-control practices. Maybe I could explain what is wrong on Wall Street and why CEOs get eight-figure bonuses while hardworking Americans lose their homes and jobs.

Make no mistake - as I told the listeners - I'm a hard-core capitalist. But capitalism has been hijacked, and I'm infuriated. For capitalism to work, people who assume risk should reap the rewards of success, but they also must suffer when losses occur.

Read more:

GS666 said...

Thank you all ploys for providing this to us. As you can see, we have published it as a blog post.


iakovos said...

The Socialist Myth of the Greedy Banker

Post a Comment