15 votes

Rothschild Zionism vs The Illuminati Occult

I can never get a clear and honest debate over this. Does anyone know the truth? I have been led to believe that Zionism is the true evil that controls the world. The Benjamin Freedman speech in 1961 is just so convincing.

Then you have the illuminati folks which haven't really convinced me (yet) of "occultism" and Satan worship being a conspiracy in Hollywood etc.

I would like to see some of the best videos preferably, so I can clearly see the two sides or many sides for that matter.

So let's here it, I don't like Israel, so am I an antisemite? Which of the two do you believe and why?

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

You shouldn’t believe either

You should go back to the drawing board, educate yourself on true Libertarian thought and the fight against Statism. Once you accept that the conspiracy theories are crap you will be happier and have a better sense of the world…..and a much greater understanding.



"I'm Ron Paul." - Ron Paul

why are you bumping my comments

lame brain......you don't know the difference between the greenbackers and free banking.

Because you finally said something intelligent

That wasn't condescending, disrespectful, inflammatory, vulgar, idiotic, ridiculous or misinformed.

Good job buddy!

You keep calling me a greenbacker.

Could you be so kind as to tell me what qualifies one as a greenbacker?

"I'm Ron Paul." - Ron Paul

the fact that you don't know

Speaks volumes. The fact that you are to lazy to look it up screams that you are only interested in being spoon fed

Nice cop out.

Way to avoid answering the question.

"I'm Ron Paul." - Ron Paul

a normal person would look it up themselves

.....man you are lazy

I know what a greenbacker is,

Just not sure that you do. You keep using that word incorrectly, that's why I asked you to define it.

Are you afraid of me shattering your argument like I did in the other post?

Understandable. Do want to stone me to death now, like your hero Gary North advocates?

"I'm Ron Paul." - Ron Paul

HAHAHA….in what world did you shatter my argument

Man there you go again Bill Clinton…..keep the lie going rather the admitting the truth. The truth is you are an advocate for the greenback movement just like you idol Andrew Guise, Ellen Brown and the movement that would allow the government the ability to print the money supply. You stated you were for the free market providing the money supply……yet the people you promote are in complete opposition of this process.

There is plenty of post on here that expose the Greenbacker for what they are…..conspiracy kooks…..start with this one:


If you dare to educate yourself read all the parts……if not ……well everyone knows you won’t….and everyone knows that you were exposed as a poser for Libertarian thought and free markets.
You could never admit you were wrong….at least I was man enough to admit I wasn’t aware of Gary North Old Testament positions…..do I like them ….not particular……would I prefer them to the Greenbacker’s religious persuasions……yeah…..hell yeah. But you don’t know what they are either, just like you don’t know anything about their monetary theory……or Gary North’s monetary theory. If you did KNOW you wouldn’t be talking out of both sides of your mouth ……but everyone now KNOWS……. that you don’t KNOW shit. You last post proves it…….you know what a greenbacker is……and you are an advocate for that position by posting that crap from Andrew Guise….opposite from a free market solution......dumbass!


This is where you realize who the dumbass is.

SPOILER ALERT!!! (It's not me.)

You've been carrying on about how I'm a greenbacker ever since I made this comment about "Ukraine and the Dollar":

"If you would like to know what's going on at the federal reserve you could just read their minutes.


If you want to know what's going on with the dollar maybe you could listen to someone who is an expert in currency.

http://oneradionetwork.com/moneyfinance/andrew-gause-and-the... "

Since you are unable to concisely and coherently define what a "greenbacker" is, I will provide a couple of definitions for you.

From Wikipedia:

The party's name referred to the non-gold backed paper money, commonly known as "greenbacks", issued by the North during the American Civil War and shortly afterward. The party opposed the deflationary lowering of prices paid to producers entailed by a return to a bullion-based monetary system, the policy favored by the dominant Republican Party. Continued use of unbacked currency, it was believed, would better foster business and assist farmers by raising prices and making debts easier to pay.


Main Entry: green·back·er
Pronunciation: \-ˌba-kər\
Function: noun
Date: 1876
1 capitalized : a member of a post-Civil War American political party opposing reduction in the amount of paper money in circulation 2 : one who advocates a paper currency backed only by the United States government
— green·back·ism \-ˌki-zəm\ noun


Now that we know what a "greenbacker" is, let's move on.

You keep associating me with Ellen Brown. Yet, this is the first time I have ever typed her name on this site.

Therefore I will not respond to anything related to her or her positions, as it would be completely off topic.

Next, we have Andrew Gause who happens to be a monetary historian and Ron Paul supporter. He is also a goldbug and dealer of numismatics.

Where he differs from Ron Paul, is that he believes society is too far gone to return to a gold standard.

His suggestion would be to nationalize the federal reserve and have the treasury keep the profits instead of the FED.

Where I differ from Gause is that I do not believe that regulating the monetary system is a proper function of government.

However, I do not see the Federal Reserve being abolished in our lifetime. Although we could 'somewhat' regain control and transparency it were to be nationalized.

This is in contradiction with my ideals, but progress is attained through compromise.

Let's be realistic. Ron Paul wasn't elected. The Fed isn't going away.

Time for Plan B.

"I'm Ron Paul." - Ron Paul

Boohoo......and still clueless

Straight from the horse’s ass…..didn’t you say. ( I do apologize for misspelling his last name)

In the following interview, Andrew Gause breaks down exactly how to end the Federal Reserve banking system:
1. Print an equivalent money supply of 1’s, 5’s, 10’s, 20’s, 50’s, 100’s in U.S. Notes….. Greenbacker

2. Issue an edict asserting that all citizens must turn in all Federal Reserve Notes……. Greenbacker

3. Return the Federal Reserve Notes to the Federal Reserve Bank and demand the return of government bonds……. Greenbacker

4. Destroy the bonds and create a public national bank that replaces “the Fed.”…… Greenbacker


This is exactly what Ellen Brown advocates. The Greenbacker Populist Movement is what gave us the Fed….the Populist became the Progressive Movement…..there is nothing “free” or “market” oriented about these people….I thought you said you want the market to be in control of the money supply……dumbass.

For those interested in the truth…..here is a dissenting opinion.


PS....I don't was my time reading the Fed mins for them to tell me what they want me to hear.....I read their financial statements to see what they are doing.

Nice try.

Dearest Goldspin,

Be honest....You didn't listen to the interview did you?

You hate Andy Gause but the link you provided has this to say about him:

"Andrew Gause is one of the most respected monetary historians and contemporary experts on American and international banking systems. Not only does Gause understand the intricacies of the Federal Reserve fiat money system, he has also studied every other fiat money system in history and understands that all of these systems ultimately fail. Gause has attracted a wide following with over one thousand television and radio appearances, and has written two books on the subject, The Secret World of Money and Uncle Sam Cooks the Books."

Andrew Gause states in another interview that Abraham Lincoln (greenbacker)was potentially the worst president in US history. The other contender is Woodrow Wilson!

What do you have to say about that Goldspan? Nevermind, I don't really care.

But I digress, lets get back to your point. Speaking of the actions of the FED, if the method you mentioned above were to be followed, Andy says the FED would "force a collapse, force a contraction, they would force a panic...threaten, cajole, twist..." He gives the example of Andrew Jackson ending the Second Bank of the United States, the "Federal Reserve" of the time.

He then goes on to state "Step 5" which is "no monopoly issue power, everyone is free to issue notes...small enterprises were able to issue money"

I thought that was your objective. Doesn't that sound like a "free market" solution? You guys have the same destination, youre just taking different paths to get there.

So now that we've covered that,

One more question, what is your connection with Gary North?

Why do you love him so much?

You stated that you preferred Gary Norths suggestion to stone homosexuals over Andrew Gause's economic proposal.

Goldspan: " I wasn’t aware of Gary North Old Testament positions…..do I like them ….not particular……would I prefer them to the Greenbacker’s religious persuasions……yeah…..hell yeah."

While I found your article well written full of insight, I now realize it was all a ploy. Looks like you've been exposed as a neo con zealot.


Such a shame.

"I'm Ron Paul." - Ron Paul

Actually I am more a Rothbardian

Then in love with Gary North, it’s just that GN has documented the Greenback movement and all these so called financial historian. I read Andrew Guase book “Uncle Sam Cooks the Books” (about a 100 years ago) and it is written for simpletons. You see LH…..what you fail to realize is……I am a financial historian and I am sure I could dismantle AG argument for the printing of government money any day. You need to learn about the truer Libertarian philosophy of a free market banking and monetary system called “free banking” You can find all you will need to know by reading “The history of banking and money” by Murray Rothbard….until you have read it….just leave me alone, I am tired of wasting my time on you.

Way to go through the whole thread down-voting everyone...

...way to troll dude...

Do you have anything to contribute besides ridicule and negativity? Please just ignore these threads if you think they're stupid. Or do you have an interest in denying the nature of the elite's agendas?

Unfortunately Goldspan is clueless when it comes to this issue. His cognitive dissonance in the face of undeniable evidence has been on display for some time. He is thoroughly convinced there is no 'NWO' or any such secret society plot, despite the testimony of many credible influential people throughout history, (like JFK, W. Wilson, Eisenhower, etc.) including those thoroughly involved in the plot like George H. W. Bush, Henry Kissinger, etc. who have openly bragged about it on numerous occasions.

Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

So Goldspan is clueless.....or perhaps perfers to live in the

real world!

Here is something i started a while ago but never really finished.....

Anytime that a hard-nosed analysis is put forth of who our rulers are, of how their political and economic interests interlock, it is invariably denounced by Establishment liberals and conservatives (and even by many libertarians) as a "conspiracy theory of history," "paranoid," "economic determinist," and even "Marxist." These smear labels are applied across the board, even though such realistic analyses can be, and have been, made from any and all parts of the economic spectrum, from the John Birch Society to the Communist Party. The most common label is "conspiracy theorist," almost always leveled as a hostile epithet rather than adopted by the "conspiracy theorist" himself.

It is no wonder that usually these realistic analyses are spelled out by various "extremists" who are outside the Establishment consensus. For it is vital to the continued rule of the State apparatus that it have legitimacy and even sanctity in the eyes of the public, and it is vital to that sanctity that our politicians and bureaucrats be deemed to be disembodied spirits solely devoted to the "public good." Once let the cat out of the bag that these spirits are all too often grounded in the solid earth of advancing a set of economic interests through use of the State, and the basic mystique of government begins to collapse.

Let us take an easy example. Suppose we find that Congress has passed a law raising the steel tariff or imposing import quotas on steel? Surely only a moron will fail to realize that the tariff or quota was passed at the behest of lobbyists from the domestic steel industry, anxious to keep out efficient foreign competitors. No one would level a charge of "conspiracy theorist" against such a conclusion. But what the conspiracy theorist is doing is simply to extend his analysis to more complex measures of government: say, to public works projects, the establishment of the ICC, the creation of the Federal Reserve System, or the entry of the United States into a war. In each of these cases, the conspiracy theorist asks himself the question cui bono? Who benefits from this measure? If he finds that Measure A benefits X and Y, his next step is to investigate the hypothesis: did X and Y in fact lobby or exert pressure for the passage of Measure A? In short, did X and Y realize that they would benefit and act accordingly?

Far from being a paranoid or a determinist, the conspiracy analyst is a praxeologist; that is, he believes that people act purposively, that they make conscious choices to employ means in order to arrive at goals. Hence, if a steel tariff is passed, he assumes that the steel industry lobbied for it; if a public works project is created, he hypothesizes that it was promoted by an alliance of construction firms and unions who enjoyed public works contracts, and bureaucrats who expanded their jobs and incomes. It is the opponents of "conspiracy" analysis who profess to believe that all events — at least in government —are random and unplanned, and that therefore people do not engage in purposive choice and planning.

( I think this was phased incorrectly……at least for me….I would have wrote it like this:
“It is the antagonist of liberty who veils himself as a "conspiracy" analysis who profess to believe that all events — at least in government —are random and unplanned, and that therefore people do not engage in purposive choice and planning”
I wrote this specifically to point the finger at the people that have buried their heads in the sand to avoid the topic of responsible government…….which I don’t believe I am doing……I think I am thinking beyond the conspiracy’s theorist that is explained which is what I underlined above.
There are, of course, good conspiracy analysts and bad conspiracy analysts, just as there are good and bad historians or practitioners of any discipline. The bad conspiracy analyst tends to make two kinds of mistakes, which indeed leave him open to the Establishment charge of "paranoia." First, he stops with the cui bono; if measure A benefits X and Y, he simply concludes that therefore X and Y were responsible. He fails to realize that this is just a hypothesis, and must be verified by finding out whether or not X and Y really did so. (Perhaps the wackiest example of this was the British journalist Douglas Reed who, seeing that the result of Hitler's policies was the destruction of Germany, concluded, without further evidence, that therefore Hitler was a conscious agent of external forces who deliberately set out to ruin Germany.)
(This is how sometimes I get caught in a position of defending the banks…..because of my knowledge of how the system works…..the specifics)
Secondly, the bad conspiracy analyst seems to have a compulsion to wrap up all the conspiracies, all the bad guy power blocs, into one giant conspiracy. Instead of seeing that there are several power blocs trying to gain control of government, sometimes in conflict and sometimes in alliance, he has to assume — again without evidence — that a small group of men controls them all, and only seems to send them into conflict. I submit that the naïfs who stubbornly refuse to examine the interplay of political and economic interest in government are tossing away an essential tool for analyzing the world in which we live.
Case in point, on April 28th 2004 the USG called the money center banks into a meeting. The topic as reported by the media was to discuss too much leverage that the banks had on their books. How do I know this is what really happened…..because I watched their actions and know their positions. There is no way a bank walks into a room and exposes their positions when everyone else in the room is holding your collateral and you owe them money……they would not have shown up for a meeting like that. ….. and the result of this meeting was that all the banks went out and increased their leverage even more……some almost doubling it. I think the USG told them that the USG was in trouble with Fannie and Freddie and they wanted their help.
The when the thing went bad……the banks were roasted and the government cried foul and rode in like a white knight……hell they even made a movie about it…..”too big to fail”. And all the conspiracy theorist were outraged by what happened…..the evil bankers made off with all this money and we were left holding the bag……but that’s not what happened.

In 2003/2004 Fannie and Freddie accounting scandals broke out. The economy was living on the housing market after the tech bubble…..not the 75% of GDP in 2008……but it was large enough to have a huge impact on the economy if Fan/ Fred collapsed. Fan/Fred was the secondary market for mortgages......and if they failed the housing market would collapse and the bailout would have been huge. Maybe not the 317 billion it ending up costing now…….but without a functioning secondary market in place the economic collapse would have been worse……and how could they sell that to the public. So they brought them all in….told them to leverage up more…bought themselves some time……hoping it would stay all good until the next administration moved in and the Bush Admin would be gone. Government promised them cover if it went south and we paid the price……the had to keep it going.

Was this a conspiracy? I don’t know…..but it wasn’t some secret banking cabal…..I think this was people making decisions based upon the information they had at the time…..bad decisions……Bad government.

By the way they didn’t save Lehman because Dick Fuld refused to help in the Long Term Capital Management bailout in 1998 when Paulson was at Citigroup.

Law man.......I have over 25 years of real world trading experience and over 35 years of looking at the things you present.........I am not clueless.....I just have the wisdom to know the difference between knowledge and information. I have bent over backwards to be nice to you......offing to help you gain some knowledge, but it goes unappreciated......if you wish to speak about me in the future......how about speaking to me.

Only about the NWO and secret societies...

...so take a chill pill...

And it's true, you are clueless about that...

Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

do you really think I haven't heard all that

Crap before......do you really think you are posting something new. I looked into it before there was an internet......when you could only get the information in books....Instead of just watching videos on youtube. C'mon man......unplug your computer and read a book.....start with the history of banking and money by Rothbard.

Video... documented recorded evidence is not valid?

Feast your eyes... and ears...

Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

My God Man you proved

George Bush uttered the words New World Order! It must exist!

The New World Order conspiracy started as an extension of old John Birch Society conspiracy theories about the role of the United Nations. This theory claimed that the United Nations was merely a tool of the Communists, and that the end goal was the complete subjugation of the United States to the United Nations. This would then set up a world government in which all of the freedoms that Americans hold dear would be abolished. Usually, top American officials were claimed to be in on the conspiracy.

As usual with conspiracy theories, there are many contradictory variations on the theory. The most popular variation used to maintain that international bankers (a common code word for the Jews) were pulling the strings in both the US and the USSR. Others of a more obvious racist bent flat-out said that Zionists were the ones responsible (Like always). As many conspiracy theorists also believe that the Jews are responsible for either the banks or Communism (or both), these three strands are often woven together into a completely ridiculous whole.

Supporters of this theory can say to a certain degree who is part of it but nobody can determine who isn't part of the NWO. International organizations such as the World Bank, IMF, European Union, the United Nations, and NATO are often listed as core NWO organizations. Presidents and prime ministers of nations are routinely included in the conspiracy. A slightly different version of the NWO theory goes as far as saying that these families and persons are all part of the same bloodline. Most prominent families such as the Rockefellers, Morgans, and Du Ponts, as well as European monarchs, are said to be important members as well. Specifically, the Rothschild family is often accused of being among the masterminds.

Some versions of the theory are just reworkings of the old Illuminati conspiracy theory, in which a secret society is said to be working behind the scenes for world domination or some other nefarious purpose. Sometimes the Illuminati may be explicitly mentioned in these versions of the theory. Other versions will reference more recent groups, of which the Trilateral Commission and the Bilderberg Group (which, unlike the Illuminati, actually do exist) are commonly mentioned. Freemasons are also regularly cited as perpetuating a conspiracy for world domination. The Pope, or the Roman Catholic Church in general, are occasionally held to be the orchestrators of the NWO. Many other manifestations of the NWO theory characterise it is an international Jewish conspiracy, though many others see conspiracy leadership elsewhere and are not anti-Semitic (explicitly, at least). Famous crank and perennial candidate Lyndon LaRouche, for example, sees the British as the leaders of the conspiracy, and the Jews merely as pawns of British power.

It is because the NWO has limitless power and is worldwide in reach that it can be alleged to have been behind just about any event anywhere. This makes it less of a conspiracy theory than a framework into which any conspiracy theory can be shoehorned (a "super-conspiracy theory"). This also commonly involves a belief in pseudohistories (usually ripped off from the cranks of yesteryear) in an attempt to explain the origins of the NWO. For example, more modern incarnations of the NWO theory often draw on older Freemason and Illuminati theories and claim that groups like the Bilderbergs grew out of these earlier conspiracies.

The conspiracy theory remained marginal until the 1990s, and the growth of the Internet. At that point, the theorists started to see Bill Clinton as the biggest pawn of the NWO. The events at both Ruby Ridge and Waco were considered part of the attempt to remove American liberties pursuant to an eventual takeover by either FEMA or the UN. During this era, the theory was most closely connected to certain paleoconservatives, and to the burgeoning militia movement. Pat Robertson gave a boost to belief in the theory with his 1992 book The New World Order. Increasingly preposterous variations on the theory proliferated during the early-to-mid 1990s, such as allegation that mysterious fleets of black helicopters were being prepared for military occupation of the U.S.

Relation to Explanations of Actual, Real, Power Structures.
In reality, there are power differences. There are forms of power, especially by Western governments and businesses in the form of: international organization bias, military interventions, economic exploitation, and dominant cultural exportation . For more credible (but not universally agreed upon) theories or arguments of world power structures, on "Core-Periphery Theory," "Criticism of United Nations," "Economic Exploitation," and "Cultural Imperialism."

The most striking difference between reality and the Conspiracy Theory is the CT's idea that everyone with power is in strict collaboration. In actuality, there is much competition, backstabbing, and differing goals between Presidents, military leaders, business managers, and others in power. It is plausible (and often shown true) that world leaders are not always innocent or transparent and that leaders have more control than many people might prefer as evidenced in news leaks and controversies around the world.

You again?

Let me be clear:

I don't go around down voting folks.

That's silly and immature.

When I do run across your hostile comments, sometimes I'll down vote them.

And sometimes I feel sympathetic. When that happens I will go find a comment I agree with and give it a bump.

There are certain things we can all agree on.

Goldspan hates me because he is a collectivist and thinks that I am a "greenbacker" ! He made a post about me that was deleted by the MoDS!

I was just being nice and bumping a comment he made that I agree with.

Afterall, we're all on this Ark together.

You hate me because I don't believe in the loony tune chemtrail bullshit. Last time I tried to educate and be nice to you, you told me to get lost, so I did.

You are the first person to call me a troll. At least your a trendsetter.

But why, are you are stalking me here?

I assume you would like me to enlighten you about your boogeyman offshore Banker Vatican loving Israeli shape shifting Satan worshipping 33rd degree illuminated new world order from the planet nubiru with their blue blooded incestuous genetically modified DNA, which allows them to control HAARP with their MIND!

But I'm not going to. I spend too much time entertaining you fools.

The answer is out there if you can find it.


"I'm Ron Paul." - Ron Paul

Best stuff that i have found in terms of real history

Is Murray Rothbard giving a lecture series on the economic history of the us up until just after ww2 found at mises.org, the Scott Horton documentaries page(specifically the one on fear and the one on the secret government), the war state by Michael Swanson, and war is a racket by smedley butler.

Not to mention anything on the founding fathers especially written by Ron chernow.

The masons and illuminati and jesuits... That's all just a cover story for the truth. You ready for it... It really is the politicians fault.


Good thread... Let's get into it shall we... 'Albert Pike'...

"On July 14th 1889, Albert Pike (Civil War General accused of war crimes, Grand Master Mason, & alleged founder of the Ku Klux Klan) issued instruction to the twenty-three Supreme Councils that gave a full exposition of his doctrines and beliefs. Pike stated: 'That which we must say to the crowd is- We worship a god, but it is the god one adores without superstition. To you Sovereign Grand Inspectors General, we say this, that you may repeat it to the Brethren of the 32nd, 31st, and 30th degrees- The Masonic religion should be, by all of us initiates of the high degrees, maintained in the purity of the Luciferian doctrine....Yes, Lucifer is god, and unfortunately, Adonay is also God." (Occult Theocracy, p.220-221)

According to Albert Pike's own writings, his goals were to create a Communist Russia, start WW1 and the League of Nations, to create Nazi Germany to start WW2 and create the UN and political Zionism, use that to start WW3 to wipe out Islam and Judaism. This leaves Christianity with no roots, to be pitted against atheism and nihilism. When the world has become desperate for order and something to believe in, the Order will reveal it's true agenda, and it's secret knowledge that Lucifer is (their) god.

Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?


What? No mention of the Talmudic Judaists? Their Talmud is held in higher esteem than the Torah. It is the final authority on all things Jewish. I think it's at least worth a look as to what our so called closest allies really believe.

You're just not right, at all... Let me explain...

I am Jewish, went to Hebrew school on Wednesdays after school, and Saturday mornings as a kid, until my Bar-Mitzvah at 13...

We NEVER, not one time ever, we never studied the Talmud.

Why don't you tell your fellow DPers what the Talmud is? Enlighten us!

(Seriously, whoever you are, save the down-votes for opinions you disagree with... But FACTS are FACTS, whether you like it or not... I'm just trying to educate people to the facts, and you Down-vote? Grow up.)

If you don't know, I'll explain...

The Talmud is a book written by Rabbis, that looks at the writings of the Torah, and makes arguments about the meanings of each line of the Torah.
On one side of the page you will have one argument, on the other side of the page you will have another side of the argument, and in the middle of the page you'll have the compromised or consensus theory.

It is absolutely NOT the "Holiest Book of the Jews", not at all. Many Jews do not consider it "holy" at all.

Certain sects of Judaism, i.e. - the Talmudic Jews, which are one sect of Orthodox Jews, follow the Talmud. Most Jews do not. Still, the Torah is above the Talmud, the Talmud is only used to interpret the Torah for these particular Orthodox sects, and still there are various opinions one can choose from.

The Talmud does NOT say anything like "Jesus is burning in hot excrement". Or anything like that.

The Holy Books to Jews are the Torah: 5 Books of Moses - Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy...

The complete Old Testament aka The Holy Scriptures aka the 'Tanach' include the Torah (the 5 books of Moses) and the 'Prophets' and the 'writings'...

Joshua, Judges, Samuel I & II, Kings I & II, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Twelve Prophets, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, ...
Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, Chronicles I & II ...

Any more questions for the Jew? Just ask, politely.

Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

If you really want the truth look to Rome.

The highest Zionist figures such as the Rothschilds are Masonic Papal Knights (Maltese Knights as one example), meaning they work for Rome. Specifically, the Rothschilds bear the title "Guardians of the Papal Treasure" as per the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia; further evidence to point to them as being contemporary court Jews. The Rothschilds were brought into the conspiracy by the Jesuit Order which at the time of their suppression founded the Bavarian Illuminati using Jesuit professor of cannon law Adam Weishaupt. The Rothschilds were seen as being financially assistant to the order during their time of suppression.

The government of Israel today is ruled by these Masonic Zionists, and therefore does not work for the benefit of the Israeli people or the Jews therein, but for this neo-Roman empire. This is why contemporary court Jew Shimon Perez has deeded legal custody of over 60% of Jerusalem including the most holy of sites like the temple Mount to the Vatican in the 1993 Oslo Accords; just recently there has been talk of even more of Jerusalem's holy sites being given to the Vatican such as Mount Zion.

One finds that Jesuits detest Christ, deceive the people (the classic definition of a Jesuit is "a clever person who deceives the people"), order assassinations, start wars and do whatever is necessary including torture and killing to secure the Pope's Temporal power over the governments of the Earth (you can read more about that in the notorious Jesuit 4th Vow "blood oath"), so there is certainly some sort of Satanic aspect as well.

I haven't heard this one yet.

I haven't heard this one yet. However, if the Rothschilds own as much of the world's wealth as we are told, Then don't you think its fair to say that they work for no one but themselves? I do realize that the pope is pretty communistic in his views and is also from the Jesuit order.

"truth is treason in an empire of lies."

If one family alone have that much wealth and power...

...which they do...

...Then why doesn't someone with more guns, or that specializes in force, just go and take their wealth? Why didn't that happen hundreds of years ago?

Because the Rothschild are PROTECTED! They are just the money handlers, the court Jews for the Vatican, and the secret societies that run it.

And this is not to knock Catholicism in any way. My mother and grandmother are both Catholic, and I'm sitting next to Grandma as I type. Both of them were raised by the Nuns in Catholic school for girls. I am not speaking about something I do not have intimate knowledge of. Most Catholics are good faithful people, and like most people have no idea of the level of deception at the highest levels of power. In the end, Yeshua/Jesus is the Head of the Church, not the Roman Papacy, and that is all that matters.

Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

Veritas know what he's talking about...

..on this topic for sure...

While the Israeli government, and the U.N., the U.S. and all the highest levels of government are run by the same oligarchy, the people of Israel are good people.

The U.S. government is corrupt, infiltrated with globalists, and actively seeking to destroy freedom for the American people. BUT... America is not evil, is it? The people are mostly good. The ideas of liberty that founded this nation are good. It's a shame that evil globalists have taken over the positions of power...

The same can be said about Israel.

Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

ecorob's picture

We have found common ground here, LmJ.

I agree with you 100%!

its 'cos I owe ya, my young friend...
Rockin' the FREE world in Tennessee since 1957!
9/11 Truth.

A few things to consider

The church is effectively the inheritor of the Former Roman Empire.

So for one thing, the physical wealth accumulated by Rome - now the church, far exceeds any worth of artificially-valued modern currencies held by the Rothschilds. Have you heard the phrase "he who holds the gold makes the rules?" It is very true and by all means, the value of gold is infinity more valuable than fiat currencies. Let us take a look at the details of the foremost institution of gold holdings; the Vatican:

The Roman Catholic Church controls approximately 60,350 metric tonnes of gold, twice the size of the total official gold reserves around the world or approximately 30.2% of all the gold every mined/produced. At current prices, it puts the asset value of the greatest treasure in human history at over US $1,245 Billion.

The above figure of 60,350 metric tonnes has came from endeavors such as the Eastern Crusades, Western Civilization, the New World, the conquering of empires, World Wars, and even organized crime.

Another asset of the church is its massive property holdings:

The Vatican is the largest holder of land titles for any organization or government in the world with visible title to around US $316 Billion of property (churches, schools, hospitals etc) and around US $2,623 Billion of investment property hidden in extremely complex networks of hundreds of thousands of trusts and front companies.

The wealth of the church over the past 100 years has been made to purposefully appear to seem not as incredibly enormous as it really is:

The indisputable historic evidence

Prior to the appearance of mainstream "entertainment" based news and media, if you were to ask an educated person 100 years ago what single entity was the largest and wealthiest in the world, they would have told you without question the Roman Catholic Church.

The clear, unmistakable and uncontestable truth concerning the Roman Catholic Church is that for 1,000 years it has been the most dominant organization on the planet, during which time it virtually owned directly or indirectly the whole or the majority of wealth of Europe.

For the four hundred years up until the last century, it was well recognized that the Roman Catholic Church also owned and controlled vast wealth and people of the Americas including large parts of South-East Asia and Africa.

Again, let us be absolutely clear on this. The Catholic Church for the past 1,000 years was the indisputable largest economic entity of humanity history. No other nation, corporation or group of families came anywhere close. For centuries, the Church and the Popes had unfettered access to the plunder of Islamic countries, of the ancient Celts and Saxons, of ancient Greek, of ancient Egypt, of the entire fortunes of gold of the Americas, of the mines and civilizations of Africa.

As the largest economic entity of history for over 1,000 years, the Roman Catholic Church dominated ever single class of assets, not just gold and minerals. Its property holdings were by fare the largest of any economic entity in Europe, let alone conquered lands. Its holdings of art and precious artifacts was and is unheralded.

The Roman Catholic Church was a founder in virtually every historic major enterprise created out of states under its influence. It had holdings in new corporations from trading companies to banks and then major industries were unmatched.

So wealthy was the Roman Catholic Church for over 1,000 years that even if it hired every single person on the planet in 1800 as an employee and paid them in gold coins, it had enough gold reserves to keep everyone gainfully employed for centuries.

This total domination of the Roman Catholic Church as the single largest economic entity on planet Earth for over 1,000 years can’t simply be dismissed. Prior to modern revisions of history, it was acknowledged as absolute fact- the Catholic Church was the biggest economic entity on the planet, no question.

How then did something so dominant suddenly appear to drop in asset value to a corporation of only a few billion dollars, that it would not even rate in the top 1,000 economic entities of the world today? Simply through creative history and creative accounting.

Creative history

Firstly in regards to creative history, from the early 20th Century, the influence of the Catholic Church began to be downplayed.

The reasons given for the" magical disappearance" of the wealth of the Roman Catholic are numerous, but all concerning the common theme-- economic and political incompetence with bad fortune. The loss of England was blown up to represent a major disaster to the finances of the Catholic Church from which it never recovered.

The wars of the 16th to 18th Century were also blamed for depleting the assets of the Catholic Church until finally the invasion of Napoleon Bonaparte at the beginning of the 19th Century was used as a final blow to indicate the once great and financially powerful Catholic Church was officially broke.

This of course is technically true. By the time Napoleon entered Rome, the Jesuits had captured most of the gold of the Pope.

Of course, in this revised history the holdings of South and North America, let alone Africa are largely left out, let alone the influence of the Jesuits and Napoleon including the treaty at the early part of the 19th Century after Napoleon was defeated.

Just to make sure, the loss of the Papal States at the end of the 19th Century is also used as the basis of revisionist history to claim the Vatican was broke.

So in the space of 80 years and successive revisionist accepted histories, the world’s largest and dominant entity has been successfully transformed into a dwindling fortune that was lost, stolen and mismanaged over centuries of incompetence to the small remainder we have today.

Remember, this slant on history is relatively recent. To say to an educated person in 1900 that the Catholic Church is not the dominant and largest economic entity in the world at the time, they’d have simply laughed in your face and told you were deluded.

Everyone knew they were the most powerful and wealthiest organization, bar none one hundred years ago. Now, most people accept they are not even in the top 1,000 economic entities of the world.

Of course, such creative and fraudulent history only works and has credibility if you can successfully hide the once dominant assets of the Catholic Church.

Creative accounting

To hide the massive assets of the Catholic Church, a decentralized system with safeguards and controls were invented. Whereas it would have been unthinkable even 200 years ago to place such wealth in the hands of bishops. However thanks to modern communication, modern finance and accounting, the task was much easier.

The major investments of property, fixed assets were transferred under the control of the dioceses around the world. In turn, all non-visible church property was hidden via complex shelf companies and trusts.

Major classes of assets such as shares, gold bullion, diamonds and other precious resources were transferred for direct control under the banks owned and controlled by the Vatican.

Using the cloaks of secrecy in such states as Switzerland and even the Vatican itself, the true ownership and identity of these massive treasures could be hidden.

The Vatican depends upon these laws of secrecy to maintain the lie of its true wealth. Without the secret banking laws and lack of uniform, proper and transparent disclosure laws around the world, the great fraud that the Catholic Church is no longer No 1. could not be maintained.

Thus in the end, the single largest economic entity the world has ever seen disappeared from the radar of people’s minds and returned as a poor and impoverished church in desperate need of funds.

To conclude this comparative analysis, according to celebritynetworth.com ,

As a modern day an empire, the [Rothschild] family's total net worth and assets combined have been pegged in the $300 – $400 billion range.

Note this figure is their combined total net worth throughout the existence of their family as bankers.

Now, when we compare this figure of $300-$400 billion with only the previous figure of of the Vatican's gold holdings, we see a huge disparity of over $800 Billion (1,245 billion - 400 billion if we are to be generous in our estimate of the Rothschilds' wealth). Again, this is only taking into account the humanly-assigned value of the Vatican's gold holdings; not their property or investments or currency holdings or treasures or etc. Also to recapitulate, since gold is so much more valuable than fiat currencies, so it follows that this $800 Billion difference between the gold "value" held by the Vatican and the Rothschilds' total net worth is arbitrary, in that the value of gold is assigned by humans based on worthless currencies. So in fact, this difference should be far greater although it is a hard task to describe exactly what the means of difference in valuation should be because of the nature of the fiat monetary paradigm.

Finally, to briefly add to the prior point that the Vatican is vastly more wealthy than the Rothschilds, and to completely address your question, the Vatican through its Jesuit commanders is able to carry out assassinations easily through their intelligence networks and various other agents and coadjutors and are well-documented as having done so. If the Rothschilds ever thought about getting out of line, they know they will be done for in a heartbeat; probably poisoned as that is one of the Jesuits' historically most-favored means of assassination. As ex-CIA agent E. Howard Hunt alluded to, it is the Jesuits who control the intelligence agencies - CIA, M16, even Mossad. They would have no problem carrying out this hit and would have all the reason to do so, as it is a Jesuit of the 4th Vow's entire life duty to do away with anyone who dares go against their Pope.

If you want to learn more about exact financial strength of Rome, I have heard that the book "The Vatican Billions" by Avro Manhattan is good.

Reference for block quotes: one-evil.org