Credit Cards | Loans | Vista tutorials | Balance Transfer Credit Cards | Online advertising
JFK vs The Federal Reserve [Archive] - FreeConservatives

PDA

View Full Version : JFK vs The Federal Reserve


Warlady
10-11-2003, 12:52 PM
I got this in email and thought it kind of interesting:

John F. Kennedy vs The Federal Reserve

On June 4, 1963, a virtually unknown Presidential
decree, Executive Order 11110, was signed with the
authority to basically strip the Federal Reserve Bank
of its power to loan money to the United States
Federal Government at interest. With the stroke of a
pen, President Kennedy declared that the privately
owned Federal Reserve Bank would soon be out of
business. The Christian Law Fellowship has
exhaustively researched this matter through the
Federal Register and Library of Congress. We can now
safely conclude that this Executive Order has never
been repealed, amended, or superceded by any
subsequent Executive Order. In simple terms, it is
still valid.

When President John Fitzgerald Kennedy - the author of
Profiles in Courage -signed this Order, it returned to
the federal government, specifically the Treasury
Department, the Constitutional power to create and
issue currency -money - without going through the
privately owned Federal Reserve Bank. President
Kennedy's Executive Order 11110 [the full text is
displayed further below] gave the Treasury Department
the explicit authority: "to issue silver certificates
against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver
dollars in the Treasury." This means that for every
ounce of silver in the U.S. Treasury's vault, the
government could introduce new money into circulation
based on the silver bullion physically held there. As
a result, more than $4 billion in United States Notes
were brought into circulation in $2 and $5
denominations. $10 and $20 United States Notes were
never circulated but were being printed by the
Treasury Department when Kennedy was assassinated. It
appears obvious that President Kennedy knew the
Federal Reserve Notes being used as the purported
legal currency were contrary to the Constitution of
the united States of America.

United States Notes" were issued as an interest-free
and debt-free currency backed by silver reserves in
the U.S. Treasury. We compared a "Federal Reserve
Note" issued from the private central bank of the
United States (the Federal Reserve Bank a/k/a Federal
Reserve System), with a "United States Note" from the
U.S. Treasury issued by President Kennedy's Executive
Order. They almost look alike, except one says
"Federal Reserve Note" on the top while the other says
"United States Note". Also, the Federal Reserve Note
has a green seal and serial number while the United
States Note has a red seal and serial number.

President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22,
1963 and the United States Notes he had issued were
immediately taken out of circulation. Federal Reserve
Notes continued to serve as the legal currency of the
nation. According to the United States Secret Service,
99% of all U.S. paper "currency" circulating in 1999
are Federal Reserve Notes.

Kennedy knew that if the silver-backed United States
Notes were widely circulated, they would have
eliminated the demand for Federal Reserve Notes. This
is a very simple matter of economics. The USN was
backed by silver and the FRN was not backed by
anything of intrinsic value. Executive Order 11110
should have prevented the national debt from reaching
its current level (virtually all of the nearly $9
trillion in federal debt has been created since 1963)
if LBJ or any subsequent President were to enforce it.
It would have almost immediately given the U.S.
Government the ability to repay its debt without going
to the private Federal Reserve Banks and being charged
interest to create new "money". Executive Order 11110
gave the U.S.A. the ability to, once again, create its
own money backed by silver and realm value worth
something.

Again, according to our own research, just five months
after Kennedy was assassinated, no more of the Series
1958 "Silver Certificates" were issued either, and
they were subsequently removed from circulation.
Perhaps the assassination of JFK was a warning to all
future presidents not to interfere with the private
Federal Reserve's control over the creation of money.
It seems very apparent that President Kennedy
challenged the "powers that exist behind U.S. and
world finance". With true patriotic courage, JFK
boldly faced the two most successful vehicles that
have ever been used to drive up debt:

1) war (Viet Nam); and,

2) the creation of money by a privately owned central
bank. His efforts to have all U.S. troops out of
Vietnam by 1965 combined with Executive Order 11110
would have destroyed the profits and control of the
private Federal Reserve Bank.

xoxox

Executive Order 11110

AMENDMENT OF EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 10289 AS AMENDED,
RELATING TO THE PERFORMANCE OF CERTAIN FUNCTIONS
AFFECTING THE DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY. By virtue of
the authority vested in me by section 301 of title 3
of the United States Code, it is ordered as follows:

SECTION 1. Executive Order No. 10289 of September 19,
1951, as amended, is hereby further amended - (a) By
adding at the end of paragraph 1 thereof the following
subparagraph (j): "(j) The authority vested in the
President by paragraph (b) of section 43 of the Act of
May 12, 1933, as amended (31 U.S.C. 821 (b)), to issue
silver certificates against any silver bullion,
silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury not
then held for redemption of any outstanding silver
certificates, to prescribe the denominations of such
silver certificates, and to coin standard silver
dollars and subsidiary silver currency for their
redemption," and (b) By revoking subparagraphs (b) and
(c) of paragraph 2 thereof. SECTION 2. The amendment
made by this Order shall not affect any act done, or
any right accruing or accrued or any suit or
proceeding had or commenced in any civil or criminal
cause prior to the date of this Order but all such
liabilities shall continue and may be enforced as if
said amendments had not been made.

JOHN F. KENNEDY THE WHITE HOUSE, June 4, 1963

xoxox

Once again, Executive Order 11110 is still valid.
According to Title 3, United States Code, Section 301
dated January 26, 1998:

Executive Order (EO) 10289 dated Sept. 17, 1951, 16
F.R. 9499, was as amended by:

EO 10583, dated December 18, 1954, 19 F.R. 8725;

EO 10882 dated July 18, 1960, 25 F.R. 6869;

EO 11110 dated June 4, 1963, 28 F.R. 5605;

EO 11825 dated December 31, 1974, 40 F.R. 1003;

EO 12608 dated September 9, 1987, 52 F.R. 34617

The 1974 and 1987 amendments, added after Kennedy's
1963 amendment, did not change or alter any part of
Kennedy's EO 11110. A search of Clinton's 1998 and
1999 EO's and Presidential Directives has also shown
no reference to any alterations, suspensions, or
changes to EO 11110.

The Federal Reserve Bank, a.k.a Federal Reserve
System, is a Private Corporation. Black's Law
Dictionary defines the "Federal Reserve System" as:
"Network of twelve central banks to which most
national banks belong and to which state chartered
banks may belong. Membership rules require investment
of stock and minimum reserves." Privately-owned banks
own the stock of the FED. This was explained in more
detail in the case of Lewis v. United States, Federal
Reporter, 2nd Series, Vol. 680, Pages 1239, 1241
(1982), where the court said: "Each Federal Reserve
Bank is a separate corporation owned by commercial
banks in its region. The stock-holding commercial
banks elect two thirds of each Bank's nine member
board of directors".

The Federal Reserve Banks are locally controlled by
their member banks. Once again, according to Black's
Law Dictionary, we find that these privately owned
banks actually issue money:

"Federal Reserve Act. Law which created Federal
Reserve banks which act as agents in maintaining money
reserves, issuing money in the form of bank notes,
lending money to banks, and supervising banks.
Administered by Federal Reserve Board (q.v.)".

The privately owned Federal Reserve (FED) banks
actually issue (create) the "money" we use. In 1964,
the House Committee on Banking and Currency,
Subcommittee on Domestic Finance, at the second
session of the 88th Congress, put out a study entitled
Money Facts which contains a good description of what
the FED is: "The Federal Reserve is a total
money-making machine. It can issue money or checks.
And it never has a problem of making its checks good
because it can obtain the $5 and $10 bills necessary
to cover its check simply by asking the Treasury
Department's Bureau of Engraving to print them".

Any one person or any closely knit group who has a lot
of money has a lot of power. Now imagine a group of
people who have the power to create money. Imagine the
power these people would have. This is exactly what
the privately owned FED is!

No man did more to expose the power of the FED than
Louis T. McFadden, who was the Chairman of the House
Banking Committee back in the 1930s. In describing the
FED, he remarked in the Congressional Record, House
pages 1295 and 1296 on June 10, 1932:

"Mr. Chairman, we have in this country one of the most
corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer
to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal reserve
banks. The Federal Reserve Board, a Government Board,
has cheated the Government of the United States and he
people of the United States out of enough money to pay
the national debt. The depredations and the iniquities
of the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal reserve
banks acting together have cost this country enough
money to pay the national debt several times over.
This evil institution has impoverished and ruined the
people of the United States; has bankrupted itself,
and has practically bankrupted our Government. It has
done this through the maladministration of that law by
which the Federal Reserve Board, and through the
corrupt practices of the moneyed vultures who control
it".

Some people think the Federal Reserve Banks are United
States Government institutions. They are not
Government institutions, departments, or agencies.
They are private credit monopolies which prey upon the
people of the United States for the benefit of
themselves and their foreign customers. Those 12
private credit monopolies were deceitfully placed upon
this country by bankers who came here from Europe and
who repaid us for our hospitality by undermining our
American institutions.

The FED basically works like this: The government
granted its power to create money to the FED banks.
They create money, then loan it back to the government
charging interest. The government levies income taxes
to pay the interest on the debt. On this point, it's
interesting to note that the Federal Reserve Act and
the sixteenth amendment, which gave congress the power
to collect income taxes, were both passed in 1913. The
incredible power of the FED over the economy is
universally admitted. Some people, especially in the
banking and academic communities, even support it. On
the other hand, there are those, such as President
John Fitzgerald Kennedy, that have spoken out against
it. His efforts were spoken about in Jim Marrs' 1990
book Crossfire:"

Another overlooked aspect of Kennedy's attempt to
reform American society involves money. Kennedy
apparently reasoned that by returning to the
constitution, which states that only Congress shall
coin and regulate money, the soaring national debt
could be reduced by not paying interest to the bankers
of the Federal Reserve System, who print paper money
then loan it to the government at interest. He moved
in this area on June 4, 1963, by signing Executive
Order 11110 which called for the issuance of
$4,292,893,815 in United States Notes through the U.S.
Treasury rather than the traditional Federal Reserve
System. That same day, Kennedy signed a bill changing
the backing of one and two dollar bills from silver to
gold, adding strength to the weakened U.S. currency.

Kennedy's comptroller of the currency, James J. Saxon,
had been at odds with the powerful Federal Reserve
Board for some time, encouraging broader investment
and lending powers for banks that were not part of the
Federal Reserve system. Saxon also had decided that
non-Reserve banks could underwrite state and local
general obligation bonds, again weakening the dominant
Federal Reserve banks".

In a comment made to a Columbia University class on
Nov. 12, 1963,

Ten days before his assassination, President John
Fitzgerald Kennedy allegedly said:

"The high office of the President has been used to
foment a plot to destroy the American's freedom and
before I leave office, I must inform the citizen of
this plight."

In this matter, John Fitzgerald Kennedy appears to be
the subject of his own book... a true Profile of
Courage.

This research report was compiled for Lawgiver. Org.
by Anthony Wayne

xoxox

What is the Federal Reserve Bank?

What is the Federal Reserve Bank (FED) and why do we
have it?

by Greg Hobbs November 1, 1999

The FED is a central bank. Central banks are supposed
to implement a country's fiscal policies. They monitor
commercial banks to ensure that they maintain
sufficient assets, like cash, so as to remain solvent
and stable. Central banks also do business, such as
currency exchanges and gold transactions, with other
central banks. In theory, a central bank should be
good for a country, and they might be if it wasn't for
the fact that they are not owned or controlled by the
government of the country they are serving. Private
central banks, including our FED, operate not in the
interest of the public good but for profit.

There have been three central banks in our nation's
history. The first two, while deceptive and
fraudulent, pale in comparison to the scope and size
of the fraud being perpetrated by our current FED.
What they all have in common is an insidious practice
known as "fractional banking."

Fractional banking or fractional lending is the
ability to create money from nothing, lend it to the
government or someone else and charge interest to
boot. The practice evolved before banks existed.
Goldsmiths rented out space in their vaults to
individuals and merchants for storage of their gold or
silver. The goldsmiths gave these "depositors" a
certificate that showed the amount of gold stored.
These certificates were then used to conduct business.

In time the goldsmiths noticed that the gold in their
vaults was rarely withdrawn. Small amounts would move
in and out but the large majority never moved. Sensing
a profit opportunity, the goldsmiths issued double
receipts for the gold, in effect creating money
(certificates) from nothing and then lending those
certificates (creating debt) to depositors and
charging them interest as well.

Since the certificates represented more gold than
actually existed, the certificates were "fractionally"
backed by gold. Eventually some of these vault
operations were transformed into banks and the
practice of fractional banking continued.

Keep that fractional banking concept in mind as we
examine our first central bank, the First Bank of the
United States (BUS). It was created, after bitter
dissent in the Congress, in 1791 and chartered for 20
years. A scam not unlike the current FED, the BUS used
its control of the currency to defraud the public and
establish a legal form of usury.

This bank practiced fractional lending at a 10:1 rate,
ten dollars of loans for each dollar they had on
deposit. This misuse and abuse of their public charter
continued for the entire 20 years of their existence.
Public outrage over these abuses was such that the
charter was not renewed and the bank ceased to exist
in 1811.

The war of 1812 left the country in economic chaos,
seen by bankers as another opportunity for easy
profits. They influenced Congress to charter the
second central bank, the Second Bank of the United
States (SBUS), in 1816.

The SBUS was more expansive than the BUS. The SBUS
sold franchises and literally doubled the number of
banks in a short period of time. The country began to
boom and move westward, which required money. Using
fractional lending at the 10:1 rate, the central bank
and their franchisees created the debt/money for the
expansion.

Things boomed for a while, then the banks decided to
shut off the debt/money, citing the need to control
inflation. This action on the part of the SBUS caused
bankruptcies and foreclosures. The banks then took
control of the assets that were used as security
against the loans.

Closely examine how the SBUS engineered this cycle of
prosperity and depression. The central bank caused
inflation by creating debt/money for loans and credit
and making these funds readily available. The economy
boomed. Then they used the inflation which they
created as an excuse to shut off the
loans/credit/money.

The resulting shortage of cash caused the economy to
falter or slow dramatically and large numbers of
business and personal bankruptcies resulted. The
central bank then seized the assets used as security
for the loans. The wealth created by the borrowers
during the boom was then transferred to the central
bank during the bust. And you always wondered how the
big guys ended up with all the marbles.

Now, who do you think is responsible for all of the
ups and downs in our economy over the last 85 years?
Think about the depression of the late '20s and all
through the '30s. The FED could have pumped lots of
debt/money into the market to stimulate the economy
and get the country back on track, but did they? No;
in fact, they restricted the money supply quite
severely. We all know the results that occurred from
that action, don't we?

Why would the FED do this? During that period asset
values and stocks were at rock bottom prices. Who do
you think was buying everything at 10 cents on the
dollar? I believe that it is referred to as
consolidating the wealth. How many times have they
already done this in the last 85 years?

Do you think they will do it again?

Just as an aside at this point, look at today's
economy. Markets are declining. Why? Because the FED
has been very liberal with its debt/credit/money. The
market was hyper inflated. Who creates inflation? The
FED. How does the FED deal with inflation? They
restrict the debt/credit/money. What happens when they
do that? The market collapses.

Several months back, after certain central banks said
they would be selling large quantities of gold, the
price of gold fell to a 25-year low of about $260 per
ounce. The central banks then bought gold. After
buying at the bottom, a group of 15 central banks
announced that they would be restricting the amount of
gold released into the market for the next five years.
The price of gold went up $75.00 per ounce in just a
few days. How many hundreds of billions of dollars did
the central banks make with those two press releases?

Gold is generally considered to be a hedge against
more severe economic conditions. Do you think that the
private banking families that own the FED are buying
or selling equities at this time? (Remember: buy low,
sell high.) How much money do you think these FED
owners have made since they restricted the money
supply at the top of this last current cycle?

Alan Greenspan has said publicly on several occasions
that he thinks the market is overvalued, or words to
that effect. Just a hint that he will raise interest
rates (restrict the money supply), and equity markets
have a negative reaction. Governments and politicians
do not rule central banks, central banks rule
governments and politicians. President Andrew Jackson
won the presidency in 1828 with the promise to end the
national debt and eliminate the SBUS. During his
second term President Jackson withdrew all government
funds from the bank and on January 8, 1835, paid off
the national debt. He is the only president in history
to have this distinction. The charter of the SBUS
expired in 1836.

Without a central bank to manipulate the supply of
money, the United States experienced unprecedented
growth for 60 or 70 years, and the resulting wealth
was too much for bankers to endure. They had to get
back into the game. So, in 1910 Senator Nelson
Aldrich, then Chairman of the National Monetary
Commission, in collusion with representatives of the
European central banks, devised a plan to pressure and
deceive Congress into enacting legislation that would
covertly establish a private central bank.

This bank would assume control over the American
economy by controlling the issuance of its money.
After a huge public relations campaign, engineered by
the foreign central banks, the Federal Reserve Act of
1913 was slipped through Congress during the Christmas
recess, with many members of the Congress absent.
President Woodrow Wilson, pressured by his political
and financial backers, signed it on December 23, 1913.

The act created the Federal Reserve System, a name
carefully selected and designed to deceive. "Federal"
would lead one to believe that this is a government
organization. "Reserve" would lead one to believe that
the currency is being backed by gold and silver.
"System" was used in lieu of the word "bank" so that
one would not conclude that a new central bank had
been created.

In reality, the act created a private, for profit,
central banking corporation owned by a cartel of
private banks. Who owns the FED? The Rothschilds of
London and Berlin; Lazard Brothers of Paris; Israel
Moses Seif of Italy; Kuhn, Loeb and Warburg of
Germany; and the Lehman Brothers, Goldman, Sachs and
the Rockefeller families of New York.

Did you know that the FED is the only for-profit
corporation in America that is exempt from both
federal and state taxes? The FED takes in about one
trillion dollars per year tax free! The banking
families listed above get all that money.

Almost everyone thinks that the money they pay in
taxes goes to the US Treasury to pay for the expenses
of the government. Do you want to know where your tax
dollars really go? If you look at the back of any
check made payable to the IRS you will see that it has
been endorsed as "Pay Any F.R.B. Branch or Gen.
Depository for Credit U.S. Treas. This is in Payment
of U.S. Oblig." Yes, that's right, every dime you pay
in income taxes is given to those private banking
families, commonly known as the FED, tax free.

Like many of you, I had some difficulty with the
concept of creating money from nothing. You may have
heard the term "monetizing the debt," which is kind of
the same thing. As an example, if the US Government
wants to borrow $1 million ó the government does
borrow every dollar it spends ó they go to the FED to
borrow the money. The FED calls the Treasury and says
print 10,000 Federal Reserve Notes (FRN) in units of
one hundred dollars.

The Treasury charges the FED 2.3 cents for each note,
for a total of $230 for the 10,000 FRNs. The FED then
lends the $1 million to the government at face value
plus interest. To add insult to injury, the government
has to create a bond for $1 million as security for
the loan. And the rich get richer. The above was just
an example, because in reality the FED does not even
print the money; it's just a computer entry in their
accounting system. To put this on a more personal
level, let's use another example.

Today's banks are members of the Federal Reserve
Banking System. This membership makes it legal for
them to create money from nothing and lend it to you.
Today's banks, like the goldsmiths of old, realize
that only a small fraction of the money deposited in
their banks is ever actually withdrawn in the form of
cash. Only about 4 percent of all the money that
exists is in the form of currency. The rest of it is
simply a computer entry.

Let's say you're approved to borrow $10,000 to do some
home improvements. You know that the bank didn't
actually take $10,000 from its pile of cash and put it
into your pile? They simply went to their computer and
input an entry of $10,000 into your account. They
created, from thin air, a debt which you have to
secure with an asset and repay with interest. The bank
is allowed to create and lend as much debt as they
want as long as they do not exceed the 10:1 ratio
imposed by the FED.

It sort of puts a new slant on how you view your
friendly bank, doesn't it? How about those loan
committees that scrutinize you with a microscope
before approving the loan they created from thin air.
What a hoot! They make it complex for a reason. They
don't want you to understand what they are doing.
People fear what they do not understand. You are
easier to delude and control when you are ignorant and
afraid.

Now to put the frosting on this cake. When was the
income tax created? If you guessed 1913, the same year
that the FED was created, you get a gold star.
Coincidence? What are the odds? If you are going to
use the FED to create debt, who is going to repay that
debt? The income tax was created to complete the
illusion that real money had been lent and therefore
real money had to be repaid. And you thought Houdini
was good.

So, what can be done? My father taught me that you
should always stand up for what is right, even if you
have to stand up alone.

If "We the People" don't take some action now, there
may come a time when "We the People" are no more. You
should write a letter or send an email to each of your
elected representatives. Many of our elected
representatives do not understand the FED. Once
informed they will not be able to plead ignorance and
remain silent.

Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution
specifically says that Congress is the only body that
can "coin money and regulate the value thereof." The
US Constitution has never been amended to allow anyone
other than Congress to coin and regulate currency.

Ask your representative, in light of that information,
how it is possible for the Federal Reserve Act of
1913, and the Federal Reserve Bank that it created, to
be constitutional. Ask them why this private banking
cartel is allowed to reap trillions of dollars in
profits without paying taxes. Insist on an answer.

Thomas Jefferson said, "If the America people ever
allow private banks to control the issuance of their
currencies, first by inflation and then by deflation,
the banks and corporations that will grow up around
them will deprive the people of all their prosperity
until their children will wake up homeless on the
continent their fathers conquered."

Jefferson saw it coming 150 years ago. The question
is, "Can you now see what is in store for us if we
allow the FED to continue controlling our country?"

"The condition upon which God hath given liberty to
man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he
breaks, servitude is at once the consequence of his
crime, and the punishment of his guilt."

John P. Curran, 1790

Source: http://www.roc-grp.org/jfk.html

DesertFox
10-11-2003, 02:33 PM
<font size=1>Long, long ago and far, far away</font>

Jason
10-11-2003, 03:48 PM
[ QUOTE ]
DesertFox said:
<font size=1>Long, long ago and far, far away</font>

[/ QUOTE ]

It may have been a long time ago, but the Federal Reserve is still here.

The Federal Reserve was engineered by and is controlled by Jews. Jews played a dominant role in the implementation of fiat monetary systems thruout the world.

JFK, in a patriotic moment inconsistent with his career, defied them. Jack "Ruby", who silenced Oswald, was a Jew, formerly Rubenstein.

LBJ the president/crook became wealthy without much ado by the media, while he signed the Jew-sponsored 1965 immigration act flooding the USA with third world immigrants.

Too many coincidences for me to dismiss.

DesertFox
10-11-2003, 03:54 PM
* S i g h *

The tiredest conspiracy theory in the book. You have no evidence, just a collection of charges that Jews are doing this or that. White people are also involved at every high level of everything, and many more of them than Jews. I'd be as willing to believe a white conspiracy as that tired Jew stuff.

Bluemoon_Rising
10-11-2003, 04:59 PM
Nah, he's right, Fox, Jews are behind the whole bagel. The Federal Reserve? Hell, that's just for starters.

Santa Claus is a Jew, so is the Tooth Fairy. The Easter Bunny's been turning tricks for the Jews for years. It's a real mess.

Jason
10-11-2003, 04:59 PM
[ QUOTE ]
DesertFox said:
* S i g h *

The tiredest conspiracy theory in the book. You have no evidence, just a collection of charges that Jews are doing this or that. White people are also involved at every high level of everything, and many more of them than Jews. I'd be as willing to believe a white conspiracy as that tired Jew stuff.

[/ QUOTE ]
Reality exists independently of how long we have been denying it or how tired we are.

Certainly white people are involved in conspiracies too, and their help in absorbing blame is worth the expense of involving their incompetence. Why do you think the media has so little to say about the secret societies?

When you investigate behind the scenes activity and measure the percentage of Jewish participants against the population density of Jews and find this to be extremely disproportionate, isn't it worth another look, espescially when they have media control to help hide these activities?

You keep saying that I have no evidence but have shown little interest in discussing just what evidence, proof and standards of verification are.

Are you waiting for Morley Safer to tell you about it on TV? Where is your keen sense of the obvious?

DesertFox
10-11-2003, 05:37 PM
My "keen sense of the obvious" tells me this whole idea's a coupla snorts short of a major-league high.

Jason
10-11-2003, 05:53 PM
[ QUOTE ]
DesertFox said:
My "keen sense of the obvious" tells me this whole idea's a coupla snorts short of a major-league high.

[/ QUOTE ]
Very funny. Is humor your way of dealing with things that are difficult or unpleasant to understand?

We were discussing this subject on another thread and you just faded away. Why not get serious and get to the bottom of it? Are you only patriotic up to the point of scrutinizing the Jews? Do you have the guts to deal with national security matters that our politicians refuse to look at? Or will you sit on your hands and dismiss this out of hand?

DesertFox
10-11-2003, 06:12 PM
I got all the guts needed to deal with reality. I don't waste energy on goofy conspiracy theories.

Jason
10-11-2003, 06:53 PM
D.F.,

I don't understand what you're doing on a forum titled "Conspiracy Corridor". There is room here for aguing about the conspiracies or debunking them.
You are doing niether which makes me think you're too bored to quit and too disinterested to engage.

DesertFox
10-11-2003, 06:57 PM
You gots a point, Jason. I'll leave this forum to you.

Unless I decide to come back. http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

lazyeyd
10-12-2003, 10:08 PM
the federal reserve is owned and controlled by members of the illuminati, not jews. the illuminati are satanists, and the jews aren't. the illuminati want the onset of the global government with not religion, and the jews believe in God. thats the working conspiracy i've heard. i've never heard one about jews being the orchestrators of the new world order...

Jason
10-13-2003, 04:59 AM
[ QUOTE ]
lazyeyd said:
the federal reserve is owned and controlled by members of the illuminati, not jews. the illuminati are satanists, and the jews aren't. the illuminati want the onset of the global government with not religion, and the jews believe in God. thats the working conspiracy i've heard. i've never heard one about jews being the orchestrators of the new world order...

[/ QUOTE ]
Jews have historically played the dominant role in banking.

Adam Weischaupt, the founder of the Illuminati, was a Jew. Jews annually take a vow that nullifies all other vows, for example those to public office, the country they reside in or to the secret societies they belong to.

Secret societies in general are not majority Jewish, but many are disproportionately Jewish.

Let's look at some secret societies:
Council on Foreign Relations, Freemasonry, The Trilateral Commission, The Bilderbergers, The Skull and Bones and The Illuminati . In general, they consist of people who are more powerful, influential and wealthy than the general population. They meet secretly and devise schemes to benifit at the expense of non-members, and in some cases the hierarchy benifits at the expense of the lesser bretheren. They generally have by-laws or a statement of purpose of some kind that has some mention, vague of clear, of hegemonic designs or world domination.
Did you know that this also describes Talmudic Judaism?

It's a short step from there that Jews are a secret society within all the other secret societies, and that the only vow important or valid to them is to their own.
There is no ethnic group as highly skilled at infiltration and as resistant to infiltration by others as the Jews. The average IQ of Jews exceeds any and all others by fifteen points.

Since they control the vast majority of media, it's a simple matter for them to conceal their activities from the majority. Isn't the media the vehicle that makes all secret societies possible?

Timberwolf
10-13-2003, 12:35 PM
Freemasonry takes its roots in Egypt...you tryin' to tell us that Moses started it before he left for the Holy Land?

C'mon...this is almost like the statement made by Hitler to one of his aides when confronted with the notion that the US and England etal were POd b/c he was "killing Jews". He supposedly responded (paraphrasing), "I'm not killing Jews, I'm killing communists...it just so happens a lot of them are Jewish".

Did you ever stop and wonder WHY the Jewish 'race' is so prevalent in the arenas in which you see them?? Do you think it could have ANYTHING to do with God's promises to Abraham?? Hmmmmmmmmmmm??

Jason
10-13-2003, 02:36 PM
Timberwolf,
I don't think Freemasonry as we know it today is anything like it was a thousand or two years ago. Subversion could have taken place at any time of over a long period of time.

The Jews as we know them today are not the same Jews as mentioned in the Bible who were not only descendents of Abraham but loyal to the Old Testament. Many of today's "Jews" are descendents of the Khazars and most Jews nullified the Old Testament with the adoption of the Talmud.

http://www.come-and-hear.com/tcontents.html

There are some true Jews in existence but they are few and overwelmed by the imposters. They are not the ones who control the media and promote all the garbage.

Although I'm not an expert on the Old Testament, I doubt that God promised Abraham "thou shalt have homosexuality, communism, gun control, feminism and race mixing". The so called Jews of today promote these things for strategic reasons, and only for Christians, not for Jews.

http://www.churchoftrueisrael.com/navigation/

Timberwolf
10-13-2003, 05:29 PM
You're missing the point. That point being that God doesn't change. Regardless of HOW the Jews behaved throughout the ages, they were, are and always shall be God's chosen.

Read Genesis 15 &amp; 17 and Exodus if you want to see God's faithfulness to covenants that He makes with his people...He doesn't reneg, though He be denied by His own people.

God does, however, punish His people when the need to do so arises...but, He will NEVER allow Israel or the Jews to be defeated more than temporarily (to teach them some manners...and they are pretty thick-headed not to have "gotten it" by now).

Jason
10-13-2003, 06:51 PM
Timberwolf,
The issue with that is the definition of Jews.

It seems awfully foolish to me that we should let these imposters jerk us around the way they do while hiding behind the Bible. Do you really think God's chosen people would be promoting homosexuality, socialism and all that garbage?

http://www.hoffman-info.com/khazars.html

Timberwolf
10-13-2003, 09:55 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Jason said:
Timberwolf,
The issue with that is the definition of Jews.

It seems awfully foolish to me that we should let these imposters jerk us around the way they do while hiding behind the Bible. Do you really think God's chosen people would be promoting homosexuality, socialism and all that garbage?

http://www.hoffman-info.com/khazars.html

[/ QUOTE ]
You haven't read much of the Old Testament have you? The Jews back then were constantly pulling shit like that. Then God would smack them upside the head - i.e. send them off into captivity or wander around with their heads up their asses for 40 years or sumthin' - they'd grudgingly come to their senses and all would be well...until the next time.

Only MAN differentiates the Jews. In God's eyes, a Jew is a Jew and a Gentile is a Gentile...sin is sin. To God murder and lying are both equal. It is mankind that makes one worse than the other.

Timberwolf
10-13-2003, 09:59 PM
IOW...deal with it, cuz it ain't likely to change regardless of what you and I do...or don't do.

Frustrating?? As all hell!! Do I worry about it?? Naw, got better things to do with my time. Like, play with my daughter, give my wife a massage, watch Monday Night Football, stick needles in my eyes...okay, so I don't actually do that, but you get my point.

Jason
10-14-2003, 06:55 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Timberwolf said:
Only MAN differentiates the Jews. In God's eyes, a Jew is a Jew and a Gentile is a Gentile.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not clear on your position here.
Is any man who calls himself a Jew a Jew in God's eyes? If a rapist in Mexico and a pedophile in Chicago say's "I'm a Jew" but isn't, does it make them God's chosen people? Should this make them immune from punishment for their actions? Or it it our test to determine who really is a Jew by God's definition?

You say "Only MAN differentiates the Jews", but don't specify whether these Jews are Jews by man's definition or God's.


Screw the Jew World Order.

Timberwolf
10-14-2003, 11:14 AM
I was referring to the fact that only God knows for sure. The Jew was a Jew long before ANY behavior was exhibited...it's a birth thang.

Regardless of the crimes committed by a rapist or pedaphile, God is a just God and would punish those two reprobates appropriately, either in this life or the next. We weren't discussing that kind of behavior, but that of succeeding in life and becoming powerful.

As for "Screwing the Jew World Order"...go for it. http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif

Jason
10-14-2003, 05:00 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Timberwolf said:
I was referring to the fact that only God knows for sure. The Jew was a Jew long before ANY behavior was exhibited...it's a birth thang.

Regardless of the crimes committed by a rapist or pedaphile, God is a just God and would punish those two reprobates appropriately, either in this life or the next.

[/ QUOTE ]
If a "Jew" is of Khazar ancestry, is being a Jew a "birth thang"or just a false claim?

Hopefully, all will get their just reward/punishment, but I don't think that's a reason to sit on our hands. I doubt that you'd go along with everyone in America having a "get-out-of-jail-free" card and could simply walk away from any misdeed by claiming to be a Jew, true or untrue. It seems that somewhere we have a responsibility to verify whether or not that person is a Jew, even if we refuse to punish true Jews for religious reasons.

lazyeyd
10-15-2003, 01:23 PM
methinks he don't like jews that much.

Timberwolf
10-15-2003, 05:38 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Jason said:
[ QUOTE ]
Timberwolf said:
I was referring to the fact that only God knows for sure. The Jew was a Jew long before ANY behavior was exhibited...it's a birth thang.

Regardless of the crimes committed by a rapist or pedaphile, God is a just God and would punish those two reprobates appropriately, either in this life or the next.

[/ QUOTE ]
If a "Jew" is of Khazar ancestry, is being a Jew a "birth thang"or just a false claim?

[/ QUOTE ]
As I've said, that is for God to judge.

[ QUOTE ]
Hopefully, all will get their just reward/punishment, but I don't think that's a reason to sit on our hands. I doubt that you'd go along with everyone in America having a "get-out-of-jail-free" card and could simply walk away from any misdeed by claiming to be a Jew, true or untrue.

[/ QUOTE ]
And I challenge you to show me where anyone here is advocating that.

[ QUOTE ]
It seems that somewhere we have a responsibility to verify whether or not that person is a Jew, even if we refuse to punish true Jews for religious reasons.

[/ QUOTE ]
For goodness sake, WHY bother? Who CARES about ones ethnicity? If the rat bastard is guilty of something, press charges and try his ass in a court of law!!

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif

Jason
10-15-2003, 08:10 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Timberwolf said:[ QUOTE ]
Hopefully, all will get their just reward/punishment, but I don't think that's a reason to sit on our hands. I doubt that you'd go along with everyone in America having a "get-out-of-jail-free" card and could simply walk away from any misdeed by claiming to be a Jew, true or untrue.

[/ QUOTE ]
And I challenge you to show me where anyone here is advocating that.

[/ QUOTE ] Well it sounds as though you are. You implied that if someone claims to be Jewish, it's God's role, not ours, to scrutinize their aggression.

[ QUOTE ]
It seems that somewhere we have a responsibility to verify whether or not that person is a Jew, even if we refuse to punish true Jews for religious reasons.

[/ QUOTE ]
For goodness sake, WHY bother? Who CARES about ones ethnicity? If the rat bastard is guilty of something, press charges and try his ass in a court of law!!

[/ QUOTE ] There is no law against promoting race-mixing, feminism, homosexuality, communism and gun control. It is perfectly legal to aquire a media monopoly and exercise the power of scrutiny, the power of smear, the power of suggestion and the power of censorship.
The fact that there is no law against these things does not mean they aren't an act of aggression.
They are simply using loopholes to conquer and destroy us.

Why bother to do anything about it? So that our children and grandchildren can live and be free.

kathrinM
10-19-2003, 06:26 AM
Jason.. you're paranoid... do you also believe in little green men and the X-files?

Seriously... you talk a lot of nonsense there. Come up with something factual please.

Thanks.

Jason
10-19-2003, 01:13 PM
[ QUOTE ]
kathrinM said:
Jason.. you're paranoid... do you also believe in little green men and the X-files?

Seriously... you talk a lot of nonsense there. Come up with something factual please.

Thanks.


[/ QUOTE ]
One mans vigilance is another man's paranoia. You have not stated what is "nonsense about what I have presented. How do you differentiate between fact and fallacy?

lazyeyd
10-19-2003, 10:49 PM
[ QUOTE ]
kathrinM said:
Jason.. you're paranoid... do you also believe in little green men and the X-files?

[/ QUOTE ]

i do...

Coral_Snake
04-03-2004, 07:38 PM
I am somewhat of an expert on the Old Testement and the original name for the Chosen People was not Jews. They were originally called Hebrews and represented twelve distinct tribs of people. Originally the term Jews refers to the single major Hebrew tribe
(Judah) that survived as a kingdom after the Assyrian takeover of the Holy Land. (The rest of the tribes were deported to the northern parts of the Assyrian Empire and could well be the origin of the "Khazar" Jews that the Anti Semites are always yapping about.)

Timberwolf
04-04-2004, 10:02 AM
Absolutely...but, didn't the Levites also endure after the Diaspora? (I think that's the right term).

Rink
04-04-2004, 05:13 PM
Jews were from the tribe of Judah, the Levites were a landless tribe unto themselves in charge of temple services, and yes they too suffered in the diaspora.

Hebrew is a play on the hebraic semitic word Ivriyt, which means 'on the other side of the river'

ha Ivriyt (The Hebrews)

they were a people set apart.

as for the Khazars, they were not hebrew by blood but were accepted into the house of Israel by their conversion and adoption of the mosaic laws and traditions (like circumcision etc).

Many people were accepted into the house of Israel that are not related.

The Ehtiopians may be related via the relationship Solomon had with Sheba Queen of the kushites in that era, there was a lot of trade in those days between those nations.

Moses married a Kushite woman after his first wife died.

So its not uncommon to have Ethiopians related to the hebrew people.

Khazars and others probably intermarried along with the persians (noting Esther married the Persian King of the day when Haman tried to kill off all the Jews).

Spadplanter
05-28-2004, 09:30 PM
<H1>Hey!</H1>
Rather than Jewbashing, how about getting back to the Fed? Warlady made a very good post regarding the Federal Reserve. It's STILL a valid point. We're all off on a tangent, and our pockets are still being picked!

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon119.gif

Justaguy
08-22-2004, 10:19 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Spadplanter said:
<H1>Hey!</H1>
Rather than Jewbashing, how about getting back to the Fed? Warlady made a very good post regarding the Federal Reserve. It's STILL a valid point. We're all off on a tangent, and our pockets are still being picked!

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon119.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. I've read some on the Fed... it really is a shadowy organization... for example... how it came into existence in the first place.