IPB




POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Split From *new* 911blogger.org Welcomes Cit, Pilots

Quest
post Dec 1 2010, 12:08 AM
Post #21





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 2,419
Joined: 23-October 06
Member No.: 145



QUOTE (Sanders @ Dec 1 2010, 04:02 AM) *
Quest, I think you give the Rothschilds too much credit. And I wouldn't believe everything you hear from "Ring of Power" ... much of that flick is off the mark.

But you are correct, a lot of what this war on Islam is about is bashing them to smithereens and then rebuilding them to the western model. Islam has rules against usury, which prevents western bankers from getting a foothold there. Afghanistan and Iraq now have western style central banks. (Since 2004 I think.) I wouldn't say that the Rothschilds own them, I'm sure they don't ... they have some piece of them, as do other high ranking global corporate elite.

Couldn't rattle off their names, but many of them were probably on the steering committee of the last Bilderberg meeting, if you can dig up a list.
biggrin.gif


I am NOT giving "Ring of Power" too much credit. The fact is multi-culturalism is being pushed down our throats by a Zionist-led media and Hollywood, and Zionists along with Christian-Zionists run the military. Can I make it any more clear?

This post has been edited by Quest: Dec 1 2010, 11:05 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sanders
post Dec 1 2010, 12:19 AM
Post #22



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 7,990
Joined: 13-September 06
Member No.: 49



QUOTE (Quest @ Dec 4 2010, 11:08 PM) *
I am NOT giving "Ring of Power" too much credit. That fact is multi-culturalism is being pushed down our throats by a Zionist-led media and Hollywood, and Zionists along with Christian-Zionists run the military. Can I make it any more clear?


No, I agree with you on that. But I wouldn't believe anything in Ring of Power without double-checking. The claim that a Rothschild had a ringside seat in Manhattan sounds bogus to me. Maybe it's true, I don't know.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Quest
post Dec 1 2010, 12:37 AM
Post #23





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 2,419
Joined: 23-October 06
Member No.: 145



QUOTE (Sanders @ Dec 1 2010, 05:19 AM) *
No, I agree with you on that. But I wouldn't believe anything in Ring of Power without double-checking. The claim that a Rothschild had a ringside seat in Manhattan sounds bogus to me. Maybe it's true, I don't know.



Point taken. Still, for what it's worth, it sounds like Lynn Forrester and Evelyn DeRothschild moved into NYC just months before 911 according to Ring of Power. Watch the 1st minute.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wb-6PRcTmuM...layer_embedded#!

Then watch the follow video. No, I do not believe in "reptilians" but Icke has an interesting take on the ritualistic part of it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jx84LSJMxWk...layer_embedded#!

http://factsnotfairies.blogspot.com/2009/0...s-new-wife.html

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-90188863.html
Article date:August 1, 2002
QUOTE
Alas, after two major successes, Rothschild's most recent enterprise went the way of all dot-coins. But Rothschild, who had everything but love during the go-go Nineties, has now found wedded bliss--which came with a tide, to boot. Since her marriage 18 months ago to Sir Evelyn de Rothschild, that's Lady de Rothschild to you. But here's the most envy-provoking part: She also has acquired what has been called the most beautiful apartment in New York.

Sitting down with her on a recent afternoon in the new pad--an 18th-floor duplex in River House that was previously owned by Carter Burden and Libet Johnson--it's hard to begrudge her the excess of good fortune, thanks to her affability and occasional self-deprecations. (The Chateau Lafitte she pours--"the family wine," as she calls it--and the heaping bowl of beluga don't hurt, either.)


This post has been edited by Quest: Dec 1 2010, 12:40 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sanders
post Dec 1 2010, 06:22 AM
Post #24



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 7,990
Joined: 13-September 06
Member No.: 49



OK sure, I'll watch that.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sanders
post Dec 1 2010, 10:06 AM
Post #25



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 7,990
Joined: 13-September 06
Member No.: 49



She's right. Evelyn Rothschild did purchase an 18th storey apartment at Riverhouse in Manhattan. Kissinger has a place in the same building, and the Obamas apparently chose Rothschild's decorator.

(Article in Huffington Post.)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Quest
post Dec 1 2010, 09:52 PM
Post #26





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 2,419
Joined: 23-October 06
Member No.: 145



QUOTE (Sanders @ Dec 1 2010, 02:06 PM) *
She's right. Evelyn Rothschild did purchase an 18th storey apartment at Riverhouse in Manhattan. Kissinger has a place in the same building, and the Obamas apparently chose Rothschild's decorator.

(Article in Huffington Post.)


I believe the main cast of characters are the Rothschild/Zionist/New World Order faction. That is who did 911.

cool.gif

This post has been edited by Quest: Dec 1 2010, 10:56 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sanders
post Dec 1 2010, 10:29 PM
Post #27



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 7,990
Joined: 13-September 06
Member No.: 49



salute.gif

I don't know what shocked me (though didn't surprise me) more, that Kissinger lives in the same building or that the Obamas were on such good terms with the Rothschilds that they recommended their decorator to them ... and that the Rothschilds took their advice ... back in 2001 nonetheless. Wild.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Quest
post Dec 1 2010, 11:02 PM
Post #28





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 2,419
Joined: 23-October 06
Member No.: 145



QUOTE (Sanders @ Dec 2 2010, 02:29 AM) *
salute.gif

I don't know what shocked me (though didn't surprise me) more, that Kissinger lives in the same building or that the Obamas were on such good terms with the Rothschilds that they recommended their decorator to them ... and that the Rothschilds took their advice ... back in 2001 nonetheless. Wild.


No such thing as "coincidences" in this shithole.

Like I said, it was so obvious we kept ignoring it, even to the point of stepping over it. The faction that did 911 was the Rothschild/Zionist/New World Order contingent. Hitler was working with Zionists to move Jews to Palestine to create Israel. Zionist run Hollywood and media which is largely owned by Rothschild (Zionist)and Israeli sympathizer Murdoch. ZIonist (the brains) and Chrstiantian Zionists (the brawn) run the Pentagon and Freemasonry provides the ritualistic/occultist glue that binds the mess. That is what is going on. salute.gif

This post has been edited by Quest: Dec 1 2010, 11:07 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kaz
post Dec 2 2010, 09:39 AM
Post #29





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 53
Joined: 11-December 08
Member No.: 4,021



QUOTE (Quest @ Nov 29 2010, 10:55 PM) *
Kaz, I appreciate your time and patience. I can also see that you are trying to be fair in your replies. But what I am curious of is if your own ethnicity (am I correct to assume you are Jewsish?) may be influencing, at least somewhat, your opinion. First of all, the Bolshevik Genocide was NOT organic, not in the least. Certainly not in the sense that the Bolshevik leaders represented the average Russian and that they finaced and organized themselves. No. Some were not even FROM the Soviet Union. There was funding and organization provided from the USA. Also, I seriously doubt that if the common Russians partaking in the Genocide, er, I mean, Revolution, could forsee what they would be left with - scraps and their country left in shambles run by the NKVD secret police - they would have not taken part in the first place. They were left with nothing but empty promises of freedom with their history and many of their family, freinds and neighbors, as well as their pride, gone.

I don't doubt for a minute that Jews were either descriminated against or treated with some type of animoisty in the Soviet Union, but that is the same in ANY country. Take Israel and it's treatment of non-Jews, as in the case of Arabs living in Israel who share not the same rights on many aspects of life wether they be marital, business or property ownership. Same for blacks in Israel where I read recently of (black) Etheopian Jews were given Depo-Provera to keep them from having children. Need we even discuss Israeli treatment of Palestinians?
Racist birth control? Claims Israel culling Ethiopian Jews
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oljrngl5Iwc

Last but not least, what do you make of this woman's proclamation of "Europeans have not learned to be multicultural"and "Europe will not survive unless they go multicultural"? Maybe it's just me but she stikes me as an arrogant, condescending air-head lacking an understanding of her host country's history, not to mention the fact she sounds like a racist. What I am curious is what do you make of her claim and what do you look for in Israel regarding multiculturalism? Will Israel also become multi-cultural?
Jews play a "leading role" in promoting multiculturalism in Europe
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJuaTIZdUKc

What I am getting at is, why were Jews overly-represented in the Bolshevik heirarchy in the killing of mostly Christian Russian, Lithuanian, Ukranian and Latvian civilians? I mean, 40-60 million human beings killed because of "discrimination" for crying-out-loud. Also, why do many Jews, like the woman in the above video, push for multi-culturalism everywhere, while ignoring racism in Israel?

Thank you for your patience and understanding. Maybe both of us can learn something from this exchange.



No I am not Jewish but it shouldn't matter. How many major revolutions in the last 400 years have been solely "ORGANIC". eg: The American revolution had considerable French involvement. Marxism/ Communism was a 19th century idea of Karl Marx a German who lived mostly in London. This influenced people like Lenin,Trotsky and Stalin,some finance but no military support came from the west in the 1917 revolution as they were pre occupied in WWl.
The Bolsheviks put their own version of Marxism into place which was basically anti-capitalist (some say anti-jewish), anti religion,anti freedom and extremely violent run by psycho dictators Lenin and Stalin. Combine this with the other 19th century idea that exploded onto the world stage....Darwinism and Eugenics which along with Marxism ended up being misinterpreted by Lenin,Stalin and Hitler. Have you heard of Eugenics?
So many new ideas abounded and people were looking for a way out from servitude,blatant racism,sexism,child labour,corrupt royalty etc. Like the Germans,the Russians would have hoped for a better world after getting rid of their Tsar. Had Hitler and Stalin not been psychotic mass murders then world history could have been vastly different.
Yes the Jewish state does treat Palestinians in an apartheid way,stripping them of their land,killing their people. I believe the world should step in and turn Palestine/Israel into one democratic state with Jerusalem owned by the worlds people so no one religion can lay claim to it. Genetically Jews and Palestinians are almost indistinguishable.

Well the Earth the only planet we live on is.....Multicultural and is inhabited by one species of Human...Us. I don't really want to live in a culture that hasn't the maturity to respect other cultures. If your pro multicultural you can't be racist as race is defined by singular skin colour or culture and trying to keep it that way by usually thinking your race is superior to everyone else's. I hope Israel does become multicultural just like the US is and shortly to be dominated by hispanic mexicans who hopefully won't be scared of everything like the current anglo saxons are.
The Soviet genocide I thought was around 20 million. 10 million starved to death in the Ukraine many others were sent to their deaths in Siberia,many obviously executed and tortured. And yes they were anti everything except the stalin/communist line.
Why are Christians ignoring Mugabe's racism? Why did Christians ignore Apartheid in Sth Africa or the US? Why did Christians outside of Ireland ignore the IRA?
You can't blame someone living in Europe and hoping for Multiculturalism for the disgusting behaviour of Israel. The majority of people on Earth hate what is going on in Israel but like Nth Korea no one wants to do anything because they are Nuclear armed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sanders
post Dec 2 2010, 11:21 AM
Post #30



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 7,990
Joined: 13-September 06
Member No.: 49



OK, I get that and while one half of me is in agreement, another side of me is hesitant to put things in those terms because calling them 'Zionists' infers that creating a homeland for the Jews is somehow the goal here. That is a means to an end. IMO.

I take my hat off Quest that you are prescient to mention the Christian Zionist element in all this.

I think one of the most revealing facts among all the research that one can do regarding the elite and the road we are tragically being herded down right now in the world is that the leading Christian Zionists in England and America at the beginning of the movement in the 19th century were Henry Drummond and Charles Taze Russell.

Both are very very elite and well-connected families, Samuel Russell dominated the opium trade in China in his day. FDR's grandfather Warren Delano ran the Russell company as manager of operations in China, and other wealthy tycoons got their start working for the Russells. Abiel Low worked for them and the Lows were prominent investors and supporters of Columbia University ... which is almost as famous for its production of intelligence spooks as Yale is. Elihu Yale worked for the British Dutch East India Company doing the same thing as Samuel Russell did (selling opium to the Chinese) a century and a half earlier, while Skull and Bones fraternity at Yale was co-founded by another Russell, a cousin of Samuel's, William H. Russell. The 3rd university which is well known for producing "spooks", Princeton, had another Russell partner for a supporter/financier, John Cleves Green.

This article wasn't my source for this, but talks about the same thing ... (I should also note that many Russells were allegedly obsessed with the occult.)
http://sci.tech-archive.net/Archive/sci.me...7/msg00119.html

This Russell business goes even deeper, for one of the first Templars was a knight known as 'Rozell'.

Russell is a Norman name, and like Roosevelt, Ross, Rus, Roth, Rothschild, Rothes (as in the Leslie Earles of Rothes), Rosslyn Chapel, the 'Rus'/'Ros' in all these names means 'RED', as in the "red-haired giants", the Red Sea (which the Black Sea may have really been called, i.e. the unidentified "Erythraean Sea" of ancient cartography), and most tellingly, the Red Crown of Egypt (Deshret). Is this why the stripes of sails of Phoenician and Viking ships, as well as red stripes of the US and earlier British East India Company flags and the cross of the Templars, and allegedly the banner of the Tribe of Dan and maybe even the Hinomaru of Japan and the Chinese Forbidden City, are red? Who knows. Undoubtedly it is the true meaning of the "Rose Line", and hence "rosy cross" or Rosicrucian.

Then you come to Charles Taze Russell, founder of the Watchtower society, early Christian Zionist and proponent of "end-times" doctrine.

What of the Drummonds? They were powerful bankers in Britain, founders of Drummonds Bank which was absorbed into the Royal Bank of Scotland in 1924. The Drummonds descend from George Unvern prince of Hungary, who accompanied Margaret the future Queen to Scotland from Hungary following the return of the English throne to the Saxons and then the seizure of it by William the Conqueror. George was an Arpad, meaning he was of the ruling Hungarian leaders of the Magyars who were descended from Attila the Hun. The Magyars had moved into Hungary generations before along with Kabar tribes from Khazaria, and George's brother who became king there was named Solomon, while Margaret's son by Malcom of Scotland was named David ... two very conspicuously Hebrew names for the time. The Arpads were tightly connected by marriage to the family of Vladimir I ruler of the Kievan Rus (George's mother was the daughter of Vladimir), and I mention it because, well, there's that 'Rus' term again, and the family coat of arms of Vlad (which may or may not be connected) is a single big Star of David on a blue background - practically the Israeli flag.

These families weren't Jewish by any stretch, if anything they were pagan converts to Christianity. (Margaret, whose maternal lineage is in question btw, was even canonized by the Church.) But more importantly, these Vladimirovs and Arpads were ruthless clan leaders of conquering "Hunnic" (the definition of what that means is vague) and "Varangian" (kind of like a Viking) tribes.

This, along with the Norman/Templar/"Red" ancestral roots of the Russells is the key in my mind to understanding what's really behind Zionism as a movement. I and a few others call it "dragon" culture. It's no accident that the country of Georgia, named for St. George the dragon-slayer, is a dogged Zionist supporter and flies the old flag of Crusader Jerusalem featuring the Templar red cross.

Is there some connection between these people and the Jews? The Templars were the first multi-national bankers, and due to their power and status as the "pope's militia" they were able to get away with charging interest (usury). (They accepted "gifts" in return for making loans.) Normally, this was forbidden for Christians (beginning with the 1st Council of Nicaea) and Muslims alike. Jews were permitted within the rules of Judaism (as per Deuteronomy) to charge usury to gentiles. This situation essentially put Jewish money lenders and Templar bankers in the same business together. Since the Templars are suspected to have followed something like Catharism or Kabbalah, they may have been secretly anti-Catholic as well, and were indeed charged with heresy and banned in the 14th century.

From there refugee Templars joined their brothers and other Christian Orders in Spain and Portugal, teaming up with Jewish merchants there to fund explorations and navigate the world in the "Age of Discovery", in which the trade routes were established. The Jews were run out of Spain during the inquisition, and I suspect many Templar decendents and heirs went with them - largely to England and Holland where the Catholic Church had lost most of its authority by that time. This is around the time that Henry VIII made usury legal in England (1545), and 50 years later the British and Duth East India Companies, the first Corporations, were off and running, this time mirroring the same partnership which had been so fruitful in Spain and Portugal but with the "Templars" wearing new clothes yet again - this time as Freemasons.

That's sort of simplistic and maybe even a bit speculative, but a valid overview in my opinion, and when you then notice that the Russells made their money in the same way that the British East India Company did (and that a number of American tycoons were from families that had been involved with those companies), the connections are hard to ignore.

I'm not trying to invalidate anything you're saying Quest, just remarking on some hidden history and possible deeper meanings involved.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Quest
post Dec 2 2010, 10:11 PM
Post #31





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 2,419
Joined: 23-October 06
Member No.: 145



QUOTE (Sanders @ Dec 2 2010, 03:21 PM) *
I'm not trying to invalidate anything you're saying Quest, just remarking on some hidden history and possible deeper meanings involved.



No problem, Sanders. We are merely trying to flesh this thing out and in debate we can do just that. handsdown.gif

Another item I came across in the last few years that may be of interest is the apparant CIA creation of the modern day Christian Zionist movement here in the US.

What is Christian Zionism?
http://notinkansas.us/monkeys.html
QUOTE
What Is Christian Zionism?
Ten Questions and Answers
By Irving Wesley Hall
1. When you speak of Christian Zionists, can you give us some American examples?
That’s easy because the Christian Zionist movement is almost 100% “Made in the USA.” It was a fringe movement inside American Christianity until the 1970’s. Nowadays it is hard to name one prominent televangelist who isn’t a Christian Zionist. Many leading Republican politicians pursue its agenda as well. The Reverend s Billy Graham, Pat Robertson, and Jerry Falwell are Christian Zionists—or dispensationalists—as their theology is called. But we can get into that later. Prominent Christian Zionist politicians include Republicans Tom DeLay, Ralph Reed, and President George W. Bush.
2. You mean all of those men agree on religion?
They may have differences. All Christians do. But they agree on at least three theological points with powerful political implications:
1. unconditional support for Israel’s hawks,
2. the imminence of the final war of Armageddon, and
3. the belief that born-again Christians will go to Heaven without dying in what is called the Rapture.



http://www.takeoverworld.info/cbn.html

QUOTE
Christian Zionism, CBN and other groups
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/gw/1581
This October 12, 2005 GroupWatch article does not directly state that Robertson and his friends are a private function of the CIA and the US military, and underground ex-Nazis and other fascists, but gives many examples.

relevant links: Council for National Policy links, CNP picture, CIA-Death Squads,

This included supporting Nicaraguan Contras and Afghani and Saudi Contras, the muj and Al-Qaeda.

Robertson and CBN can be seen bluntly as a CIA psychological warfare "religion", which works with military "counterinsurgency" experts to crush indigenous rights and "guerilla" groups. To crush freedom in the name of freedom, and to starve people in the name of humanitarian relief.

Some of Robertson's friends in his network of "Christian charities" have privately admitted being CIA. (see bottom "I was detailed to Berkeley" "I invented Jesus freaks.")

Christian Zionism is just one aspect of this, but "selling God" [using the Lord's Name in vain, literally] is an ingenious (and ancient) approach for fundraising and running and providing cover for and observing parts of private Intelligence operations that perhaps the govt wants to set aside due to legal issues. (Robertson close involvement with Contra operations in Guatemala and Honduras, and his "personal friendship" with Ollie North, means logically that he was also tied to the explosion of crack cocaine in America.)


QUOTE
Robertson interviewed and apparently has a relationship with fmr CIA director Ray Cline, who was involved with CIA psywar against the publics of Europe and the USA (run by a Nazi SS agent, Reinhard Gehlen), as well as played a role in Operation Gladio, 40 years of FAKE "Left wing" murderous terrorist bombings staged by the CIA and NATO using underground fascists in Europe. This is now lightly admitted by the CIA, starting in 1975 by William Colby, who was later found dead in a river with his dinner half eaten on the table, and with later FOIA "leaks" in 2000 and 2001.
1992 BBC video http://www.Takeoverworld.info/vid.html#gladio


http://www.theunjustmedia.com/Christian%20...m%20defined.htm
Introduction: Christian Zionism Defined

QUOTE
At its simplest, Christian Zionism has been defined as 'Christian support for Zionism.'1 In Der Judenstaat, published in 1896, Theodor Herzl forcefully articulated the aspirations of Jewish Zionists for their own homeland, although the Zionist dream was largely nurtured and shaped by Christian Zionists long before it was able to inspire widespread Jewish support in the 1940's.2

At the First Zionist Congress which Herzl convened a year later in Basle, the Zionist aspiration was formulated in a call for a, 'publicly secured and legally assured homeland for the Jews in Palestine.'3 At the 27th Zionist Congress held in Jerusalem in 1968, Zionism was defined in terms of five principles:


QUOTE
Contemporary British Christian leaders such as Derek Prince10, David Pawson11, Lance Lambert12, Walter Riggans13, along with Americans like Jerry Falwell14, Pat Robertson15, Hal Lindsey16, Mike Evans17, Charles Dyer18, John Walvoord19, Dave Hunt20, and the German, Basilea Schlink21, have had considerable influence in popularising an apocalyptic premillennial dispensational eschatology and Zionist vision among Western Christians.


This post has been edited by Quest: Dec 2 2010, 10:12 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Quest
post Dec 2 2010, 10:57 PM
Post #32





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 2,419
Joined: 23-October 06
Member No.: 145



Kaz wrote
QUOTE
No I am not Jewish but it shouldn't matter. How many major revolutions in the last 400 years have been solely "ORGANIC". eg: The American revolution had considerable French involvement. Marxism/ Communism was a 19th century idea of Karl Marx a German who lived mostly in London. This influenced people like Lenin,Trotsky and Stalin,some finance but no military support came from the west in the 1917 revolution as they were pre occupied in WWl.


True enough but two wrongs do not make a right and you really cannot compare the two events. America was still forming and made up of many groups of people from many European contries whereas the Soviets had defined historical bounderies based on language, culture and religion. The philosophical makeup of the Bolsheviks did NOT reflect the the majority of Soviets whereas early Americans were unified in the rejection of British rule and did not wish to be taxed without representation. Millions were killied in the Soviet Union alone even by your low claim of 20 million. Why? Could it be the Czar refused the Rothschilds' New Worold Oder central bank? Bet on it.

Criminal Rothschilds - Tsar helps Lincoln fight Britain
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USGSOViaulc

QUOTE
The Bolsheviks put their own version of Marxism into place which was basically anti-capitalist (some say anti-jewish), anti religion,anti freedom and extremely violent run by psycho dictators Lenin and Stalin. Combine this with the other 19th century idea that exploded onto the world stage


Why the anti-religious stance by the Bolsheviks? The Soviets were largely Chrsistian. What were most of the Bolsheviks? Jewish. Apparently the Bolsheviks could not assimilate so they genocided millions. Does this seem fair? What if it was the other way around? Would it be fair then or do you live by a double standard? Religion bad- atheist genocide of religionists - good. Btw, Kas, I am athesit too but the Bolsheviks were arrogant, egotistical, intolerant, genocidal maniacs who were fueled by hatred of a majority they refused to assimilate with not to mention they helped the hidden agenda of the New World Order who wanted a Rothschilds bank to run the country. Why you cannot see this is beyond me.

QUOTE
....Darwinism and Eugenics which along with Marxism ended up being misinterpreted by Lenin,Stalin and Hitler. Have you heard of Eugenics?


Whatever. That "misinterpretaion" resulted in the genocide of millions of women and children. Eugenics? As part American Indian I am quite familiar with eugenics. I agree, the Wall Street-funded Bolsheviks were involved in eugenics as were the Wall Street funded Hitler Nazis. What's your point? That because the target of cultural racisist Zionist/Christian Zionist elite were peaceful Christian Soviets that "might makes right"? How many Jews did the Christian Soviets kill before the Bolshevik 'Revolution'?

QUOTE
So many new ideas abounded and people were looking for a way out from servitude,blatant racism,sexism,child labour,corrupt royalty etc. Like the Germans,the Russians would have hoped for a better world after getting rid of their Tsar. Had Hitler and Stalin not been psychotic mass murders then world history could have been vastly different.


Poppycock. Hitler was a creation of Prescott Bush and Wall Street. You are trying to create a straw man argument with the Hitler claim. Don't blame Germans for Hitler when Time Magazine called Hitler it's "1938 Man of the Year".

Adolf Hitler, Time Magazines's 1938 Man of the Year
http://www.scrapbookpages.com/DachauMemorial/TimeCover.html

Regarding the Soviet Tsar, how many millions of Jews did the Tsar kill? The Tsar refused a Rothschild bank running his country. The Wall Street funded and organized Jewish lead Bolsheviks killed between 40-60 million or as you cliam, 20 million. And what about the genocide of Latvians, Lithuanians and Ukranians? What were they guilty of to have millions of them killed???

QUOTE
Yes the Jewish state does treat Palestinians in an apartheid way,stripping them of their land,killing their people. I believe the world should step in and turn Palestine/Israel into one democratic state with Jerusalem owned by the worlds people so no one religion can lay claim to it. Genetically Jews and Palestinians are almost indistinguishable.


On this we agree.

QUOTE
Well the Earth the only planet we live on is.....Multicultural and is inhabited by one species of Human...Us. I don't really want to live in a culture that hasn't the maturity to respect other cultures. If your pro multicultural you can't be racist as race is defined by singular skin colour or culture and trying to keep it that way by usually thinking your race is superior to everyone else's. I hope Israel does become multicultural just like the US is and shortly to be dominated by hispanic mexicans who hopefully won't be scared of everything like the current anglo saxons are.


Are you suggesting that Africans and Chinese should no longer be allowed to be ethnocentric? I mean, didn't the world in the early 1980's basically rally around Africa to rid itself of white rule? Should China be forced to become multi-racial? Question, are you suggesting that the only way for people to be multi-racial is for every country on the planet to open it's borders to all ethnicities? Are you suggesting it's not possible to be accepting of other cultures yet remain ethno-centric within your own borders because you are familiar with your own religion, customs and laws? Not for nothing, Kaz, but you sound racist and extremely intolerant. You need to understand the extreme left and extreme right are virtually one in the same; the nearly touching ends of a line bent to form a ring. These were the Nazis and the Bolsheviks. Do you really think it ironic they had the same paymasters?

http://thy-weapon-of-war.blogspot.com/2010...viet-union.html
QUOTE
1920 - Winston Churchill acknowledges Jewish origin of Communist conspiracy

On February 8, 1920, Winston Churchill expressed his alarm over world developments in an interview published in the Sunday Illustrated Herald, London:

"From the days of Adam (Spartacus) Weishaupt, to those of Karl Marx to those of Trotsky, Bela Kun, Rosa Luxemburg and Emma Goldman. This worldwide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and for the reconstruction of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence and impossible equality, has been steadily growing.

There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international, and for the most part, atheistic Jews. It is certainly a very great one: it probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews. Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from the Jewish leaders." [3]


This post has been edited by Quest: Dec 3 2010, 12:30 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kaz
post Dec 3 2010, 05:04 AM
Post #33





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 53
Joined: 11-December 08
Member No.: 4,021



True enough but two wrongs do not make a right and you really cannot compare the two events. America was still forming and made up of many groups of people from many European contries whereas the Soviets had defined historical bounderies based on language, culture and religion. The philosophical makeup of the Bolsheviks did NOT reflect the the majority of Soviets whereas early Americans were unified in the rejection of British rule and did not wish to be taxed without representation. Millions were killied in the Soviet Union alone even by your low claim of 20 million. Why? Could it be the Czar refused the Rothschilds' New Worold Oder central bank? Bet on it.

I was answering your statement about how the russian revolution was heavily influenced from outside. The French revolution came about partly because France nearly went bankrupt supporting the American Revolution that didn't include or give rights to Native Americans or Blacks who remained slaves for nearly a century. How many Native Americans and Slaves were killed after this revolution as the good white christians laid claim to all lands. The British/Spanish and French conquerers had massacred many native civilisations and all in the name of Christianity. I was trying to give you an example of a Revolution that had outside support and established (for better or worse) a new democracy and a secular government.
By the end of the 19th century, the introduction of national taxation systems had ended the Rothschild's policy of operating with a single set of commercial account records, resulting in the various houses gradually going their own separate ways. The coherence that had worked so well for the five brothers and their successor sons had all but disappeared by World War I. In Britain, the introduction of estate taxes resulted in Rothschild inheritors handing over multi-millions to the government and brought an end to the passing down of their great mansions. However, the estate tax relative to the bank and corporate assets was far more detrimental long-term because it restricted growth at a time when publicly owned banks were expanding rapidly with huge resources raised on capital markets.

The decline of the French and British Empires particularly after World War I along with increased nationalization by governments restricted growth potential for the Rothschilds. However, business analysts generally agree that their failure to shift their focus to opportunities in the United States, where the greatest industrial expansion at that time was occurring, is a major factor in the belief that the Rothschild bankers of today are only minor players in the global economy.



Why the anti-religious stance by the Bolsheviks? The Soviets were largely Chrsistian. What were most of the Bolsheviks? Jewish. Apparently the Bolsheviks could not assimilate so they genocided millions. Does this seem fair? What if it was the other way around? Would it be fair then or do you live by a double standard? Religion bad- atheist genocide of religionists - good. Btw, Kas, I am athesit too but the Bolsheviks were arrogant, egotistical, intolerant, genocidal maniacs who were fueled by hatred of a majority they refused to assimilate with not to mention they helped the hidden agenda of the New World Order who wanted a Rothschilds bank to run the country. Why you cannot see this is beyond me.

The Communist party manifesto is anti-religous...read Karl Marx. The Bolsheviks were a faction of the Marxists/Communist party and didn't establish themselves as the majority faction until 1910. And No they weren't all Jewish and certainly didn't promote Judaism....you need to read real history not what someone tells you on You Tube.Lenin and Stalin ruled as paranoid Dictators and killed off their political rivals including Bolsheviks (like Trotsky...a secular jew). Their single minded determination to impose their twisted form of Communism lead them to massacre and starve millions. Communists consistently hated capitalism so wanting a british empire banking conglomerate that was very powerless by WWI to rule their country is just stupid.


Whatever. That "misinterpretaion" resulted in the genocide of millions of women and children. Eugenics? As part American Indian I am quite familiar with eugenics. I agree, the Wall Street-funded Bolsheviks were involved in eugenics as were the Wall Street funded Hitler Nazis. What's your point? That because the target of cultural racisist Zionist/Christian Zionist elite were peaceful Christian Soviets that "might makes right"? How many Jews did the Christian Soviets kill before the Bolshevik 'Revolution'?

For much of the 19th century, Imperial Russia, which included much of Poland, contained the world's largest Jewish population. From Alexander III's reign until the end of Tsarist rule in Russia, many Jews were often restricted to the Jewish Pale of Settlement, and banned from many jobs and locations. They were subject to racist laws, like the May Laws, and were targeted in hundreds of violent anti-Jewish riots, called pogroms, that had unofficial state support. It was during this period that a hoax document alleging a global Jewish conspiracy, "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion", was created.

Even though many of the Old Bolsheviks were ethnically Jewish, they sought to uproot Judaism and Zionism and established the Yevsektsiya to achieve this goal. By the end of the 1940s the Communist leadership of the former USSR had liquidated almost all Jewish organizations, with the exception of a few token synagogues. These synagogues were then placed under police surveillance, both openly and through the use of informants.

The campaign of 1948-1953 against so-called "rootless cosmopolitans," the alleged "Doctors' plot," the rise of "Zionology" and subsequent activities of official organizations such as the Anti-Zionist committee of the Soviet public were officially carried out under the banner of "anti-Zionism,", and by the mid-1950s the state persecution of Soviet Jews emerged as a major human rights issue in the West and domestically.



Poppycock. Hitler was a creation of Prescott Bush and Wall Street. You are trying to create a straw man argument with the Hitler claim. Don't blame Germans for Hitler when Time Magazine called Hitler it's "1938 Man of the Year".

Time bases its Man of the Year on who has had the most influence on the world at that time not on what they may or may not have done. If you read Mein Kampf and follow Hitler from 1918 onwards he was horrified that Germany capitulated after WWI and when the economic disasters of the 1920's occurred he blamed this and the Jews for all Germany's problems. And many German people ended up agreeing giving him around 33% of the vote more than most US Presidents get as a % of total voters. And if you read the real history of the holocaust you will find that many Germans willing handed in Jewish names to the SS. Prescott Bush and his banking buddies helped finance a Fritz Thyssen in Germany but to say they created Hitler is just a fantasy.




Are you suggesting that Africans and Chinese should no longer be allowed to be ethnocentric? I mean, didn't the world in the early 1980's basically rally around Africa to rid itself of white rule? Should China be forced to become multi-racial? Question, are you suggesting that the only way for people to be multi-racial is for every country on the planet to open it's borders to all ethnicities? Are you suggesting it's not possible to be accepting of other cultures yet remain ethno-centric within your own borders because you are familiar with your own religion, customs and laws? Not for nothing, Kaz, but you sound racist and extremely intolerant. You need to understand the extreme left and extreme right are virtually one in the same; the nearly touching ends of a line bent to form a ring. These were the Nazis and the Bolsheviks. Do you really think it ironic they had the same paymasters?

Any country that has a democratic/secular country should live by its stated laws and values. The ethnic makeup of who is in charge is immaterial. Especially in a society which respects all culture and allows them to express themselves within that culture and or religion. Sth Africa rid itself of white rule because it was functioning as a white supremacists regime. China has quite a few different races already but under its communist guise it doesn't show much respect to the other cultures.
How can I be Racist and Multicultural? Where is the Mayan,Egyptian,Sumerian,Roman,Greek,Inca,Navaho etc,etc cultures. Cultures and languages come and go some last longer than others either by "Rule by the Sword" or by having some in built fairness which leaves it exposed to the cultures who want everyone to be the same as their war culture. If your culture/religion and laws are strong and fair and you believe in them enough your way of life will last alas we live in a world where apparently belief in their God is so weak that it can be overrun by people of another religion just by them moving in next door. We are one race of people and DNA proves we are physically intertwined ethnically. Lets say Europe and the US go broke and economic refugees end up going to Africa to eke out a living I am sure the majority of Africans would welcome them(except the Mugabes of Africa). Humans want basically the same treatment and respect the world over,culture is just window dressing.

Their is no evidence that NAZI's and Bolsheviks had the same paymasters and Hitler or Stalin would have told off or killed anyone who tried to tell them what to do.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Quest
post Dec 4 2010, 03:31 PM
Post #34





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 2,419
Joined: 23-October 06
Member No.: 145



Kaz wrote
QUOTE
I was answering your statement about how the russian revolution was heavily influenced from outside. The French revolution came about partly because France nearly went bankrupt supporting the American Revolution that didn't include or give rights to Native Americans or Blacks who remained slaves for nearly a century. How many Native Americans and Slaves were killed after this revolution as the good white christians laid claim to all lands. The British/Spanish and French conquerers had massacred many native civilisations and all in the name of Christianity. I was trying to give you an example of a Revolution that had outside support and established (for better or worse) a new democracy and a secular government.


Oh, don't get me wrong here about the fledgling American "Chrsitian" nation, Kaz, I have my problem with Christianity, along with most major religions. As I have mentioned repeatedly, I am part Native American and atheist as well. I agree with you on the above statement.

Kaz wrote
QUOTE
By the end of the 19th century, the introduction of national taxation systems had ended the Rothschild's policy of operating with a single set of commercial account records, resulting in the various houses gradually going their own separate ways. The coherence that had worked so well for the five brothers and their successor sons had all but disappeared by World War I. In Britain, the introduction of estate taxes resulted in Rothschild inheritors handing over multi-millions to the government and brought an end to the passing down of their great mansions. However, the estate tax relative to the bank and corporate assets was far more detrimental long-term because it restricted growth at a time when publicly owned banks were expanding rapidly with huge resources raised on capital markets.

The decline of the French and British Empires particularly after World War I along with increased nationalization by governments restricted growth potential for the Rothschilds. However, business analysts generally agree that their failure to shift their focus to opportunities in the United States, where the greatest industrial expansion at that time was occurring, is a major factor in the belief that the Rothschild bankers of today are only minor players in the global economy


I am not quite sure where you are going with this. Are you claiming the Rothschilds are in effect, "broke" and no longer have any influence in matters of government, particularly, in international affairs they have no influence? Is this your claim?

From Wikipedia
QUOTE
The Rothschild family (known as The House of Rothschild,[1] or more simply as the Rothschilds) is a European family of German Jewish origin that established European banking and finance houses from the late eighteenth century. Five lines of the Austrian branch of the family were elevated into the Austrian nobility, being given hereditary baronies of the Habsburg Empire by Emperor Francis II in 1816. The British branch of the family was elevated into the British nobility by Queen Victoria.[2][3] It has been argued that during the 19th century, the family possessed by far the largest private fortune in the world, and by far the largest fortune in modern history.[3][4]


The Rothschilds own Reuters, The Associated Press and fix the price of gold as well. Does this sound like they have no power and influence?
http://100777.com/node/164
QUOTE
The House of Rothschild bought Reuters news service in the 1800's. Within the last 20 years, Reuters bought the Associated Press. Now the Elite own the two largest wire services in the world, where most newspapers get their news. The Rothschilds have control of all three U.S. Networks, plus other aspects of the recording and mass media industry according to research by Eustice Mullins in his book 'Who Owns the TV Networks'.


In the article below it is claimed that many researchers believe that the Rothchilds worth to be around "500 trillion dollars or about 1/2 the wealth of the entire world". Now, I am not in a position to argue the accuracy of this statement but given the Rothschilds worth at the beginning of the 20th Century, the claim seems not at all far-fetched.
http://tobefree.wordpress.com/2010/05/10/t...-gold%e2%80%a6/

Quest wrote
QUOTE
Why the anti-religious stance by the Bolsheviks? The Soviets were largely Chrsistian. What were most of the Bolsheviks? Jewish. Apparently the Bolsheviks could not assimilate so they genocided millions. Does this seem fair? What if it was the other way around? Would it be fair then or do you live by a double standard? Religion bad- atheist genocide of religionists - good. Btw, Kas, I am athesit too but the Bolsheviks were arrogant, egotistical, intolerant, genocidal maniacs who were fueled by hatred of a majority they refused to assimilate with not to mention they helped the hidden agenda of the New World Order who wanted a Rothschilds bank to run the country. Why you cannot see this is beyond me.


Kaz responded
QUOTE
The Communist party manifesto is anti-religous...read Karl Marx. The Bolsheviks were a faction of the Marxists/Communist party and didn't establish themselves as the majority faction until 1910. And No they weren't all Jewish and certainly didn't promote Judaism....you need to read real history not what someone tells you on You Tube.Lenin and Stalin ruled as paranoid Dictators and killed off their political rivals including Bolsheviks (like Trotsky...a secular jew). Their single minded determination to impose their twisted form of Communism lead them to massacre and starve millions. Communists consistently hated capitalism so wanting a british empire banking conglomerate that was very powerless by WWI to rule their country is just stupid.


Quest answers,
Kaz, my question was rhetorical. I gave you credit you would understand but apparently, that wasn't the case. Yes, the Bolshevik communist party was anti-religious, and brutaly so. I am also aware that the Bolsheviks did not promote Judiasm, just as the Zionsit leaders in Israel are also not religious. I have no idea where you got the idea that I said the Bolsheviks promoted Judaism. You need to actually READ posts before you answer them. Your apology is accepted. wink.gif As to the Bolshviks not wanting a capitalist banking and economic system, we are once again in agreement but what you don't seem to understand is that this transformation from sovereign countries definded by languages, cultures and religions to the one-world-goverment, criminal elite driven New World Order model was never planned as an overnight operation. It was designed so that the elite would not have to actually fight the masses to control them, otherwise it would be very easy to identify their own "leaders" as the enemy in a class war. This class war was designed in such a fashion as to let the common people believe they are masters of their own destiny. It was designed so that the actual elite rulers would simply back movements that will pit one group against another while they, the elite, profit from playing both sides of the fence. It's always been that way. Many assasinations, wars and phony political movements have been and will be used to accomplish the desired goal. Communism, Capitalism and Socilism have meaning only to the lower, unenlightened masses but at the top, where these various ideologies are spawned, it's all about Gangsterism and robber-barons, and one-world-government by any means necessary at any given time. Any solution will suffice. The New World Order CIA will perform coups (see Irans' Shah or Iraq's Saddam) or outright attack a country as it did to Germany in the 1st World War. Also remember the NWO would never build a strawman it couldn't knock down and this is why many say Hitler knowingly worked for the NWO or was a "useful idiot". The German people had every right to be upset about being attacked FIRST in WW1 but the New World Order apparently used that against them when the created Hitler and Nazi Germany. Many of the German people, to their detriment, went along with Hitler but with Time Magazine exulting Hitler as "Man Of The Year" who could fault them in thinking the world was on their side?

Quest wrote
QUOTE
Poppycock. Hitler was a creation of Prescott Bush and Wall Street. You are trying to create a straw man argument with the Hitler claim. Don't blame Germans for Hitler when Time Magazine called Hitler it's "1938 Man of the Year".

Kaz responed

QUOTE
Time bases its Man of the Year on who has had the most influence on the world at that time not on what they may or may not have done. If you read Mein Kampf and follow Hitler from 1918 onwards he was horrified that Germany capitulated after WWI and when the economic disasters of the 1920's occurred he blamed this and the Jews for all Germany's problems. And many German people ended up agreeing giving him around 33% of the vote more than most US Presidents get as a % of total voters. And if you read the real history of the holocaust you will find that many Germans willing handed in Jewish names to the SS. Prescott Bush and his banking buddies helped finance a Fritz Thyssen in Germany but to say they created Hitler is just a fantasy.


Quest responds
Kaz, you seem to have difficulty grasping English. I, as a person in their mid-fifties do not need to have explained to me what "Man Of The Year" means. It means EXACTLY what it says, it means Man Of The Year. Period. Otherwise it would say, "Dictator of the Year" or "Idealogical Nutcase of the Year", etc, etc. For your information, Time Magazine was founded by Henry Luce, a Yale alum and member of the Yale secret society and power broker, Skull and Bones. Skull and Bones also has among its' members, Senator Prescott Bush who helped at least in part to finance Hitler's rise to power, George Bush Sr. former director of the CIA and President of the US, and George Bush Jr. President of the United States. In other words, the same people that in part helped finace Hitler are now calling him, "Man Of The Year". I am sure to this you'll respond, "So?", so I'll save you the effort.

Quest wrote,
QUOTE
Are you suggesting that Africans and Chinese should no longer be allowed to be ethnocentric? I mean, didn't the world in the early 1980's basically rally around Africa to rid itself of white rule? Should China be forced to become multi-racial? Question, are you suggesting that the only way for people to be multi-racial is for every country on the planet to open it's borders to all ethnicities? Are you suggesting it's not possible to be accepting of other cultures yet remain ethno-centric within your own borders because you are familiar with your own religion, customs and laws? Not for nothing, Kaz, but you sound racist and extremely intolerant. You need to understand the extreme left and extreme right are virtually one in the same; the nearly touching ends of a line bent to form a ring. These were the Nazis and the Bolsheviks. Do you really think it ironic they had the same paymasters?

Kaz responed,
QUOTE
Any country that has a democratic/secular country should live by its stated laws and values. The ethnic makeup of who is in charge is immaterial. Especially in a society which respects all culture and allows them to express themselves within that culture and or religion. Sth Africa rid itself of white rule because it was functioning as a white supremacists regime. China has quite a few different races already but under its communist guise it doesn't show much respect to the other cultures.


Quest answers,
Kaz, you stated that, "Any country that has a democratic/secular country should live by its stated laws and values." What on earth does this mean? Surely you aren't suggesting any RELIGIOUS country should NOT be allowed to live by it's own laws and values. Is this what yo are implying? If so, you are indeed quite frightening. The non-religious Bolsheviks with their genocide of millions proved the irreligious have no lock on sanity. To the topic at hand, the Chinese government doesn't represent the Chinese people any more than Bush Jr or Obama represents the US citizens. The Chinese people have not genocied millions around the world. Are you suggested it would be "acceptable" to kill millions of Chinese people because China is not in your words, "multi-cultural"? Not for nothing, Kaz, you are sounded more and more like a flaming, uber-liberal elitist who likes to listen to the sound of their own breath. Better have a look in the mirror and see yourself in about 20 years.

George Bernard Shaw Defends Hitler, Mass Murder
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQvsf2MUKRQ
Left-wing roots of the Nazis
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4758sBZLC5k...feature=related

Kaz wrote
QUOTE
How can I be Racist and Multicultural? Where is the Mayan,Egyptian,Sumerian,Roman,Greek,Inca,Navaho etc,etc cultures. Cultures and languages come and go some last longer than others either by "Rule by the Sword" or by having some in built fairness which leaves it exposed to the cultures who want everyone to be the same as their war culture. If your culture/religion and laws are strong and fair and you believe in them enough your way of life will last alas we live in a world where apparently belief in their God is so weak that it can be overrun by people of another religion just by them moving in next door. We are one race of people and DNA proves we are physically intertwined ethnically. Lets say Europe and the US go broke and economic refugees end up going to Africa to eke out a living I am sure the majority of Africans would welcome them(except the Mugabes of Africa). Humans want basically the same treatment and respect the world over,culture is just window dressing.


Quest responds,
I definitely think it's possible to be "multi-cultural" and racist; especially if you look at a monolithic race/culture country and see it as a "problem" as opposed to appreciating its' uniqueness and celebrating it's history as long as said country is minding it's own business. Having said that, who wants every country in the world to look like mine? Certainly not me. I WANT to see a diverse world but prefer it within their own law-abiding borders. I do not want my own history and culture wiped out, like my Indian ancestors. The same is for MOST people of the world. Most people, if asked, would want to preserve their own race, culture and history. That is as ancient and human as eating, sleeping and sex. Kaz, what YOU seem to struggle with the difference between "preference" and "predjudice". Because someone wishes to live in the culture they are familiar with does not make them "predjudice", it simply means that is their "preference". However, I suppose if you grew up in a large metropolitain area you might prefer "multi-culturalism" but even then, I'll bet even you have your limits wether they be due to certain culture's customs, religions, or whatever. Question, how willing would you be willing to move to crime-ridden Mexico or Saudi Arabia, or if you were Muslim, or Christian for that matter, how willing would you be to move to Israel? Oh, try asking the average Brit how immigration and multi-culturalism is working out for him. Lastly, what would be wrong with all countries withdrawing to their own borders (as most wish to do already), mind their own business and have their citizens simply visit each other? By saying this I am not implying that no people from any country should never be allowed to move to another country. No. What I am saying however is that it is important to recognize that there is a hidden force that uses the facade of "tolerance" and "multi-culturism" as a means of leveraging politics in a given country in which to control it for its' own selfish, nefarious purposes. My solution of countries withdrawing into their own borders certainly seem a lot more effecient, not to mention humane, than genocidng people around the world because they are not "multi-cultural". As to the immigrant who is trying to "eke out some type of living" as you say, why didn't he fix the problems in the country of his origin? Do you think said immigrant will care any more about his new country when it comes to dealing with corruption or injustice if he fled his old country? Conversly, if justice is what America and the New World Order is actually about, why not fix the corruption and problems in Mexico? We certainly have started enough war overseas in the last 75 years. This begs the question, what is REALLY going on? Again, this is a rhetorical question - what is going on is a class war and immigration as well as multi-cultiralism are but mere tools of the elite NWO.

QUOTE
Their is no evidence that NAZI's and Bolsheviks had the same paymasters and Hitler or Stalin would have told off or killed anyone who tried to tell them what to do.


No evidence? Really?
Professor Antony Sutton: Wall Street & the rise of Hitler 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sCpsq55uic

Antony Sutton - Wall Street & Bolshevik Revolution Part 1.flv
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GhPsJCXPqY
http://reformed-theology.org/html/books/wa.../chapter_07.htm
QUOTE
Hitler's 1924 Munich trial yielded evidence that the Nazi Party received $20,000 from Nuremburg industrialists. The most interesting name from this period is that of Emil Kirdorf, who had earlier acted as conduit for financing German involvement in the Bolshevik Revolution.4 Kirdorfs role in financing Hitler was, in his own words:

In 1923 I came into contact for the first time with the National-Socialist movement .... I first heard the Fuehrer in the Essen Exhibition Hall. His clear exposition completely convinced and overwhelmed me. In 1927 I first met the Fuehrer personally. I travelled to Munich and there had a conversation with the Fuehrer in the Bruckmann home. During four and a half hours Adolf Hitler explained to me his programme in de tail. I then begged the Fuehrer to put together the lecture he had given me in the form of a pamphlet. I then distributed this pamphlet in my name in business and manufacturing circles.

Since then I have placed myself completely at the disposition of his movement, Shortly after our Munich conversation, and as a result of the pamphlet which the Fuehrer composed and I distributed, a number of meetings took place between the Fuehrer and leading personalities in the field of indus. try. For the last time before the taking over of power, the leaders of industry met in my house together with Adolf Hitler, Rudolf Hess, Hermann Goering and other leading personalities of the party.5


The above are only part of a MOUNTAIN of evidence, Kaz, if you ever bothered looking for it.

This post has been edited by Quest: Dec 26 2010, 01:41 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kaz
post Dec 5 2010, 12:18 AM
Post #35





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 53
Joined: 11-December 08
Member No.: 4,021



[

I am not quite sure where you are going with this. Are you claiming the Rothschilds are in effect, "broke" and no longer have any influence in matters of government, particularly, in international affairs they have no influence? Is this your claim?
Not broke just a small fish in a big pond.

27 March 2008 3:28:16 PM AEST by admin ( Leave a comment )

As you are using Wiki you can see this plus many articles telling you no one owns more than 15% of Reuters. Murdoch tried but failed.I don't see Rothschild anywhere. Same for Associated Press. There is no proof Rothschild own these media outlets other than on websites occupied with the Protocols of Zion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reuters


In the article below it is claimed that many researchers believe that the Rothchilds worth to be around "500 trillion dollars or about 1/2 the wealth of the entire world". Now, I am not in a position to argue the accuracy of this statement but given the Rothschilds worth at the beginning of the 20th Century, the claim seems not at all far-fetched.
http://tobefree.wordpress.com/2010/05/10/t...-gold%e2%80%a6/



Yes it is far fetched.


Quest answers,
Kaz, my question was rhetorical. I gave you credit you would understand but apparently, that wasn't the case. Yes, the Bolshevik communist party was anti-religious, and brutaly so. I am also aware that the Bolsheviks did not promote Judiasm, just as the Zionsit leaders in Israel are also not religious. I have no idea where you got the idea that I said the Bolsheviks promoted Judaism. You need to actually READ posts before you answer them. Your apology is accepted. wink.gif As to the Bolshviks not wanting a capitalist banking and economic system, we are once again in agreement but what you don't seem to understand is that this transformation from sovereign countries definded by languages, cultures and religions to the one-world-goverment, criminal elite driven New World Order model was never planned as an overnight operation. It was designed so that the elite would not have to actually fight the masses to control them, otherwise it would be very easy to identify their own "leaders" as the enemy in a class war. This class war was designed in such a fashion as to let the common people believe they are masters of their own destiny. It was designed so that the actual elite rulers would simply back movements that will pit one group against another while they, the elite, profit from playing both sides of the fence. It's always been that way. Many assasinations, wars and phony political movements have been and will be used to accomplish the desired goal. Communism, Capitalism and Socilism have meaning only to the lower, unenlightened masses but at the top, where these various ideologies are spawned, it's all about Gangsterism and robber-barons, and one-world-government by any means necessary at any given time. Any solution will suffice. The New World Order CIA will perform coups (see Irans' Shah or Iraq's Saddam) or outright attack a country as it did to Germany in the 1st World War. Also remember the NWO would never build a strawman it couldn't knock down and this is why many say Hitler knowingly worked for the NWO or was a "useful idiot". The German people had every right to be upset about being attacked FIRST in WW1 but the New World Order apparently used that against them when the created Hitler and Nazi Germany. Many of the German people, to their detriment, went along with Hitler but with Time Magazine exulting Hitler as "Man Of The Year" who could fault them in thinking the world was on their side?

Yes rich and powerful individuals do try and back many political movements usually ones which feather their business interests. Rupert Murdoch is a good example of someone backing left and right wing governments. But the 20th Century was not only a fight for resources and greed it was a fight for ideas and unfortunately humans tend to sought them out through revolutions or wars. Thats why NO one should be paid more than a million a year as a wage. If you can't live on that you shouldn't be in charge of anything. The political ideas gained popular acceptance as the 19th century was dominated by the British Empire, Royal Serfdom, some democracy and a few dictators. Most of these were dismantled by the end of WW1 with the Rothschild having so much tied up with this empire its power and influence declined with it. There is NO evidence Hitler worked for anyone and he clearly spelt out and stuck to his agenda long before becoming a political force in Germany.






Quest responds
Kaz, you seem to have difficulty grasping English. I, as a person in their mid-fifties do not need to have explained to me what "Man Of The Year" means. It means EXACTLY what it says, it means Man Of The Year. Period. Otherwise it would say, "Dictator of the Year" or "Idealogical Nutcase of the Year", etc, etc. For your information, Time Magazine was founded by Henry Luce, a Yale alum and member of the Yale secret society and power broker, Skull and Bones. Skull and Bones also has among its' members, Senator Prescott Bush who helped at least in part to finance Hitler's rise to power, George Bush Sr. former director of the CIA and President of the US, and George Bush Jr. President of the United States. In other words, the same people that in part helped finace Hitler are now calling him, "Man Of The Year". I am sure to this you'll respond, "So?", so I'll save you the effort.

You obviously take everything literally. And as an American and been indoctrinated by the cold war your world is black/white, left wing right wing, and the huge grey area between seems to be out of your reach. As you see from the Time reference below the Public perceived that it was an Honour Award. Time was trying to give the title to the person of most influence in that particular year. No matter how many times they said this.
"Despite the magazine's frequent statements to the contrary, the designation is often regarded as an honor, and spoken of as an award or prize, simply based on many previous selections of admirable people. However Time magazine points out those such as Adolf Hitler in 1938, and Joseph Stalin in 1939 and again in 1942, and the Ayatollah Khomeini in 1979, have also been granted the title." Tell me was Henry Luce or any of the others present or is there any evidence that they ordered the Times Editors to name Hitler as man of the Year?




Quest answers,
Kaz, you stated that, "Any country that has a democratic/secular country should live by its stated laws and values." What on earth does this mean? Surely you aren't suggesting any RELIGIOUS country should NOT be allowed to live by it's own laws and values. Is this what yo are implying? If so, you are indeed quite frightening. The non-religious Bolsheviks with their genocide of millions proved the irreligious have no lock on sanity. To the topic at hand, the Chinese government doesn't represent the Chinese people any more than Bush Jr or Obama represents the US citizens. The Chinese people have not genocied millions around the world. Are you suggested it would be "acceptable" to kill millions of Chinese people because China is not in your words, "multi-cultural"? Not for nothing, Kaz, you are sounded more and more like a flaming, uber-liberal elitist who likes to listen to the sound of their own breath. Better have a look in the mirror and see yourself in about 20 years.

George Bernard Shaw Defends Hitler, Mass Murder
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQvsf2MUKRQ
Left-wing roots of the Nazis
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4758sBZLC5k...feature=related

I was clearly referring to democratic/secular countries (eg: USA)secular:denoting attitudes, activities, or other things that have no religious or spiritual basis. You know the separation of Church and State enshrined in the Constitution. Which also gives anyone the right to freely express their religion. This would be more ideal than living in a country like Israel which shovels its religion down everyones throats." the irreligious have no lock on sanity" So your either religious or you have lost your sanity? Who represents China? I said that China did have many ethnic groups but tries to suppress these by having a mono culture and government. I should ask why people are scared of Multiculturalism? It sounds more and more that you are a white christian racist disguising himself as the opposite in the hope no one will notice your hatred of multiculturalism and anything non christian...Well?

Quest responds,
I definitely think it's possible to be "multi-cultural" and racist; especially if you look at a monolithic race/culture country and see it as a "problem" as opposed to appreciating its' uniqueness and celebrating it's history as long as said country is minding it's own business. Having said that, who wants every country in the world to look like mine? Certainly not me. I WANT to see a diverse world but prefer it within their own law-abiding borders. I do not want my own history and culture wiped out, like my Indian ancestors. The same is for MOST people of the world. Most people, if asked, would want to preserve their own race, culture and history. That is as ancient and human as eating, sleeping and sex. Kaz, what YOU seem to struggle with the difference between "preference" and "prejudice". Because someone wishes to live in the culture they are familiar with does not make them "predjudice", it simply means that is their "preference". However, I suppose if you grew up in a large metropolitain area you might prefer "multi-culturalism" but even then, I'll bet even you have your limits wether they be due to certain culture's customs, religions, or whatever. Question, how willing would you be willing to move to crime-ridden Mexico or Saudi Arabia, or if you were Muslim, or Christian for that matter, how willing would you be to move to Israel? Oh, try asking the average Brit how immigration and multi-culturalism is working out for him. Lastly, what would be wrong with all countries withdrawing to their own borders (as most wish to do already), mind their own business and have their citizens simply visit each other? By saying this I am not implying that no people from any country should never be allowed to move to another country. No. What I am saying however is that it is important to recognize that there is a hidden force that uses the facade of "tolerance" and "multi-culturism" as a means of leveraging politics in a given country in which to control it for its' own selfish, nefarious purposes. My solution of countries withdrawing into their own borders certainly seem a lot more effecient, not to mention humane, than genocidng people around the world because they are not "multi-cultural". ast to the immigrant who is trying to "eke out some type of living" as you say, why didn't he fix the problems in the country of his origin? Do you think said immigrant will care anymore about his new country when it comes to dealing with corruption of injustice if he fled his old country? If justice is what America and the New World Order is actually about, why not fix the corruption and problems in Mexico? We certainly have started ebough ware overseas in the last 75 years. This begs the question, what is REALLY going on? Again, this is a rhetorical question - what is going on is a class war and immigration as well as multi-cultiralism are but mere tools of the elite NWO.

So Anthony Sutton is your major source do you have other people as sources to help substantiate his work? Multiculturalism is an ideal or a progression of circumstances when a country opens up to other cultures. Their are many mono type cultures but because of travel,the internet and the fact we live longer the world has opened up an information Tsunami which will see conflicts and harmonisation of ideas. But I believe many cultures whilst retaining their language and colourful costumes will end up questioning those parts of their culture which suppresses or abuses their basic human rights. It may end up a multicultural world, it may end up with the dominant cultures quarantining themselves but still maintaining contact with each other.
In most multicultural countries peoples diverse cultural histories are allowed to be expressed and preserved but the mutually agreed rights and freedoms are also held to the agreed laws of the land. Yes there are many examples where this doesn't happen or has been used to suppress,destroy cultures. Cultures will only survive under freedom not under oppression.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Quest
post Dec 5 2010, 07:09 PM
Post #36





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 2,419
Joined: 23-October 06
Member No.: 145



Kaz wrote,
QUOTE
I was clearly referring to democratic/secular countries (eg: USA)secular:denoting attitudes, activities, or other things that have no religious or spiritual basis. You know the separation of Church and State enshrined in the Constitution. Which also gives anyone the right to freely express their religion. This would be more ideal than living in a country like Israel which shovels its religion down everyones throats." the irreligious have no lock on sanity" So your either religious or you have lost your sanity? Who represents China? I said that China did have many ethnic groups but tries to suppress these by having a mono culture and government. I should ask why people are scared of Multiculturalism? It sounds more and more that you are a white christian racist disguising himself as the opposite in the hope no one will notice your hatred of multiculturalism and anything non christian...Well?


No, Kaz, I am not religious. I have mentioned to you several times in fact that I am ATHEIST, however I am also TOLERANT and don't feel the need to run all religion out of sovereign countries that are minding their own business unlike the Bosheviks who killed MILLIONS because they felt "discriminated" against.

China is multi-cultural? I understand that you can technically call China multi-cultural because of different religions but most of China has one skin color. True? Along with that skin color, be it black, white, red, olive, usually comes different interests, religions, customs and laws. This doesn't sound like today's China at all but it does it sound more like America or most western European countries. What I am curious of is what is the population of blacks, eoropeans, hispanics, American Indians (of which I am part) are living in China and how are the Chinese fairing?

White racist? Clearly, you haven't been paying attention. For the last time, I am mostly European, part American Indian, atheist, have a Jewish friend, 2 black freinds, I grew up in a metropolitain area and work in a metroplitain city alongside peoples of many nationalities and religions. Oh yeah, I have a younger sister that had a black boyfriend years ago that although he and my sister are no longer an item he still keeps in touch with my family. Where does this charge of "white racist" come from, pray tell? I merely recognize that my country has been hijacked by people with dual-citizenship (Neocons), killed 3,000 of my fellow black, white, and other race Americans on 911, are doing everything they can do to destroy this country's sovereignty and radicalize it's media and culture and I am upset. This makes me a "white racist"? My Jewish and black freinds share my views on these same issues as well. Are they white racists too? laugh.gif

Just to be clear, I have no problem with multi-culturalism in this country. What I do NOT like is rampant immigration when we are already supposedly fighting for oil and sending jobs overseas. Where is the oil going to come from to support the next 10 million immigrants? And water as well as other resouces? Also, what kind of people are we letting in?
Has Illegal Immigration been good for Downtown L.A.? ( Los Angeles / Undocumented Aliens )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZJQT9tCKHU

Clearly, blacks are concerned with illegal immigration. Are they racist?

Are Latinos against illegal immigrants racist?
Genocide of Black Americans via illegal immigration: Ted Hayes speaks
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2YLUJ_WsZk
American Blacks Rise Up Against Illegal Immigration
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRRuDfZEvL8...feature=related


Latinos against illegal immigration
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKiYQMp3JAE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laYeI-9nPLU...feature=related

Kaz wrote,
QUOTE
Multiculturalism is an ideal or a progression of circumstances when a country opens up to other cultures. Their are many mono type cultures but because of travel,the internet and the fact we live longer the world has opened up an information Tsunami which will see conflicts and harmonisation of ideas. But I believe many cultures whilst retaining their language and colourful costumes will end up questioning those parts of their culture which suppresses or abuses their basic human rights. It may end up a multicultural world, it may end up with the dominant cultures quarantining themselves but still maintaining contact with each other.


Sounds great on paper. But what if a sovereign, monolithic-race country minding it's own business says, "No thanks." Then what?

Kaz, what gurantee is there that once a country opens up to multi-culturalism (the USA) that it's govermnet won't be hijacked by another country (Israel) because of citizens with dual-citizenships (American/Isareli Neocons) and interets sending it's host country's troops to their death, depleting resources, money, ruination of popular culture and economy, dumbing down it's schools, propogandizing in it's media and in general destroying it's culture all because it wants to spread "democracy", "freedom" and "multi-culturalism" elsewhere? Is that simply the price we must pay?

Can you please tell me what you know about the School Of The Americas?
http://www.soaw.org/about-the-soawhinsec
QUOTE
Over its 59 years, the SOA has trained over 60,000 Latin American soldiers in counterinsurgency techniques, sniper training, commando and psychological warfare, military intelligence and interrogation tactics. These graduates have consistently used their skills to wage a war against their own people. Among those targeted by SOA graduates are educators, union organizers, religious workers, student leaders, and others who work for the rights of the poor. Hundreds of thousands of Latin Americans have been tortured, raped, assassinated, “disappeared,” massacred, and forced into refugee by those trained at the School of Assassins.
Initially established in Panama in 1946, it was kicked out of that country in 1984 under the terms of the Panama Canal Treaty. Former Panamanian President, Jorge Illueca, stated that the School of the Americas was the “biggest base for destabilization in Latin America.” The SOA, frequently dubbed the “School of Assassins,” has left a trail of blood and suffering in every country where its graduates have returned.

One more question, is it at all possible that "multi-culturalism" as it is being discussed in the US media can be used to control a country(s) by an elte group much like contrived issues like, "The war on terror", the war on drugs", "global warming", etc?

By the way Kaz, before this goes any further, I gave you some background on myself so let's be fair and share that much. How old are you, what is your race, religion and what country are you from?

This post has been edited by Quest: Dec 6 2010, 12:32 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kaz
post Dec 6 2010, 12:23 AM
Post #37





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 53
Joined: 11-December 08
Member No.: 4,021



China is multi-culture? I understand that you can technically call China multi-cultural because of different religions but most of China has one skin color. True? Along with that skin color, be it black, white, red, olive, usually comes different interests, religions, customs and laws. This doesn't sound like today's China at all but it does it sound more like America or most western European countries. What I am curious of is what is the population of blacks, eoropeans, hispanics, American Indians (of which I am part) are living in China and how are the Chinese fairing?

You obviously have to do more study on China. There are many ethnic groups and some even have slightly different skin colours(although that is irrelevant to culture) There are also TWO main languages in China (mandarin No1 and Cantonese). Does every country have to made up by exactly the same ethnic groups as the USA to be deemed Multicultural? Of course not if you have two or more cultures in a countries borders your country can be called multicultural.

White racist? Clearly, you haven't been paying attention. For the last time, I am mostly European, part American Indian, atheist, have a Jewish friend, 2 black freinds, I grew up in a metropolitain area and work in a metroplitain city alongside peoples of many nationalities and religions. Oh yeah, I have a younger sister that had a black boyfriend years ago that although he and my sister are no longer an item he still keeps in touch with my family. Where does this charge of "white racist" come from, pray tell? I merely recognize that my country has been hijacked by people with dual-citizenship (Neocons), killed 3,000 of my fellow black, white, and other race Americans on 911, are doing everything they can do to destroy this country's sovereignty and radicalize it's media and culture and I am upset. This makes me a "white racist"? My Jewish and black freinds share my views on these same issues as well. Are they white racists too? laugh.gif

Kaz wrote,
So your life history is a testament to multiculturalism yet you are in fear of it and in fear of christianity becoming a minority WHY?

Sounds great on paper. But what if a sovereign, monolithic-race country minding it's own business says, "No thanks." Then what?

Then that country ends up like Israel, OLD Sth Africa or Iraq or it democratically decides to take a less extreme form of exclusion. Don't worry most people are happy to stay where they are and in their established cultures its only when wars,hunger,torture,apartheid or some other hideous act makes people refugees that they then seek refuge in countries willing to accept them. And countries that have signed up to the UN convention on refugees are willing to accept them in certain numbers.

Kaz, what gurantee is there that once a country opens up to multi-culturalism (the USA) that it's govermnet won't be hijacked by another country (Israel) because of citizens with dual-citizenships (American/Isareli Neocons) and interets sending it's host country's troops to their death, depleting resources, money, ruination of popular culture and economy, dumbing down it's schools, propogandizing in it's media and in general destroying it's culture all because it wants to spread "democracy", "freedom" and "multi-culturalism" elsewhere? Is that simply the price we must pay?

The US has been hijacked by its own rhetoric by worshipping capitalism,low taxes, privatise everything, spend large amounts of government money on defence, and not taking an active voting and lobbying interest in their government. So the industrial Military complex and yes Israel have filled the void left by the people of the US and taken over mainly your foreign policy. So spreading Democracy,Freedom and a multi cultural tolerate society is a bad thing?

Sounds like the School of America confirms the military involvement in Iran/Contra, Air America and all the other rubbish/disasters going on in Central America.

It does seem you like you conspiracy to be simple so you try and tie everything into one country Israel or one elite group like the Rothschilds. Multiculturalism happened from the day europeans started settling in Nth America long before Israel or the Jews had any power. The war on terror,communism and drugs are hyped up to keep the military monies flowing making sure health,education and social well being are begging for crumbs. I feel sorrow for you if you think Global Warming is a scam. The very same carbon which previously wiped out most life on earth 200 million years ago is the same carbon we are pumping into our atmosphere right now.

By the way Kaz, before this goes any further, I gave you some background on myself so let's be fair and share that much. How old are you, what is your race, religion and what country are you from?
[/quote]
Well your background seems dubious but I am an aethiest around 50 and I am a human from planet Earth.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Quest
post Dec 6 2010, 12:37 AM
Post #38





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 2,419
Joined: 23-October 06
Member No.: 145



QUOTE (kaz @ Dec 6 2010, 05:23 AM) *
China is multi-culture? I understand that you can technically call China multi-cultural because of different religions but most of China has one skin color. True? Along with that skin color, be it black, white, red, olive, usually comes different interests, religions, customs and laws. This doesn't sound like today's China at all but it does it sound more like America or most western European countries. What I am curious of is what is the population of blacks, eoropeans, hispanics, American Indians (of which I am part) are living in China and how are the Chinese fairing?

You obviously have to do more study on China. There are many ethnic groups and some even have slightly different skin colours(although that is irrelevant to culture) There are also TWO main languages in China (mandarin No1 and Cantonese). Does every country have to made up by exactly the same ethnic groups as the USA to be deemed Multicultural? Of course not if you have two or more cultures in a countries borders your country can be called multicultural.

White racist? Clearly, you haven't been paying attention. For the last time, I am mostly European, part American Indian, atheist, have a Jewish friend, 2 black freinds, I grew up in a metropolitain area and work in a metroplitain city alongside peoples of many nationalities and religions. Oh yeah, I have a younger sister that had a black boyfriend years ago that although he and my sister are no longer an item he still keeps in touch with my family. Where does this charge of "white racist" come from, pray tell? I merely recognize that my country has been hijacked by people with dual-citizenship (Neocons), killed 3,000 of my fellow black, white, and other race Americans on 911, are doing everything they can do to destroy this country's sovereignty and radicalize it's media and culture and I am upset. This makes me a "white racist"? My Jewish and black freinds share my views on these same issues as well. Are they white racists too? laugh.gif

Kaz wrote,
So your life history is a testament to multiculturalism yet you are in fear of it and in fear of christianity becoming a minority WHY?

Sounds great on paper. But what if a sovereign, monolithic-race country minding it's own business says, "No thanks." Then what?

Then that country ends up like Israel, OLD Sth Africa or Iraq or it democratically decides to take a less extreme form of exclusion. Don't worry most people are happy to stay where they are and in their established cultures its only when wars,hunger,torture,apartheid or some other hideous act makes people refugees that they then seek refuge in countries willing to accept them. And countries that have signed up to the UN convention on refugees are willing to accept them in certain numbers.

Kaz, what gurantee is there that once a country opens up to multi-culturalism (the USA) that it's govermnet won't be hijacked by another country (Israel) because of citizens with dual-citizenships (American/Isareli Neocons) and interets sending it's host country's troops to their death, depleting resources, money, ruination of popular culture and economy, dumbing down it's schools, propogandizing in it's media and in general destroying it's culture all because it wants to spread "democracy", "freedom" and "multi-culturalism" elsewhere? Is that simply the price we must pay?

The US has been hijacked by its own rhetoric by worshipping capitalism,low taxes, privatise everything, spend large amounts of government money on defence, and not taking an active voting and lobbying interest in their government. So the industrial Military complex and yes Israel have filled the void left by the people of the US and taken over mainly your foreign policy. So spreading Democracy,Freedom and a multi cultural tolerate society is a bad thing?

Sounds like the School of America confirms the military involvement in Iran/Contra, Air America and all the other rubbish/disasters going on in Central America.

It does seem you like you conspiracy to be simple so you try and tie everything into one country Israel or one elite group like the Rothschilds. Multiculturalism happened from the day europeans started settling in Nth America long before Israel or the Jews had any power. The war on terror,communism and drugs are hyped up to keep the military monies flowing making sure health,education and social well being are begging for crumbs. I feel sorrow for you if you think Global Warming is a scam. The very same carbon which previously wiped out most life on earth 200 million years ago is the same carbon we are pumping into our atmosphere right now.

By the way Kaz, before this goes any further, I gave you some background on myself so let's be fair and share that much. How old are you, what is your race, religion and what country are you from?

Well your background seems dubious but I am an aethiest around 50 and I am a human from planet Earth.


Better re-read my last post, Kaz for an edit. It would seem you and I have been talking about 2 different issues right along. What I am especially concerned about is illegal imigration in this country. My last post explains it but I will copy the edit in this post. As to my background, it is what it is.

I added the following to my previous post because I started to realize we are not on the same page and are actually discussing 2 different topics. I may be in part at fault because I was thinking one thing, illegal immigration in the USA and somehow it carried over to multi-culturalism in sovereign countries OTHER than the USA. I also had the impression that you think it's OK to FORCE immigration in sovereign monolithic race/religious countries because of your take on the Bolshevik Genocide. That's where the misunderstanding stems from and I apologize.

From my previous post,
Just to be clear, Kaz, I have no problem with multi-culturalism in this country. What I do NOT like is rampant immigration when we are already supposedly fighting for oil and sending jobs overseas. Where is the oil going to come from to support the next 10 million immigrants illegal or otherwise? And water as well as other resouces? Also, what kind of people are we letting in?
Has Illegal Immigration been good for Downtown L.A.? ( Los Angeles / Undocumented Aliens )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZJQT9tCKHU

Clearly, blacks are concerned with illegal immigration. Are they racist?
Genocide of Black Americans via illegal immigration: Ted Hayes speaks
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2YLUJ_WsZk
American Blacks Rise Up Against Illegal Immigration
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRRuDfZEvL8...feature=related

Are Latinos against illegal immigrants racist?Latinos against illegal immigration
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKiYQMp3JAE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laYeI-9nPLU...feature=related

This post has been edited by Quest: Dec 6 2010, 01:01 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kaz
post Dec 7 2010, 02:50 AM
Post #39





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 53
Joined: 11-December 08
Member No.: 4,021



QUOTE (Quest @ Dec 6 2010, 12:37 AM) *


Better re-read my last post, Kaz for an edit. It would seem you and I have been talking about 2 different issues right along. What I am especially concerned about is illegal imigration in this country. My last post explains it but I will copy the edit in this post. As to my background, it is what it is.

I added the following to my previous post because I started to realize we are not on the same page and are actually discussing 2 different topics. I may be in part at fault because I was thinking one thing, illegal immigration in the USA and somehow it carried over to multi-culturalism in sovereign countries OTHER than the USA. I also had the impression that you think it's OK to FORCE immigration in sovereign monolithic race/religious countries because of your take on the Bolshevik Genocide. That's where the misunderstanding stems from and I apologize.

From my previous post,
Just to be clear, Kaz, I have no problem with multi-culturalism in this country. What I do NOT like is rampant immigration when we are already supposedly fighting for oil and sending jobs overseas. Where is the oil going to come from to support the next 10 million immigrants illegal or otherwise? And water as well as other resouces? Also, what kind of people are we letting in?
Has Illegal Immigration been good for Downtown L.A.? ( Los Angeles / Undocumented Aliens )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZJQT9tCKHU

Clearly, blacks are concerned with illegal immigration. Are they racist?
Genocide of Black Americans via illegal immigration: Ted Hayes speaks
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2YLUJ_WsZk
American Blacks Rise Up Against Illegal Immigration
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRRuDfZEvL8...feature=related

Are Latinos against illegal immigrants racist?Latinos against illegal immigration
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKiYQMp3JAE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laYeI-9nPLU...feature=related



As always you look at life through a simple prism. You never see the reason why their might be a backlash against" illegal immigrants "and in the US where private companies are worshipped like churches it could never be their fault. For the past past forty years and especially after the Soviets fell the Big Business end of town has been going overseas to find cheap labour, no unions,no workers rights ,no safety, no 401's, no anti pollution laws etc,etc...business nirvana. The most clear example of this is Mexico where most of the top 500 businesses in the US have set up shop. Read Naomi Klein's "No Logo" sometime. And as the US has just gone through almost 15 years of boom where average workers wages dropped and the elite received obscene wages it has all become more clear after the Global Fraud Crisis happened. Here we had private enterprise bag junk debt got their buddies the ratings agencies to AAA rate them then sold them round the world. The best trick was that they have successfully passed on that debt mainly to the US and Europe (not Germany as it has a banking/finance system that invests in big and small business/innovation,education and subsequently has a highly paid and skilled workforce ) and now the taxpayer is on the hook. This has resulted in a huge loss in jobs as a people are looking to survive they become more desperate for jobs. So the low paid menial jobs mainly done by Mexicans (economic refugees) are up for grabs. When you have let big US companies go to Mexico and treat that country and its workforce like a sewer you can expect those same people to look for better wages and conditions over the border. Get the Big companies to pay decent wages and give good conditions in Mexico then the flow of refugees will almost stop and when they have cleaned up the drug cartels their wages may even become higher than yours, then you can become the economic refugees (your illegal immigrants) and cross into Mexico. Do you watch a lot of David Duke (I'm not a racist but would just like a white only culture)?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sanders
post Dec 7 2010, 10:59 AM
Post #40



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 7,990
Joined: 13-September 06
Member No.: 49



Jobs move overseas because the US over-regulates (and taxes) businesses to the point of pushing them out. Wages and unions are a part of it, but faulting corporations for trying to make money is like shouting at the rain. But the more relevant point is, it is all intentional and by design. The outsourcing of America's manufacturing base is the result of a 100 year long trend, couched in "Universal Laws" which have taken powers from the states and allowed the Federal Government to regulate everything under the sun under the guise of its inter-state commerce powers (enumerated in the Constitution). I even suspect that the big corporate scandals, like Enron, are fomented ... they are always followed by more regulations which in fact give the biggest corporations advantage over smaller businesses, pushing them aside.

The super-rich are in power, they hold the reigns. The only way to get power back is to go back to basics ... get rid of the FED (and in turn their control over the volume of money and the business cycle), repeal any regulations that are not sensible and necessary or that infringe on the rights of the people to conduct business freely, and so level the playing field. Of course none of that will ever happen, but barring that, we're at their mercy whether the system is capitalistic, socialistic, democratic, whatever. They don't care ... so long as we don't revert back to a truly free capitalist society under a constitutional republic as the founders envisioned ... which America prospered under ... the bankers hate that ... they spent a full century trying to get around it. And they did.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 2nd October 2014 - 12:29 PM