Members NoirAbattoir Posted October 29, 2008 Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 You know what the deal is, right? The Federal Reserve is not a "Federal" entity, though it parades itself as one every day in the media. The Federal Reserve is a private, for-profit bank that is running America's economy. The Federal Reserve has been lending money at will for our government to run itself. Of course, like any bank in our debt-based economy, it invents the money from thin-air. It bears no liability whatsoever, but does require payment with interest. The Federal Reserve is owed our national debt. Our national debt is never, ever, ever going to be paid down. With our federal tax dollars, we barely cover the interest rate. Essentially, our nation has become a money tree for the Federal Reserve bank. Now that this has been achieved, it's my belief that the next step is to work at privatizing all aspects of federal, state, and local government, thereby transferring even greater levels of wealth into the hands of the very few at the top of the money hill. Even more tax dollars will be funnelled into their hands, by giving them ownership and control of our infrastructure (under the guise that they can better run the maintenance and upkeep), by giving them control of the educational system (which has wholly been destroyed under the guise of education reform, which was driven by said big business entities), and by allowing them ownership of all things which used to be by the people for the people. When this is achieved, we will be utterly powerless, instead of the state we're currently in: relatively powerless. So, that's the deal in a nutshell. I'm trying to figure this stuff out, and it's taken a lot of years for me to get a handle on the big picture, but that's pretty much how I see it. If you disagree, and feel you could shed some light on any of these topics, please do. If you have any other ideas about this at all, feel free to share. This isn't a consipiracy, in my eyes: Them's just the facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members collinwho Posted October 29, 2008 Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members NoirAbattoir Posted October 29, 2008 Author Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 Banker BernankeBanker GreenspanBanker Volke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dave Campbell Posted October 29, 2008 Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 Holy {censored}, what is it with these people handing out tin foil hats? If anyone has 3.5 hrs to spare, check out The Money Masters on Google Video.Save the tin foil for the meat loaf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members King Kashue Posted October 29, 2008 Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 Banker Bernanke Banker Greenspan Banker Volke Zomg, it's almost like Comrade Lenin Comrade Trotsky Comrade Stalin Oh wait, you're claiming that it's a capitalist conspiracy, not a socialist one...Hard to keep these things straight, what with 700 billion to buy up private banks' assets, lately most tinfoil hats have their polarity set to block out pinko commie radiation... Sorry, right...Um, banker, banker, banker... Um, Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy? Um, bankers...The butcher, the baker, the candlestick maker? Winken, Blinken, and Nod? Ickle me, pickle me, tickle me too? Also, it's Volker...His name is Paul Volker. (His name is Robert Paulson) ...and I am Jack's meandering train of thought along with Jack's growing boredom with unsubstantiated and inaccurate postings... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members NoirAbattoir Posted October 29, 2008 Author Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 Zomg, it's almost like Comrade Lenin Comrade Trotsky Comrade Stalin Oh wait, you're claiming that it's a capitalist conspiracy, not a socialist one...Hard to keep these things straight, what with 700 billion to buy up private banks' assets, lately most tinfoil hats have their polarity set to block out pinko commie radiation... Sorry, right...Um, banker, banker, banker... Um, Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy? Um, bankers...The butcher, the baker, the candlestick maker? Winken, Blinken, and Nod? Ickle me, pickle me, tickle me too? Also, it's Volker...His name is Paul Volker. (His name is Robert Paulson) ...and I am Jack's meandering train of thought along with Jack's growing boredom with unsubstantiated and inaccurate postings... Unsubstantiated? Are you suggesting the Federal Reserve isn't a private, for-profit bank? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members NoirAbattoir Posted October 29, 2008 Author Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 Holy {censored}, what is it with these people handing out tin foil hats?If anyone has 3.5 hrs to spare, check out The Money Masters on Google Video.Save the tin foil for the meat loaf. They're going to need the tinfoil to wrap their freezing, naked, poor arses when the banks are through with them. It's going to happen in our lifetime, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members collinwho Posted October 29, 2008 Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 His name is Robert Paulson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members King Kashue Posted October 29, 2008 Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 Unsubstantiated? Are you suggesting the Federal Reserve isn't a private, for-profit bank? Substantiation means the provision of evidence demonstrating the validity of one's argument...I must have missed where you'd posted something other than your opinion. Ah well, I'm sure you posted the information somewhere, if you could just requote it for me, that'd be super! As for the Fed, the laws that created it and dictate its practices, it's neither fully private nor explicitly for profit (note, that is not synonymous with 'not for profit', which is another legal classification)... Do you have evidence to the contrary? (and not just secret evidence that you can't share with us (security reasons, we understand), we need to be able to read it as well ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members King Kashue Posted October 29, 2008 Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 His name is Robert Paulson. His name is Robert Paulson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members NoirAbattoir Posted October 29, 2008 Author Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 http://www.federalreserve.gov/default.htm Check what the banner says: "The Federal Reserve, the central bank of the United States, provides the nation with a safe, flexible, and stable monetary and financial system." Who in their right mind would allow a private, for-profit bank to be in control of a nation's economy? Conflicting interests, anyone? {censored}... We're just a bunch of suckas, I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members NoirAbattoir Posted October 29, 2008 Author Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 Substantiation means the provision of evidence demonstrating the validity of one's argument...I must have missed where you'd posted something other than your opinion. Ah well, I'm sure you posted the information somewhere, if you could just requote it for me, that'd be super! As for the Fed, the laws that created it and dictate its practices, it's neither fully private nor explicitly for profit (note, that is not synonymous with 'not for profit', which is another legal classification)... Do you have evidence to the contrary? (and not just secret evidence that you can't share with us (security reasons, we understand), we need to be able to read it as well ) Your arguments are quite fallacious, as usual. There is no secret here. Do some research, and you will be enlightened. The Federal Reserve is no more "federal" in nature than Chase Bank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Incubitabus Posted October 29, 2008 Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dave Campbell Posted October 29, 2008 Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 Your arguments are quite fallacious, as usual. There is no secret here. Do some research, and you will be enlightened. The Federal Reserve is no more "federal" in nature than Chase Bank. Or Federal Express. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members NoirAbattoir Posted October 29, 2008 Author Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 A lot of guys around here need to bone up on their argumentation: http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Incubitabus Posted October 29, 2008 Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 Or Federal Express. It's FedEx! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members King Kashue Posted October 29, 2008 Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 Your attacks are quite fallacious, as usual. My "attacks"? Please point out everywhere I've attacked you. I've been sarcastic as hell, but where has it been about something other than the content of your claims. As for my fallacies, feel free to point them out as well. Do some research, and you will be enlightened. Your claim, your burden of proof. Hell, I'll be generous. I've read the Federal Reserve Act multiple times. Just tell me where in there I should look (full passage notation please), and I'll check the relevant sections. If it's something else, Federal Reserve Reform act of 1977, DIDMCA, whatever, you just give me full passage notation and I'll actually go look it up, to save you the trouble of having to copy it out here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members NoirAbattoir Posted October 29, 2008 Author Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 My "attacks"? Please point out everywhere I've attacked you. I've been sarcastic as hell, but where has it been about something other than the content of your claims. As for my fallacies, feel free to point them out as well. Your claim, your burden of proof. Hell, I'll be generous. I've read the Federal Reserve Act multiple times. Just tell me where in there I should look (full passage notation please), and I'll check the relevant sections. If it's something else, Federal Reserve Reform act of 1977, DIDMCA, whatever, you just give me full passage notation and I'll actually go look it up, to save you the trouble of having to copy it out here... I made an assertion in my very first post. I also made some predictions. You have said nothing, but demand much. Argue, or step aside. Your blustering bellows add nothing to the topic. Also, I changed "attack" to "argument" immediately after I posted it. I guess you're just waiting in the wings for the very second someone posts a response. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dave Campbell Posted October 29, 2008 Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 It's FedEx! Yeah, I'm still stuck in the '80s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members King Kashue Posted October 29, 2008 Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 A lot of guys around here need to bone up on their argumentation: http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members collinwho Posted October 29, 2008 Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 His name is Robert Paulson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members King Kashue Posted October 29, 2008 Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 I made an assertion in my very first post. I also made some predictions. You have said nothing, but demand much. Argue, or step aside. Your blustering bellows add nothing to the topic. You made claims, and provided no substantiation. When asked for it, you told me to "go do some research". (Even though the burden of proof is on the one making the claim) When I've offered to actually look up the passages you should have already provided yourself, you post this instead of giving me the passage references? If it's so obvious, why can't you just tell me where to look...I'm offering to do your job for you and look up the references, yet you still can't even provide them? Seriously? Also, I changed "attack" to "argument" immediately after I posted it. I guess you're just waiting in the wings for the very second someone posts a response. Yep...or I just happened to hit refresh as I'm sitting at the computer looking through fantasy football stats. But does this mean you're not going to point out my fallacies? I am quite interested in you pointing out where my arguments are flawed in their logic. (Particularly since I haven't made any significant claims and have merely pointed out that the burden of proof is on the person making the claim...is that the fallacious portion of my posts? ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members King Kashue Posted October 29, 2008 Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 His name is Robert Paulson. His name is Robert Paulson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members NoirAbattoir Posted October 29, 2008 Author Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 King Kashue, I like you. I'm going to be perfectly honest. Anyone who could name themselves after a regal nut has to be halfway decent. Just the same, you've made no argument here. You never do. You, as well as many others, only pose obstacles. You make no real assertions, you simply shout at people to prove something. That is not argumentation, that is simply instigation. Make a point yourself, I'd love to hear something. So far, you've attempted to discredit my assertion by discrediting me. Then, you tip-toed around insinuating that the Federal Reserve is neither private, nor federal. What is it, then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Incubitabus Posted October 29, 2008 Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 Yeah, I'm still stuck in the '80s. Just remember, it wasn't as {censored}ing fast before the arrow! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.