LordCanuck Posted October 22, 2017 Share Posted October 22, 2017 7 minutes ago, Rounoush said: well since the federal reserve wasnt established till 1910s im sure lincohn was a time traveller too then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rounoush Posted October 22, 2017 Share Posted October 22, 2017 He didn't actually try to end the federal reserve but he did try to introduce new notes as an alternative currency. Basically taking power away from the banks so essentially the same thing. Watch this: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnarcore Posted October 22, 2017 Share Posted October 22, 2017 I've always thought it was the mob after Kennedy's bootlegger dad used them to secure Chicago and Robert went right after them as attorney general. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckylager Posted October 22, 2017 Share Posted October 22, 2017 3 minutes ago, Gnarcore said: I've always thought it was the mob after Kennedy's bootlegger dad used them to secure Chicago and Robert went right after them as attorney general. I've always thought it was the "complex" because he wanted to end the federal reserve, end the vietnam war and wasn't a mason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted October 22, 2017 Share Posted October 22, 2017 35 minutes ago, Rounoush said: He didn't actually try to end the federal reserve but he did try to introduce new notes as an alternative currency. Basically taking power away from the banks so essentially the same thing. I understand your need to try and be right, but it's not the same thing. Nearly all presidents have tried messing with the financial system to some degree or another. It's a big part of their job. Lincoln brought the federal government unprecedented power after the civil war. If it wasn't for him, the Federal Reserve would never have existed. It was tried twice before his presidency and it failed both times because the states had too much power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rounoush Posted October 22, 2017 Share Posted October 22, 2017 2 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said: I understand your need to try and be right, but it's not the same thing. Nearly all presidents have tried messing with the financial system to some degree or another. It's a big part of their job. Lincoln brought the federal government unprecedented power after the civil war. If it wasn't for him, the Federal Reserve would never have existed. It was tried twice before his presidency and it failed both times because the states had too much power. It is essentially the same thing. I understand your need to try and be right, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted October 22, 2017 Share Posted October 22, 2017 27 minutes ago, Gnarcore said: I've always thought it was the mob after Kennedy's bootlegger dad used them to secure Chicago and Robert went right after them as attorney general. I've never thought it was the mob who killed JFK. If there was a true JFK conspiracy, I've always figured LBJ played a big role in it. I believe it was the mob mostly involved in RFK's killing by Jack Ruby however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted October 22, 2017 Share Posted October 22, 2017 Just now, Rounoush said: It is essentially the same thing. I understand your need to try and be right, though. Somebody is a little upset that his meme was shot down. It is not even remotely the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rounoush Posted October 22, 2017 Share Posted October 22, 2017 Just now, SabreFan1 said: Somebody is a little upset that his meme was shot down. It is not even remotely the same thing. Still going on about the meme. Watch the video instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted October 22, 2017 Share Posted October 22, 2017 Just now, Rounoush said: Still going on about the meme. Watch the video instead. I did. I understand the video, but the fact remains that had Lincoln not won his election and then the civil war, the bankers never would have been able to eventually get a stranglehold on first the US and then the world through globalization. Lincoln was one of the, if not the, best thing that ever happened to the current banking system and the people who control it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rounoush Posted October 22, 2017 Share Posted October 22, 2017 True enough I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted October 22, 2017 Share Posted October 22, 2017 1 hour ago, Rounoush said: True enough I suppose. Bankers have always been dangerous. Just look at what happened to the Knights Templar. They gained so much power because of their immense wealth that eventually they made kings afraid of them. It was what led to their downfall and destruction. *edit* It didn't happen the way that video said it did. The narrator needs to look at the story again with an unbiased eye. Lincoln made the federal government a defacto monarchy just by fighting and winning the civil war. The Cival War was not just about slavery. It was every bit as much about the idea of Federal Supremacy vs. State Supremacy. Guess which side the biggest bankers and financiers were on? The Civil War was so close at one point that had the Confederacy had any real financial backing they would have won the war. The history books aren't lying when they said that the Confederacy soldiers often fought without proper food, shoes and/or clothing. They had a bit of foreign power backing but that's about it. The Northern power brokers and bankers of the day were actually mostly on Lincoln's side. They twice tried to create a federal banking system and it failed both times because of a weaker than needed central federal government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justdean10 Posted October 22, 2017 Share Posted October 22, 2017 did he also not say he would say who was actually behind 9/11? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted October 22, 2017 Share Posted October 22, 2017 21 minutes ago, Justdean10 said: did he also not say he would say who was actually behind 9/11? I definitely missed that if he did. However, he is recalling up to 1,000 retired Air Force pilots, so I'm thinking he's gearing up for a war of his own. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/10/20/air-force-recall-many-1-000-retired-pilots-address-serious-shortage/785344001/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 22, 2017 Share Posted October 22, 2017 32 minutes ago, Justdean10 said: did he also not say he would say who was actually behind 9/11? I think he said something along the lines of releasing the 29 pages or so that were never released Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted October 22, 2017 Share Posted October 22, 2017 2 minutes ago, Chandymen said: I think he said something along the lines of releasing the 29 pages or so that were never released I'll be super secret man and beat him to it!!! https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2994083-28-Pages.html#document/p6/a308032 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wizardB Posted October 22, 2017 Share Posted October 22, 2017 Kennedy is the only sitting president of the United States to be killed by people in his own government. Days before his murder he enacted and signed the ending of the Vietnam wars and was killed to keep that highly profitable war going. The proof of this is in recently released documents from the CIA and have been read and written on by a number of scholars including an ex-head of Army intelligence named Dr. John M. Newman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rounoush Posted October 22, 2017 Share Posted October 22, 2017 2 hours ago, SabreFan1 said: Bankers have always been dangerous. Just look at what happened to the Knights Templar. They gained so much power because of their immense wealth that eventually they made kings afraid of them. It was what led to their downfall and destruction. *edit* It didn't happen the way that video said it did. The narrator needs to look at the story again with an unbiased eye. Lincoln made the federal government a defacto monarchy just by fighting and winning the civil war. The Cival War was not just about slavery. It was every bit as much about the idea of Federal Supremacy vs. State Supremacy. Guess which side the biggest bankers and financiers were on? The Civil War was so close at one point that had the Confederacy had any real financial backing they would have won the war. The history books aren't lying when they said that the Confederacy soldiers often fought without proper food, shoes and/or clothing. They had a bit of foreign power backing but that's about it. The Northern power brokers and bankers of the day were actually mostly on Lincoln's side. They twice tried to create a federal banking system and it failed both times because of a weaker than needed central federal government. We seem to be basically be on the same page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted October 22, 2017 Share Posted October 22, 2017 Just now, Rounoush said: We seem to be basically on the same page. Same page, but you're putting too much stock into that video. It's highly biased and skips over a good chunk of history and even in some of the parts that it got right, it only told the parts of the story that served it's own thesis. One of the few things that it nailed down decently was it's quotes from Gen. Smedley Butler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rounoush Posted October 22, 2017 Share Posted October 22, 2017 13 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said: Same page, but you're putting too much stock into that video. It's highly biased and skips over a good chunk of history and even in some of the parts that it got right, it only told the parts of the story that served it's own thesis. One of the few things that it nailed down decently was it's quotes from Gen. Smedley Butler. I agree he has some failings in the video and areas I disagree with. I bet if I looked the guy up, we wouldn't even align in our world views either. But I think the spirit of his argument is true and pretty thoroughly researched. I consider it a good jumping off point for normies to get introduced into the world of who really runs the world. BTW, putting too much stock in the video is a total judgment call. I used it to back up the argument that Lincoln was no friend of the global banking elite. You pointed out that he had the backing of the federal banks in America but he did not have the backing of the banks in Europe who held all of the power at the time. It wasn't until after WWII that the US dollar became the currency that the global banking community began backing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.