Die Hard Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 2 hours long. Excellent movie. Take from it what you wish I'd be interested to see responses... but it isn't difficult to see where it's going to lead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sinister Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 I watched the first one. Didn't know what to make of it, but I couldn't turn it off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Wiggles Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 I've yet to see these movies. Only thing I really know about them is that they were made by a guy my brother was friends with in High School. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellis Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 If ya wanna see a good movie on the American monetary system, watch this movie... The Secret of Oz. Get past the fact that the narrator looks like a weirdo. He's actually quite intelligent. And many of you probably didn't know that the Wizard of Oz wasn't really about a wizard at all... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Die Hard Posted January 4, 2011 Author Share Posted January 4, 2011 What I don't understand is.... why does the US government need the Federal Reserve? Why would it cost the US government $10 billion to create $10 billion with of bank notes? If the US government has the capacity to create "bonds"... why doesn't it just create its own currency and skip the middle men (Reserve) altogether? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techboy Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 I'd be interested to see responses... Peter Joseph's first movie was a stunning combination of poor scholarship and worse, outright fabrication. I have no reason to believe that this film will be any more credible. There might well be a kernel of truth buried in there somewhere, but I don't feel like I need to dig through dumpsters to find a bite of food, either. I've always found it stunning that people that consider themselves "skeptics" could buy into such wild alternate theories, just because they're not "official" or from the government. A healthy dose of that skepticism turned on those alternatives would be most useful. Or, to quote Leonard Nimoy on The Simpsons (1997 episode: "The Springfield Files" The following tale of alien encounters is true. And by true, I mean false. It’s all lies. But they’re entertaining lies, and in the end isn’t that the real truth? The answer is no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 What I don't understand is.... why does the US government need the Federal Reserve? Why would it cost the US government $10 billion to create $10 billion with of bank notes? If the US government has the capacity to create "bonds"... why doesn't it just create its own currency and skip the middle men (Reserve) altogether? The Federal Reserve is the US government. It is created by a law of congress and given power by the US federal government. The board of govenors are appointed by the President. This is question is like asking why the US government needs the IRS. Why doesn't it just collect the money itself? Now, in the case of the Fed, there has been some effort to make sure that the people running the monetary policy aren't to easily swayed by political concerns so there is somewhat of a disconnect with respect to the length of the terms and historically the act of the President asking somebody to resign. So what is essentially happening is one entity of the government is "lending" money to the rest of the government. Similar things happen with respect to the social security system, and the Fed has never cashed the bonds it is given to make the rest of the government pay for that loan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Paint Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 The Federal Reserve is the US government. It is created by a law of congress and given power by the US federal government. The board of govenors are appointed by the President.This is question is like asking why the US government needs the IRS. Why doesn't it just collect the money itself? Now, in the case of the Fed, there has been some effort to make sure that the people running the monetary policy aren't to easily swayed by political concerns so there is somewhat of a disconnect with respect to the length of the terms and historically the act of the President asking somebody to resign. So what is essentially happening is one entity of the government is "lending" money to the rest of the government. Similar things happen with respect to the social security system, and the Fed has never cashed the bonds it is given to make the rest of the government pay for that loan. I don't have time to go into this, nor do I feel like getting into a long drawn out debate, but the Fed Reserve is NOT the US Government. If you really believe that, you haven't done any research on the Fed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 I don't have time to go into this, nor do I feel like getting into a long drawn out debate, but the Fed Reserve is NOT the US Government. If you really believe that, you haven't done any research on the Fed. Are Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac the US government? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 I don't have time to go into this, nor do I feel like getting into a long drawn out debate, but the Fed Reserve is NOT the US Government. If you really believe that, you haven't done any research on the Fed. Of course the Fed is part of the Government. It is a creation of the Federal Government, run by government appointees, but specifically designed to be immune from short term political pressures. Is the Electoral Congress part of government? Is the FDIC part of government? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Paint Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Are Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac the US government? The nick name for Goldman Sachs is Government Sachs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Oh, and Zeitgeist was total dishonest manipulative crap of the first order, and I expect that this new version is also crap, with the most obvious glaring errors better obscured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Paint Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Of course the Fed is part of the Government. It is a creation of the Federal Government, run by government appointees, but specifically designed to be immune from short term political pressures. Is the Electoral Congress part of government? Is the FDIC part of government? No, the Fed is a private bank, with the illusion of being public due to appointees. The Federal Reserve is as Federal as Federal Express. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[[ghost]] Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 According to the Board of Governors, the Federal Reserve is independent within government in the sense that "its decisions do not have to be ratified by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branch of government." However, its authority is derived from the U.S. Congress and is subject to congressional oversight. Additionally, the members of the Board of Governors, including its chairman and vice-chairman, are chosen by the President and confirmed by Congress http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 ];8085873']http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System And since that independence was established by a specific law, it could be changed w/o the consent of the Fed in the same manner. FedEx's independence from the federal government is not the result of a specific law and changes in the independence of FedEx from the federal government, especially w/o the consent of FedEx would have significant legal ramifications that likely would result in multiple court cases/appeals. The Fed also can be audited in some aspect by the GAO, another government entity, as described in a specific law (which can also be modified as Ron Paul is trying to do) and the government also "takes" most of the profits collected by the Fed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellis Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Shoulda gone Silver Standard back in the 1800's. :pfft: cough, cough!! wizardofoz cough, cough, cough!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Do Itch Big Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 This movie came out a while back. It sounded to me like they were pushing a product the second half. I take this movie with a grain of salt, as with the first one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Die Hard Posted January 4, 2011 Author Share Posted January 4, 2011 The History of Money Changers: http://www.iamthewitness.com/DarylBradfordSmith_Bankers.htm Stansberry Research Advisory: http://www.stansberryresearch.com/pro/1011PSIENDVD/MPSILC22/PR?o=230927&s=233550&u=37238318&l=197794&g=156&r=Milo Seems to be a common theme. All these links were recently forwarded to me.... and I'm trying to take things with a grain of salt and connect the dots. But, there's enough facts that are consistent throughout many different resources... that it has to make you begin to at least think about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 The History of Money Changers:http://www.iamthewitness.com/DarylBradfordSmith_Bankers.htm Stansberry Research Advisory: http://www.stansberryresearch.com/pro/1011PSIENDVD/MPSILC22/PR?o=230927&s=233550&u=37238318&l=197794&g=156&r=Milo Seems to be a common theme. All these links were recently forwarded to me.... and I'm trying to take things with a grain of salt and connect the dots. But, there's enough facts that are consistent throughout many different resources... that it has to make you begin to at least think about it. Do you wish to point out some actual substantiated facts that you think are worth connecting? I always love this quote: "We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries." Then how come it hasn't appeared in a major publication such as the Post, NYT, or Time where it could be properly sourced, but appeared in a minor right wing French publication that nobody has ever heard of? **EDIT** If your "fact" is that there are various times that our government has been motivated to protect the interest of certain large corporations (e.g. as we did in Iran (but more to help the British with respect to BP, but in the same manner)) in a manner that also at least partly benefited the US in general, then I'm not going to argue with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techboy Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Then how come it hasn't appeared in a major publication such as the Post, NYT, or Time where it could be properly sourced, but appeared in a minor right wing French publication that nobody has ever heard of? Because they're covering it up. Duh! This is the best part of conspiracy theories: It's not just that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, it is, in fact, positive evidence because it shows a coverup! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Because they're covering it up. Duh!This is the best part of conspiracy theories: It's not just that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, it is, in fact, positive evidence because it shows a coverup! But he specifically states in the quote there is no need to continue to cover it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arsenic Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Esoteric Agenda & Kymatica are great as well. Theres also tons of interesting views to be found at www.thecrowhouse.com (scroll down to "recommended viewing"). oh and, of course: http://www.extremeskins.com/showthread.php?341125-What-In-The-World-Are-They-Spraying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Die Hard Posted January 4, 2011 Author Share Posted January 4, 2011 Do you wish to point out some actual substantiated facts that you think are worth connecting? There's no possible way you have viewed any of the materials contained within the thread. Hence your reply. So you aren't really worthy of my time. Sorry. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/12/19/60minutes/main7166220.shtml http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7166222n (video) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 There's no possible way you have viewed any of the materials contained within the thread. Hence your reply. So you aren't really worthy of my time. Sorry. I don't normally listen to YouTube videos, but I did read the transcript of the movie here: http://zeitgeistmovements.wordpress.com/category/zeitgeist-transcripts/ (I can read very quickly, hence my affinity for transcripts as compared to videos) Hence my comment about Iran, and I did read the other link you posted and as you can see I pulled out one of the quotes (though the account is incorrect. The Shah was Iran and in power before the coup and approved the removal of the PM, which under the Iranian constitution he had the authority to do. He then fled the country when it appeared the coup wasn't going to work for one day, and then he came back and took power. I did not watch the other video or look on the internet for a transcript for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techboy Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 It sounded to me like they were pushing a product the second half. I take this movie with a grain of salt, as with the first one. The first one required a lot more than a grain, but your comment seems on point, especially with... Stansberry Research Advisory: http://www.stansberryresearch.com/pro/1011PSIENDVD/MPSILC22/PR?o=230927&s=233550&u=37238318&l=197794&g=156&r=Milo I started to watch that video, and I wondered why a guy the SEC has pursued (successfully) for fraud would make it. First he says this: Believe me, I don't make this prediction lightly and I have no interest in trying to scare you. Yeah, right... But then, at the end, the truth comes out... If you want the opportunity to make a lot of money during the coming crisis, one sure way to do it is to learn the intricacies of an unusual investment strategy that is now making some investors an absolute fortune. At my research firm, we have been teaching readers this method for several years. And get this: You don't have to buy a single stock to begin using this strategy... and it has nothing to do with "shorting." In a nutshell, this is a secret that could enable you to safely extract gains of exactly 100% from the market, over and over again... without ever owning or touching a stock. Keep in mind: the most you can make using this strategy is 100%... and as with all investments, there is some risk involved. Also, it's important to note that this strategy will probably not be right for everyone... But it can be so safe and easy, once you learn how it works, you might decide to never buy ordinary stocks, ever again. "Safe and easy" 100% returns, but they might not be right for everyone? Please, tell me how! I'll show you exactly how this investment strategy works, and how you can take advantage of it immediately, starting today. Everything you need to know is in my new report called: The Stock Quitter's Secret – The Easiest Way in the Markets to Make 100%. Oh. I have to subscribe to the newsletter. I see. Well, what's another way to save myself from the thing you have no interest in scaring me about? There's no telling exactly how bad things are going to get as this crisis unfolds. I firmly believe there could be riots, marches in the streets, bank runs, massive arrests, and periods of uncontrollable mayhem... at least for several months as things begin to unravel. But the good news is that there is one asset you can own (now widely available in America), which should help protect you and your family from this chaos... and could also likely make you a fortune in the years to come. I'm not talking about guns or bonds or gold or other precious metals... or anything like that. And of course this has absolutely nothing to do with the stock market. What I'm talking about is a very powerful asset that wealthy families have used for centuries to protect themselves... and preserve and build their fortunes. An index tracking this asset has absolutely crushed the stock market between 1991 and 2009, by returning about 430% more than stocks during that period. Fantastic! Please, what do I do? What do I do? There are several ways to make this investment. I'll show you what they are. Yes! Yes! Tell me! So how can you begin taking these simple steps, right away? Well, my company, Stansberry & Associates Investment Research, is a financial research firm. I see... That's why I created this letter, and that's why I'd like to send you the full details on exactly how I believe this is all going to unfold... and exactly how to protect yourself and even prosper during this crisis. Remember: The government is not going to save you: If the government couldn't save one small city from the disastrous news coming, then how is it going to save all of us when the [beep] really hits the fan? You can either let things happen to you... or you can take a few simple steps and take charge of your family's fate. Please, just give the work I've done a look... and I believe you will have all the information you need at your disposal. The best part is, you can take a look at my research, and receive everything I've mentioned here, at absolutely no risk or obligation. I have to subscribe to a newsletter? Oh... well, at least there's no risk. So how much does my work cost... and how can you get started? Well, a one-year subscription, including everything I mentioned here, normally costs $99 per year – that's what many others have paid. But right now, you can try my research, for HALF-OFF the normal rate. You'll pay just $49.50 for an entire year. Except $50, apparently. At first. But he has absolutely no interest in scaring me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.