Revealed: The Capitalist Newtork That Rules The World

[Bill Mattocks]

Nothing stops conspiracy nuts.

The problem is that sometimes, they put on uniforms and strut around and others start to do what the nuts tell them to do, you know? I've already read comments about how the 'banksters' should be lined up against a wall and shot for what they've done to us. How long before someone fits actions to words?

 

[granfire]

The problem is that sometimes, they put on uniforms and strut around and others start to do what the nuts tell them to do, you know? I've already read comments about how the 'banksters' should be lined up against a wall and shot for what they've done to us. How long before someone fits actions to words?

Heard close to this about the people who drive carriages in NYC.

(Considering that they always get the WRONG bankers, it's bad)

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Heard close to this about the people who drive carriages in NYC.

(Considering that they always get the WRONG bankers, it's bad)

http://books.google.com/books?id=LI...pg=PA254#v=onepage&q="jewish bankers"&f=false

A history of the Jewish nation
By Edward Henry Palmer
1874

...
At York, where a large number of the Jewish bankers, or usurers, resided, the populace began to repeat the scenes of violence and bloodshed which had just disgraced the metropolis. The Jews, in order to escape the fury of the mob, sought and obtained an asylum in the castle; but suspecting the good faith of the governor, they took the opportunity of his temporary absence in the town to lock the gates against him and defended the castle themselves. The governor, hereupon, made common cause with the popular party and induced the sheriff to give orders for an attack. The sheriff, seeing the frightful consequences which would be likely to ensue, wished the governor to revoke his decision, but it was too late; the enraged people carried the castle by assault, and the Jews, being unable to obtain terms from the conquerors, chose to fall by their own hands rather than encounter the brutal fury of the mob. The tragedy of Masada was enacted over again, and the wretched band, having slain their wives and children, fell upon each other's swords. More than 500 are said to have perished on the occasion, and a few wretched survivors, who had surrendered at discretion, were massacred without mercy. The assault was led by a canon of York cathedral, who, dressed in full canonicals, continued to incite the mob to the work of destruction, shouting out, "Kill the enemies of Jesus Christ." After this frightful catastrophe, the ring-leaders, who were nearly all debtors of the Jews, proceeded to the cathedral, where the records of all financial transactions were laid up, and forcing the custodian to give up the documents to them, solemnly burnt in the church all the bills, acceptances, and other memoranda of their pecuniary obligations. It is probable that the government would have overlooked the slaughter of a few Jewish subjects, and the levying of a small fine might have repaired the damage done to the castle; but the last act of the mob was enough to rouse the virtuous indignation of the king and his ministers, for the law provided that all debts owing to a deceased Jew should revert to the crown. Rydal, Bishop of Ely, and then Lord Chancellor of the realm, was accordingly charged with the exemplary punishment of the ill-doers; but the prelate contented himself with depriving the sheriff and governor,...

Change the words "Jews" to "bankers" and any reference to Christians to "the people," and there you have it.

Those who continue to cheer this on are convinced that they are somehow different from those who did the same thing in the past, because those people then were motivated by racial, religious, or other forms of unjustified hatred, and our new, modern hatred is based entirely upon sufficient justification. History will show there is no difference between the two; those who encourage this kind of violence today will someday perhaps understand this.

 

[granfire]

http://books.google.com/books?id=LIMBAAAAQAAJ&dq="jewish bankers"&pg=PA254#v=onepage&q="jewish bankers"&f=false



Change the words "Jews" to "bankers" and any reference to Christians to "the people," and there you have it.

Those who continue to cheer this on are convinced that they are somehow different from those who did the same thing in the past, because those people then were motivated by racial, religious, or other forms of unjustified hatred, and our new, modern hatred is based entirely upon sufficient justification. History will show there is no difference between the two; those who encourage this kind of violence today will someday perhaps understand this.

Then again, we do advocate selfdefense against those who do us harm.

And harm those folks did. To us, to the country and the world. And they won't be held accountable.

A) Conspiracy nuts will be nuts. Regardless.
B) I agree, the strong wording is troublesome. Like I said, I am waiting for the news of a carriage driver being killed by a zealous AR person, or at least assaulted.
C) I had another point but Karma Chameleon made me lose my train of thought.
D) While I get angry and frustrated, I hope I can rise above mob influence, but it is hard, and when exploited by the clever very dangerous. That is why there are laws on the books in Germany for those folks, called 'Volksverhetzer' - those who rile up the masses for evil.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Then again, we do advocate selfdefense against those who do us harm.

When a banker attacks you with violence, you can use violence to defend yourself from his attack. Failing that, it's not self-defense, as you well know.

And harm those folks did. To us, to the country and the world. And they won't be held accountable.

And that's our fault for failing to demand that of our politicians, and for failing to vote out of office those politicians who let it happen. Killing bankers is neither self-defense, nor justice, nor going to fix anything. I got three pay cuts in a row in 2009. By your logic, I could punch my boss in the nose, in 'self-defense'.

A) Conspiracy nuts will be nuts. Regardless.

Yes. All that trouble in Germany in the 1930's probably came to nothing after all.

B) I agree, the strong wording is troublesome. Like I said, I am waiting for the news of a carriage driver being killed by a zealous AR person, or at least assaulted.

You're the one agreeing that *some* bankers deserve a violent end. You *are* them.

C) I had another point but Karma Chameleon made me lose my train of thought.
D) While I get angry and frustrated, I hope I can rise above mob influence, but it is hard, and when exploited by the clever very dangerous. That is why there are laws on the books in Germany for those folks, called 'Volksverhetzer' - those who rile up the masses for evil.

In the US, we have freedom of speech; and they get to spew their hatred up to the point where they incite to violence; which we're getting fairly close to now. And when the police crack down on that, great will be the outcry against the 'oppressors' who are not allowing 'the people' to have their say.

You're on the wrong side of history, you just don't want to accept it.

 

[granfire]

Ah, my friend, you are mistaken. I don't advocate violent ends. If for no other reason that it almost always hits the wrong end.


(but I wonder, how it would not be self defense to try to protect your livelihood, after all losing everything is pretty much right up there. I think lesser losses have been covered, no? Naturally, as long as no guns are involved and only the ink of the pen - or printer - the offending parties are off the hook, though they could Have done no more damage with a full frontal assault, no?)

You mistook my lack of surprise concerning the existence of nuts - with or without violent potential - for support. How bad of you!

(I am guessing too many people have resigned themselves to the fact that money rules, no matter who is voted in, and were too busy trying to salvage the debris of their lives to do more than just sigh. Now many have lost all and have the time and lingering anger. You are right, that can be dangerous!)

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Ah, my friend, you are mistaken. I don't advocate violent ends. If for no other reason that it almost always hits the wrong end.


(but I wonder, how it would not be self defense to try to protect your livelihood, after all losing everything is pretty much right up there. I think lesser losses have been covered, no? Naturally, as long as no guns are involved and only the ink of the pen - or printer - the offending parties are off the hook, though they could Have done no more damage with a full frontal assault, no?)

You mistook my lack of surprise concerning the existence of nuts - with or without violent potential - for support. How bad of you!

(I am guessing too many people have resigned themselves to the fact that money rules, no matter who is voted in, and were too busy trying to salvage the debris of their lives to do more than just sigh. Now many have lost all and have the time and lingering anger. You are right, that can be dangerous!)

Stating that they would kill the 'wrong bankers' is implying that there right bankers to kill. Implying that there are 'right' bankers to kill is support. And you stated that violence towards bankers is really just self-defense anyway. I react to what you say, even if you choose not to believe you said it.

 

[granfire]

Stating that they would kill the 'wrong bankers' is implying that there right bankers to kill. Implying that there are 'right' bankers to kill is support. And you stated that violence towards bankers is really just self-defense anyway. I react to what you say, even if you choose not to believe you said it.

You are twisting thing a bit there. I did - yes, I admit - say that they would be killing the wrong ones. As mobs go. I am dreadfully sorry that I lack a lot of empathy when it comes to abstract masses.
As a whole I think the whole lot of bankers needs a session behind the wood shed. In that sphere, I doubt there are a lot that are really innocent.
Do I advocate violence? No.

Do I think some deserve to be violated? Depends. On my mood and on the individual. But as for actual factual violence, like lynch mobs? Or vigilante gunslingers? No. It's no different than say a Gynocologist performing services one does not agree with. (besides, there is always a new banker to take his spot)


Alas. If you take my shoulder shrugging half desinterested 'They'd get the wrong one anyhow' as approval, I suppose I can't change your mind. Guilty by association is not current law (no, wait, actually it is, but not in this context, only if you are protestor sympathizer...or other undesirable, my bad, nvm)

Now, if I have to explain more in depth how I feel about big scale banking, I might come up with a few thousand reasons why they really need a beat down, counting what's left of my IRA and my kid's college fund. If this continues he'd be lucky to go to barber college.

Punishment needs to be doled out. And really, if you are honest, REALLY honest, you have to admit, people have been executed (sure after a legal trial etc and decades...) for doing much less than ruining millions of people's lives and throwing the world into turmoil.
Oh well, they did not put a gun to anybody's head....can't be that bad, right!



back to the original problem of conspiracy nuts....

 

[Xue Sheng]

Bill

I do beleive you are currently giving conspiracy theorists ideas in order to make your argument.

 

[granfire]

Bill

I do beleive you are currently giving conspiracy theorists ideas in order to make your argument.

nah, they can come up with that on their own. After all crazy is in the air and catching...

 

[Omar B]

Shades of Robert Ludlum's The Matarese Countdown.

 

[granfire]

Shades of Robert Ludlum's The Matarese Countdown.

The who, the what?

 

[Omar B]

The who, the what?

http://www.amazon.com/Matarese-Countdown-Robert-Ludlum/dp/0553579835

 

[granfire]

http://www.amazon.com/Matarese-Countdown-Robert-Ludlum/dp/0553579835

boo, a sequel...

Oh, nvm, it's not the Library.