The Central Bank of Libya under Muammar Gaddafi | Stephen M. Goodson

From 1551 to 1911 Libya was ruled by the Ottoman Empire, by Italy from 1911 to 1943 and from 1943 to 1951 was under the military suzerainty of Britain and France. The Central Bank of Libya was founded in 1956 and was run as a typical central bank until the bloodless coup d’etat of 1 September 1969. 

 

Mu’ammar Qathafi - A strict disciple of the Holy Q’uran, who abolished all forms of usury
and used the Central Bank of Libya for the sole benefit of the Libyan people.

Oil of an exceptionally high quality was discovered in 1959. However, King Idris al Mahdi as-Sanusi failed to capitalise on this bonanza or use it for the benefit of his people, and the bulk of the oil profits were siphoned into the coffers of the oil companies. On assuming power in 1969 Mu’ammar Muhammad al-Qathafi took control of most of the economic activities in the country, including the central bank, which for all practical purposes was run as a state bank. It operated as a banker of the local bankers and foreign bankers were not permitted to operate. Financing of government infrastructure did not atract riba (interest) and Libya had no national debt and no foreign debt. Its foreign exchange reserves exceeded $54 billion, which may be compared to reserves of developed countries such as the United Kingdom and Canada, which in 2010 were $50 billion and $40 billion respectively. GDP growth during the period 2000-10 was 4.32% per annum and the official figure for inflation was -0.27%.

 

Mass manifestation in support of Muammar Gaddafi in Tripoli,  July 1, 2011.

Colonel Qathafi was described by the mainstream media as being a “terrible dictator and a blood-sucking monster”, but the reality was that with the exception of the city of Benghazi and its environs, he had the support of 90% of the population. The following benefits provided by Qathafi explain why he was so popular:

■   Free education. Free electricity. Free health care. Free housing (There were no mortgages).
■   Students were paid the average salary for which subject they were studying.
■   Students studying overseas were provided with accommodation, an automobile and €2,500 per annum.
■   Newly-wed couples received a gift of 60,000 dinar ($50,000) from government.
■   Automobiles were sold at factory cost free of interest.
■   Private loans were provided free of interest.
■   Bread cost 15 US cents per loaf. Gasoline cost 12 US cents per litre.
■   Portion of profits from sale of oil was paid directly into bank accounts of citizens.
■   Farmers received free land, seeds and animals.
■   Full employment with those temporarily unemployed paid a full salary as if employed.

Qathafi’s Jamahariya “state of the masses” ensured that the wealth of this country of 5.79 million inhabitants was fairly distributed to all of its people. Beggars and homeless vagrants did not exist, while life expectancy at 75 years was the highest in Africa and 10% above the world average. The literacy rate was 82%. Regarding human rights Libya stood at 61 in the International Incarceration Index. The lower the rating, the lower the standing. The no.1 spot is currently occupied by the United States. Another major achievement, which Qathafi initiated was the conversion of the Nubian Sandstone Fossil Aquifer System into the Great Man-Made River, which supplies 6,500,000m³ of fresh water daily to the cities of Tripoli, Sirte and Benghazi. The extracted water is ten times cheaper than desalinated water. The total cost of the project, estimated at $25 billion was financed without a single foreign loan.

 

 Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi's foreword to 

A History of Central Banking and the Enslavement of Mankind.

 

Although the central banks of Belarus, Burma, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, North Sudan and Syria do not fall under the direct control of the Rothschild banking syndicate, Libya had the only central bank run on genuine state banking lines, which exhibited the classic symptoms of full employment, zero inflation and a modern day workers’ paradise. The question arises as to why NATO intervened on the pretext of fabricated human rights abuses, the so called responsibility to protect. Since 1971 when the United States abandoned the gold exchange standard for the petrodollar with the connivance of Saudi Arabia, any attempt to displace the United States dollar as the premier reserve currency has been blocked and opposed with violence.

 

 Ezra Pound - 1943.

 

In November 2000 Saddam Hussein of Iraq decreed that all oil payments would in future be made in euros, as he did not wish to deal “in the currency of the enemy”. As has already been proven, the possession of weapons of mass destruction pretext was a deliberately concocted hoax and it was this currency decision, which cost Saddam Hussein his life and the destruction of his country. 

 

True, whether the quote is authentic or not.

In similar circumstances Qathafi announced in 2010 the creation of the gold dinar as a replacement for the settlement of all foreign transactions in a proposed region of over 200 million people. Libya at that time possessed 144 tons of gold. What was intended was not a return to the gold standard per se, but a new unit of account with oil exports and other resources being paid for in gold dinars. Qathafi crossed a red line and paid the ultimate price [he was assassinated by Western invasion forces in Sirte on October 20, 2011].

 The Truth About Libya - Stephen Mitford Goodson, 2011.

Since 2007 Iran has stipulated that payments be made in euro currency. On 17 February 2008 the Iranian Oil Bourse for trading in petroleum, petrochemicals and gas using primarily the euro, Iranian rial and a basket of non-US currencies was established. The first oil shipments under the new system were sold through this market in July 2011. This event must be deemed as one of the prime causes for the constant Israeli and American threats to annihilate Iran.

Quoted from:

Stephen Mitford Goodson (2017) - A History of Central Banking and the Enslavement of Mankind.

 

See also:

Imran N. Hosein (2023) - The Bretton Woods International Monetary System.
TPR (2023) - Ibrahim Traoré: Terminating French Neocolonialism & the CFA Zone in Africa.
Stephen Mitford Goodson (2022) - Who Ever Sets the Price of Gold and Silver.

Asatizah of Al-Munawwar (2013) - The Dazzling Proof for the Return of our pure Money. The Judgment on Fiat Currency. 

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (October 20, 2011) - Bragging about murdering Libya’s Leader Muammar Gaddafi. (video)

 Global Research (May 5, 2011) - The Gold Dinar: Saving the world economy from Gaddafi.

Stephen Mitford Goodson (April 1, 2011) - The Truth About Libya.

Muammar Gaddafi (2009) - "I am the leader of a revolution, not a country." (video) 

Muammar Gaddafi (1975) - The Green Book.

Welcome to the UNIT - The De-Dollarization Bombshell | Pepe Escobar

Welcome to the UNIT – a concept that has already been discussed by the financial services and investments working group set up by the BRICS+ Business Council and has a serious shot at becoming official BRICS+ policy as early as in 2025.

  » The UNIT is a new form of international currency that can be issued 

in a de-centralized way, and then recognized and regulated at national level.  «

[...] The Global Majority has had enough of the centrally controlled monetary framework put in place 80 years ago in Bretton Woods and its endemic flaws: chronic deficits fueling irresponsible military spending; speculative bubbles; politically motivated sanctions and secondary sanctions; abuse of settlement and payment infrastructure; protectionism; and the lack of fair arbitration. In contrast, the UNIT proposes a reliable, quick and economically efficient solution for cross-border payments. The - transactional - UNIT is a game-changer as a new form of international currency that can be issued in a de-centralized way, and then recognized and regulated at national level.

  » Decoupling money from politics will undoubtedly offer unique opportunities 

for fair trade and investments across the globe removing economic bypasses created by 

political power plays and irresponsible fiscal and monetary policies.  «

The strength of the UNIT, conceptually, is to remove direct dependency on the currency of other nations, and to offer especially to the Global Majority a new form of apolitical money - with huge potential for anchoring fair trade and investments. It is indeed a new concept in terms of an international currency - anchored in gold (40%) and BRICS+ currencies (60%). It is neither crypto nor stablecoin. [...] The endgame is that everyone, essentially, may use the UNIT for accounting, bookkeeping, pricing, settling, paying, saving and investing.

Quoted from:
Pepe Escobar (May 13, 2024) - De-Dollarization Bombshell: The Coming of BRICS+ Decentralized Monetary Ecosystem. 

 

See also:

The UNIT Foundation (May 9, 2023) - The UNIT White Paper.

About Our Great Victory | Yuliana Titaeva

Every year on the eve of May 9th, a battle for historical memory of our great victory begins in the media space. Do those who repeat the clichés about "this day of mourning," "why the parades ?" or "is this victory necessary ?" realize that these are not their own judgments, but narratives cynically imposed on them by the very propaganda from which they avidly hide in "alternative sources of information" like YouTube and Meduza? And that the memory of the fact of our victory has long been, systematically, and deliberately destroyed? "By whom ? " the liberal will ask, and I will answer "by those who paid for this war."

Raising the Russian Soviet flag over the Reichstag during the Battle of Berlin - May 2, 1945.

And it was paid for by the US Federal Reserve and the Bank of England. Having profited from the First World War and boosting their industrial sector and economy, the US needed continuation. A new war promised to solve problems according to the principle of "everything everywhere at once": rivers of oil in the form of fuel and lubricants would bring dividends to Standard Oil, industrialists like Ford would sell military equipment, American banks would lend money to all warring sides, and the unfinished business of Europe in the First World War and the burgeoning USSR would be "chopped down to the last" soldier. The planned action was phased and stretched in implementation for almost 20 years.

First, the US intentionally attacked the economy of Germany, which had sunk into an economic crisis due to reparations payments after losing the First World War, then offered its own help to it - in the form of loans and active penetration of American capital into the German industry, which in a few years rose to second place in the world, but with a small nuance: it all belonged to American owners. The German Farbenindustrie was under the control of Standard Oil, General Electric controlled the electrical industry through AEG and Siemens, Opel belonged to General Motors, Henry Ford owned 100% of Volkswagen's shares, and by 1933, under the wing of American capital, large banks such as Deutsche Bank and Dresdner Bank were also.

 

 Western tanks and military hardware captured by Russian forces in Ukraine on display in Moscow at an exhibition

entitled "Trophies of the Russian Army". It is being held outside a museum celebrating the victory over Nazi Germany in 1945. 

The Russian military said it showed "Western help would not stop us winning this war".  - May 9, 2024.

At the same time, with American capital money, the Nazi party and personally Hitler were prepared and sponsored. To bring a new political figure onto the big stage, the United States first intentionally withdrew its loans from the German economy, causing a sharp crisis there, then let all the dogs loose on the current government and offered the electorate a familiar solution: "you need a new leader, like a comedian or an artist, and we have him! ". History always repeats itself twice.

What was done in 20 years completely prepared Germany for war. Apparently, it was promised that "we will take the Soviet Union quickly, and you, Dolphi, will receive the Nobel, the cover of Time, a house in Nice, a place in history, and a bucket of cocaine" (or was this promised to another president?) But of course, no one was going to take the Soviet Union quickly. The US needed a long, drawn-out, exhausting war, in which they would feed, finance, and ruthlessly exterminate every one of its participants. The winner didn't matter, but we ended up paying the huge price.

 

US White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre re-vealing world history - May 7, 2024.

They pay for the war today, implementing the same plan right before our eyes. They also pay for the revision of history, erasing any information about their interests in the Second World War and gradually shifting the blame for its outbreak onto the winner, while appropriating the fact of victory for themselves. They instill in immature minds something about the futility of holding parades, suggesting "quietly mourn at home," and hit the target with it precisely because they know that every historical symbol must be loud and noticeable, and what is not repeated en masse, as truth, from generation to generation, is simply forgotten forever. 

 

They made hundreds of films about the Jewish people, but not a single film about our 28 million victims, who fell so that Standard Oil would have something to fuel its oil. We did not ask our ancestors for this sacrifice, nor did they ask for it: the historical moment came to give it away, and they did. But now it's our turn to sacrifice and fight for our memory and victory with parades, conversations about the important viewings of "The Dawns Here Are Quiet" and festive posts on May 9th. And we give this sacrifice, it's necessary.

Happy Victory Day.

Yuliana Titaeva

 

 May 9, 2024

 

Russian President Vladimir Putin addressing attendees

of the annual Moscow Victory Day military parade - May 9, 2024.

Inside European Finance’s Most Secretive Society │ Owen Walker

In late October 2023 more than 40 of Europe’s most powerful bankers convened at the palatial Dolder Grand hotel overlooking Zurich for three days of discussions about the state of their industry. Attendees were given the chance to quiz Switzerland’s finance minister Karin Keller-Sutter and central bank governor Thomas Jordan, just over six months after the pair played key roles in the rescue of Credit Suisse by its rival UBS. The talks, which were not publicly disclosed, were arranged by a highly influential organisation whose existence is barely known outside its rarefied membership.

 

Italian President Francesco Cossiga at the 77th session of the IIEB on October 20, 1989.

 » This is not like Davos, where anyone can buy their way in. This really is exclusive. «

 

[...] The Institut International d’Etudes Bancaires (IIEB, International Banking Study Institute) is the most exclusive and secretive networking club in European finance, where bank bosses rub shoulders with guests from presidents and prime ministers to royalty and central bankers. “This is not like Davos, where anyone can buy their way in,” one longtime member told the Financial Times. “This really is exclusive.” For 73 years the IIEB has brought together the heads of Europe’s biggest banks twice a year at luxury hotels and royal palaces across the continent to discuss sensitive subjects such as M&A deals and global policymaking. The group has no website and its membership, meeting agendas and minutes are not made public. Members are discouraged from sharing details of the discussions. 

 

[...] The IIEB was founded in Paris in 1950 by the heads of four lenders from across the continent — Crédit Industriel et Commercial, Union Bank of Switzerland, Société Générale de Belgique and Amsterdamsche Bank — with the aim of holding regular top-level discussions on developments in the banking sector, as well as the economy and monetary system. It was part of a raft of cross-border institutions set up during that period to encourage closer ties between organisations from countries that had recently been at war with one another. [...] High-profile guests are a staple of IIEB gatherings. In 2000 and again in 2009, the group was hosted by Prince Andrew, first at St James’s Palace and then Buckingham Palace. At the IIEB’s first meeting in Russia, in St Petersburg in 2013, it received a speech from former president Dmitry Medvedev, while the club welcomed Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, now Turkey’s president, at a gathering in Istanbul when he was still the country’s prime minister.

 

[...] In one of the few publicly disclosed speeches given to the IIEB, European Central Bank vice-president Lucas Papademos began addressing the October 2006 IIEB meeting in Athens by quoting Adam Smith’s warning against collusion from 'The Wealth of Nations': “People of the same trade seldom meet together even for merriment and diversion, but on those occasions when they meet the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public or some contrivance to raise prices. If Adam Smith could have seen this gathering of top bankers from across Europe, would he have expressed such an opinion, which would also be a cause of alarm for a central banker because of the potential ‘contrivance to raise prices’? I very much doubt it.”

Reference:
Owen Walker (Feb 10, 2024) - Inside European finance’s most secretive society.

 

See also:
Carroll Quigley (Oct 23, 2023) - The Bank for International Settlements: The Apex of the System.

The Bretton Woods International Monetary System | Imran N. Hosein

Gold and silver have continuously functioned successfully as money all through our history as a civilization, until modern Western civilization emerged with an agenda of establishing its dominion over the rest of the world. In the wake of the first and second world wars a new European monetary system was formally established at the Bretton Woods Conference held in 1944. Agreement was reached amongst the Western rulers of the world on a monetary system in which only one currency, the US dollar, would be redeemable in gold at the rate of $35 per ounce of gold. All other currencies in the world would have their value determined in relation to the US dollar. Secondly, only governments, through their central banks, could redeem dollars for gold. Ordinary people who would be required to use paper currencies, could not redeem any currency for gold. An institution known as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) would be established and each member state of the IMF would be required to deposit with the IMF 25% of all gold reserves that the state possessed.

 

 The US was founded by Satanists and is ruled by Satanists ever since. This is their 'Great Seal'.

» Annuit Cœptis. MDCCLXXVI. Novus Ordo Seclorum. «
» He has favored our undertakings. 1776. New Order of the Ages. «

Most of the 'Founding Fathers' of the United States of America were freemasons following the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite. In their Great Seal » He « is radiating above a 13 layers pyramid. The realm between » He « and the pyramid below is enlightened by  » He « and reserved for the chosen few most blessed, most obedient and most ablest amongst his masons. 13 is the number of the founding federal states of the United States of America. So who is » He « ? His freemason worshipers call him Lucifer and Lord Satan and consider him bearer and bringer of light, great insights and mundane powers. The above original Great Seal of the United States of America was crafted in 1782, six years after the American Revolution in 1776 and one year after constituting the United States of America as an all-embracing imperial federal republic in the model and spirit of the Roman Republic's Empire. The United States of America was founded as the epicenter of an universal empire to come, as the shining fortress of » He «,  named 'New Jerusalem', from where an unprecedented conquest and rule over all worlds beyond was to begin.

After the establishment of the Bank for International Settlements in 1930, after the abolition of the US dollar's gold standard and after the seizure of the goyim's gold in 1933, the original Great Seal of the United States of America was added in 1935 to the dollar bill's design along the words 'In God We Trust' by Franklin Delano Roosevelt, a 32nd degree Grand Master of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite and the 32nd US President.
 

 

In fact, gold that was deposited with the IMF functioned merely as a means through which states could seek loans on interest (backed by something of value) from the IMF. More importantly, to the extent that member-states faithfully complied with the requirement of depositing that gold, the IMF would know the extent of gold reserves of each member-state. This was further assured through a requirement that member-states must report to the Fund all sales and purchases of gold. Why would the US-controlled - and hence Zionist-controlled - IMF be so interested in knowing the quantum of gold reserves in the possession of all countries in the world? 

 

 » The IMF claimed 25% of the world's gold and prohibited the use of gold as money. «

 

What was not disclosed however was that the US dollar would remain redeemable in gold only for as long as it was convenient for the US government to honor the legal obligation to do so. And just as ominous was the other possibility that if the US government could renege on its legal obligation to redeem US dollars for gold under the Articles of Agreement of the IMF, it could also refuse to repatriate 25% or more of the world’s gold stored in USA in accordance with IMF requirements. 

 

'The House of the Temple', officially: 'Home of The Supreme Council, 33°, Ancient & Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, Southern Jurisdiction, Washington D.C., U.S.A.'; and 'The George Washington Masonic National Memorial'.

 

Let us pause for a moment to remind those who are unaware, that the US government has already abandoned its legal obligation to redeem US dollars for gold in August 1971, and now refuses to even audit gold belonging to the rest of the world, that is stored in the US. Strangely and mysteriously, the use of gold as money was prohibited in the Articles of Agreement of the IMF. Nowhere was an explanation offered for this strange prohibition. The likely reasons for the prohibition of the use of gold as money are as follows:

1. To prevent the possibility that gold used as money could threaten, and cause a collapse, of the bogus paper money monetary system.
2. To ensure that gold belonging to the rest of the world, but stored in USA, would remain undisturbed in US territory until the time arrived when the monetary system of paper money collapsed and the world returned to gold as money. At that time the legal prohibition of the use of gold as money would be removed, and gold stored with the Zionist owned and controlled Federal Reserve Bank in NY, could then be secretly and illegally transferred to Israel (the transfer may already have taken place) so that Israel’s rule over the world of money might remain unchallenged and unchallengeable. The gold stored in USA would remain largely undisturbed since there would be no reasons for a member-state to seek to repatriate its gold. What would they do with their gold, other than keeping it as a store of value? It could not be used as money.
3. Once the member-states of the IMF had deposited 25% of their gold reserves with the IMF (i.e., with USA), member-states had begun to take IMF loans that were secured by that gold, and it would then be possible to encourage them to store more and more of their gold reserves with the IMF. If they held on to their gold, they could not use it in any way that would benefit them. And so this provision of the Articles of Agreement opened a way for USA to eventually be entrusted with storage of most of the gold reserves of the world.

Is it by accident or by design that decolonization resulted in the rest of the non-European world becoming part of a mysterious and ominous new European monetary system in which, for the first time in human history, mankind was prohibited by international law from using gold as money, and in which money with intrinsic value was replaced by money with no intrinsic value?

 

» First we plunder the Americans, then the Mexicans, the Tsars, the Germans and the Ottomans. Then all of mankind. «

Paul M. Warburg (1868 - 1932), German-born investment banker; Rothschild agent at Wall Street since 1895; 

Philantropist and brother of Otto H. Warburg, head of the World Zionist Organization in 1911;

Architect of the US Federal Reserve System and the Federal Reserve Bank; Spiritus rector of the Federal Reserve Act in 1913;

Original member of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors in 1914; Second Vice Chairman of the Federal Reserve 1916 - 1918;  

Issuer of Liberty war bonds in 1917; inventor of the post-World War I gold reparation and confiscation schemes enforced upon the defeated German, Austrian and Ottoman empires during the Versailles and Sèvres conferences 1919-1920, where his German brother Felix M. Warburg is part of the German empire's delegation reaching for a peace treaty;

Visionary and pioneer of the Bank for International Settlements, the International Monetary Fund

and of a globalized New Deal for Lord Satan's New Order of the Ages.

 

Is it by accident or by design that the new European monetary system supported a European banking system which together operated in such ways that they and their clients grew incredibly wealthy while the rest of the world was imprisoned in increasing poverty and destitution?

 
Has that economic impoverishment lead to political servitude? Is it true or is it false that modern political servitude invariably implies conformity with a Zionist agenda? Is it by accident or by design that European Zionist Jews and Zionist Christians have a firm control over that monetary and international banking system and are using it to the advantage of the State of Israel?

 
Is it by accident or by design that the modern secular West continued the Jihad, known as the crusades, waged by medieval Christian Europe to liberate the Holy Land from Muslim rule, until success was finally achieved in 1917? Why did non-European Christians refrain from participating in an ostensibly Christian Jihad? Why did western European Christian crusaders fight their eastern Christian brothers-in-faith while making their way to the Holy Land?

 

Is it by accident or by design that the West then presided over the birth of a State of Israel in the Holy Land some 2000 years after Holy Israel was destroyed by divine decree, and the Jews were then brought back by hook and by crook to reclaim the Holy Land as their own some 2000 years after they were expelled from it? 

 
Did all of the above take place by accident, or was it part of a grand design that would eventually make it possible for Israel to rule the world? Why would Israel want to rule the world?

 

Quoted from:

Imran N. Hosein (2021) - Preface to 'The Future of Money'.

 

See also:

Carroll Quigley (1966) - The Apex of the System: The Bank for International Settlements.

 

For the first time in history the world is witnessing mass murder and genocide live on television. 

The United States and the State of Israel will both be held accountable for their crimes in the Holy Land.

Usury | Ezra Pound

The first thing for a man to think of when proposing an economic system is: WHAT IS IT FOR? And the answer is: to make sure that the whole people shall be able to eat (in a healthy manner), to be housed (decently) and be clothed (in a way adequate to the climate). 

 

 

 

Another form of that statement is Mussolini’s:

DISCIPLINE THE ECONOMIC FORCES AND EQUATE THEM TO THE NEEDS OF THE NATION.

The Left claim that private ownership has destroyed this true purpose of an economic system. Let us see how OWNERSHIP was defined, at the beginning of a capitalist era during the French Revolution.

OWNERSHIP is the right which every citizen has to enjoy and dispose of the portion of goods guaranteed him by the law. The right of ownership is limited, as are all other rights by the obligation to respect the rights of others. It cannot be prejudicial to the safety, nor to the liberty nor to the existence, nor to the ownership of other men like ourselves. Every possession, every traffic, which violates this principle is illicit and immoral.

Robespierre.

 

The perspective of the damned XIXth century shows little else than the violation of these principles by demoliberal usuriocracy. The doctrine of Capital, in short, has shown itself as little else than the idea that unprincipled thieves and antisocial groups should be allowed to gnaw into the rights of ownership. This tendency ‘to gnaw into’ has been recognised and stigmatised from the time of the laws of Moses and he called it neschek. And nothing differs more from this gnawing or corrosive than the right to share out the fruits of a common co-operative labour.

 

Indeed USURY has become the dominant force in the modern world.

 

Moreover, imperialism is an immense accumulation of money capital in a few countries, which, as we have seen, amounts to 4 or 5 thousand million pounds sterling in securities. Hence the extraordinary growth of a class, or rather a Stratum, of rentiers, i.e, persons who live by “clipping coupons” who take absolutely no part in any enterprise, and whose profession is idleness. The exportation of capital, one of the most essential economic bases of imperialism, still further isolates this rentier stratum from production, and sets the seal of parasitism on the whole country living on the exploitation of the labour of several overseas countries and colonies.

V. I. Lenin, quoting Hobson in ‘Imperialism, the highest stage of Capitalism’.

Very well! That is from Lenin. But you could quote the same substance from Hitler, who is a Nazi (note the paragraph from ‘Mein Kampf’ magnificently isolated by Wyndham Lewis in his ‘Hitler’) – ‘The struggle against international finance and loan capital has become the most important point in the National Socialist programme; the struggle of the German nation for its independence and freedom.’

You could quote it from Mussolini, a Fascist, or from C. H. Douglas, who calls himself a democrat and his followers the only true democrats. You could quote it from McNair Wilson who is a Christian Monarchy man. You could quote it from a dozen camps which have no suspicion they are quoting Lenin. The only people who do not seem to have read and digested this essay of his are the British Labour Party and various groups of professing communists throughout the Occident.

Milton Friedman — Lie for hire.

Thomas Piketty — Worse than Jewspapers.

Some facts are now known above parties, some perceptions are the common heritage of all men of good will, and only the Jewspapers and worse than Jewspapers try now to obscure them. Among the worse than Jewspapers we must list the hired professors who misteach new generations of young, who lie for hire and who continue to lie from sheer sloth and inertia and from dog-like contempt for the wellbeing of all mankind. At this point, and to prevent the dragging of red herrings, I wish to distinguish between prejudice against the Jew as such and the suggestion that the Jew should face his own problem.

DOES he in his individual case wish to observe the law of Moses? 

Does he propose to continue to rob other men by usury mechanism while wishing to be considered a ‘neighbour’?

Quoted from:
Ezra Pound (1939) - What is money for?

 

Fed Governors — Prevent the dragging of red herrings.

 

Larry Fink — Considered a ‘neighbour’?

See also:

Neema Parvini (2022) - The Liberal Political Theology.
Stephen Mitford Goodson (2019) - Who Ever Sets the Price of Gold and Silver.

TPR (2014) - Modern Money Mechanics — The Alchemy of Neo-Feudalism.

Asatizah of Al-Munawwar (2013) - The Dazzling Proof for the Return of our pure Money. The Judgment on Fiat Currency.

 Serhii Hrabovsky (2010) - Lenin. Money. Revolution.
Nikolai Starikov (2010) - The Conspiracy of the Counterfeiters.
Anthony C. Sutton (1974) - The Bankster's Paradise Conspiracy Theory.
Hjalmar Schacht (1967) - The Magic of Money.
Gaetano Mosca (1898) - The Rulers and the Ruled.

Modern Fractional Reserve Banking - A Ponzi Scheme | Murray N. Rothbard

The banker issues fake warehouse receipts and lends them out as if they were real warehouse receipts represented by cash. At the same time, the original depositor thinks that his warehouse receipts are represented by money available at any time he wishes to cash them in. Here we have the system of fractional reserve banking, in which more than one warehouse receipt is backed by the same amount of gold or other cash in the bank’s vaults.

 

It should be clear that modern fractional reserve banking is a shell game, a Ponzi scheme, a fraud in which fake warehouse receipts are issued and circulate as equivalent to the cash supposedly represented by the receipts.

Quoted from:
Murray N. Rothbard (1983) - The Mystery of Banking.

 

See also:

Anthony C. Sutton (1974) - The Bankster's Paradise Conspiracy Theory.

 Nikolai Starikov (2013) - The Conspiracy of the Counterfeiters.

The Bankster's Paradise Conspiracy Theory | Antony C. Sutton

There is an extensive literature in English, French, and German reflecting the argument that the Bolshevik Revolution was the result of a "Jewish conspiracy"; more specifically, a conspiracy by Jewish world bankers. Generally, world control is seen as the ultimate objective; the Bolshevik Revolution was but one phase of a wider program that supposedly reflects an age old religious struggle between Christianity and the "forces of darkness."

 

The argument and its variants can be found in the most surprising places and from quite surprising persons. In February 1920 Winston Churchill wrote an article — rarely cited today — for the London Illustrated Sunday Herald entitled "Zionism Versus Bolshevism." In this article Churchill concluded that it was "particularly important ... that the National Jews in every country who are loyal to the land of their adoption should come forward on every occasion ... and take a prominent part in every measure for combatting the Bolshevik conspiracy." Churchill draws a line between "national Jews" and what he calls "international Jews." He argues that the "international and for the most atheistical Jews" certainly had a "very great" role in the creation of Bolshevism and bringing about the Russian Revolution. He asserts (contrary to fact) that with the exception of Lenin, "the majority" of the leading figures in the revolution were Jewish, and adds (also contrary to fact) that in many cases Jewish interests and Jewish places of worship were excepted by the Bolsheviks from their policies of seizure. Churchill calls the international Jews a "sinister confederacy" emergent from the persecuted populations of countries where Jews have been persecuted on account of their race. Winston Churchill traces this movement back to Spartacus-Weishaupt, throws his literary net around Trotsky, Bela Kun, Rosa Luxemburg, and Emma Goldman, and charges: "This world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilisation and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing."

 

[...] The persistence with which the Jewish-conspiracy myth has been pushed suggests that it may well be a deliberate device to divert attention from the real issues and the real causes. The evidence provided in this book suggests that the New York bankers who were also Jewish had relatively minor roles in supporting the Bolsheviks, while the New York bankers who were also Gentiles (Morgan, Rockefeller, Thompson) had major roles.

What better way to divert attention from the real operators than by the medieval bogeyman of anti-Semitism?

Quoted from:
Antony C. Sutton (1974) - Wallstreet and the Bolshevik Revolution