Rothschild; Facts and the Fiction
- Thread starter MHz
- Start date
I did post a link to the Rothschild chain of controlled Banks. You show that they don't.
You provided a list of 50 Banks that do not show who has control of the voting stock. What kind of proof is that?
Show me that the $34B we pay as interest goes only into the pockets of Canadian investors then do the same for the US.
You can even use the data in the Canada, Sold Out vid as Mr. Martin doesn't dispute the figures.
If any goes to foreign banks we are being robbed.
The fact is the Rothschild Banks shouldn't be making any money off the internal affairs of the USA or of Canada. The massive payouts of the last few years have not just been for internal debts. If there are no inter-connections the American taxpayer nor the Canadian Taxpayer should be servicing internal dept only.
J. Henry Schroder Banking Corp.'search" results in the previous link and to the one below, short history
Schroders - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
brown, shiply & company is certainly British controlled.
Brown Shipley Private Banking : History
Same for everybody on the list, even marriages count as a 'connection'. JFK's family would have been considered as being 'rebels' as they ran a tax-exempt business. Their only payments went to the Canadian Distilleries and their Employees. However deeply involved they were it became legal again so it wasn't really equal to the charge of Traitor by conspiring with the Canadian Govt to undermine the social fabric of the moral US.
That made them legit after prohibition and that is why they became a political power. Unfortunately being somewhat new they also had some morals left when it came to giving their customers (John Q. Public) a good product in exchange for some of their hard-earned money. That is why he could make the speeches he did, they go to be threatening and so 'they' killed him and then destroyed the rest of his families political power.
Morgan Grenfell & Company, another tie back to England' financial powers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgan,_Grenfell_%26_Co.
Lazard Brothers is a connection to Europe through France. England also has ties to the European Banks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lazard#History
The Rothschild might be shielded by hiding their true income through the companies the banks do business with, ie the companies withe the special printing ink or the actual printing presses. Money through fees rather than year end profits by the lest of the Banks. Profits from the earnisgs of the service industries are just as good, if not even better that a portion the Banks create for themselves as profit.
Ah so
That's a far Eastern name is it not? Who collects the interest they pay on their loans from the World Banks (and the like)?
Debt - external:
$347.1 billion (31 December 2009 est.)country comparison to the world: 22 $400.6 billion (31 December 2008 est.)
Last edited:
Come on. You showed me a link to a bank that hardly qualifies as being much larger than a state bank in the US. That is hardly take-over-the-world stuff.
As for the 50 banks in the list I posted all I have asked for is that you tell me which of them are controlled by the evil Rothschilds. Surely it can' t be that hard if the Rothschilds are as all-pervasive as you claim. On the other hand, since it is not possible to determine the major shareholders in any corporation what you are asking me to do is probably impossible. As I stated before. You are making the claim. Provide the proof.
lol, by the sounds of it, you already know.
Why? A country's internal actions can have affects on the financial sector.
What massive payouts? To whom?
Why?
And that means wha
Tax exempt? lmao!
The Kennedy clan and morals, now there's a stretch. I think you've been reading to much conspiracy stories and not enough history.
And that means what?
Might be? Sounds mysterious to me. Got any real proof?
So you're catching on then. So how are the Chinese controlled and connected to the Rothschild clan?
It's your conspiracy, you tell us.
That's nothing compared to the debt they hold for the US. Do you know how much that is?Debt - external:
country comparison to the world: 22 $400.6 billion (31 December 2008 est.)
Now, have you been able to refute what I posted about the Federal Bank of the US and EO 11110, or are you just going to ignore that material because it puts a great big dent in your theories?
But Bar, the maybe's are important, lol.
Bar, didn't you see the "chart" from 1976? That's all the proof mhz needs. That and a ton of maybe's. To make her theory completely true.
Last edited:
The money went to pay derivative gamblers. If you want someone or thing to blame blame the US Congress for deregulating derivatives.
They don't even supply who has the voting shares, so go with the next best thing, a list of who the Board of Directors are, expend to spend some money getting the lists.
You have yet to start to answer to the list (s) I already supplied, show they do not have apron string tied in just like the charts say.
No one has even proved that the Rothschild's even own or are currently involved with a banking consortium. Other than this, what do they control. http://www.rothschild.com/
Who is #1? Does the Pope **** in those woods? How many other fully privately owned banks are there?
No Who's on first.
No, he takes a dump on a gilded crapper.
KS Bank of Toronto, and Alliance, to name two off the top of my head.
Not that matter when applied to the crap mhz keeps posting.
Not at all, I think they knew exactly what they were saying and how to say it, so people like yourself would suck it up like candy and run with it, without ever giving it any real thought.
:lol: Actually, in some cases no. Which was aptly proven when I took apart the theory you posted on how the Fed works, who owns the Fed and so on. Those are just a couple points you haven't acknowledged, let alone refuted, other then to call me names and tell me that my words mean nothing.
So can you refute my posts on who owns the Fed, how the Fed works, or EO 11110? Or will you just continue to call me names and make light of the abuses I faced as a child?
Ya I saw that too. To bad he doesn't do as most accredited scholars do and apply each reference to the part of his theory. I'm sure he did use those sources for some aspects of his story, although I can simply post those references at the end of an article on painting in water colours, and without applying each reference to the stated part of the article. Make it seem like that's where the info came from.
But I digress, unfortunately for you and the author of that tid bit of silly, not one of them says what banks are stockholder members in the Fed. As that has never been published. Thus proving he's lying through his eye teeth. And you swallowed it.
One thing I did pick up from that cartoon you posted before, was that most people don't know how banks work. You're a shining example of that. Especially when it comes to the Fed.
Ah yes, your post lacks any explanation, the author fails to provide that, we asked for you to provide an explanation of what it is, and thus according to you, the problem is ours. Good call, that how you get out of having to prove its validity. How predictable, and funny too.
Ah yes, still can't refute my posts so attack away. Again predictable.
The topic here is your fascination with the Rothschild family.
That's the point mhz, you didn't have to take my word for it. I posted references. They all lead to accredited books on the subject, by professors in economics and international banking.
What does? The fact that when I pressed you to explain what you cut and paste you refused to answer the questions? Then went on this campaign of calling me a liar.
I don't care what you call me. I've poked huge holes in your theory. You refuse to acknowledge the posts, let alone the facts contained in them. You've steadfatsly refused to answer questions on all manner of subjects you post cut and pastes in. The reason for that is, you have no practical understanding of the material you're posting. You simply take the material, believe it because it says it supports your position and post.
Again, the topic is your fascination with the Rothschild family.
Again, I already showed the errors in those claims. Just because you find someone else that makes the same claims, doesn't make your post any more factual. Nor is it a form of credible rebuttal.
Now, can you or can you not explain the connections, with proof, other then just their names? Yes or no?
Last edited:
If you don't like FED RESERVE NOTES you can always carry around a big sack of coins. Congress still mints the change.
If you were stuck in the woods and had to be like the Pope would you rather have a $100 FEDERAL RESERVE NOTE, gold coin or a pine cone?
