submitted 4 years ago by useless_aether from (self.fof)

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 4 years ago (10 children)

[–]useless_aether[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 4 years ago* (1 child)

the freemasonry was infiltrated by the illuminati.

they hate the catholic church, christianity, god and its creation, but they don't hate the baphomet, lucifer, the egyptian and babylonian mysteries, gnosticism, sufism, the kabbalah or rosicrucianism (and derivatives of these: law of one, the new age movement, theosophy, thelema..).

The revolution was against the monarchy.

when pope clement and king philip of france outlawed the templars, the templars swore revenge and that's why the french revolution was done.

at the time when the bavarian illuminati was created the jesuit order (crypto-templars) was also outlawed by another pope clement. so they had double reasons to hate the catholic church and the papacy. this hate gave birth to the enlightenment and its proponents d'alembert, jacques russeau, voltaire and the rest.

this is why napoleon, the illuminati puppet conquered the papal states, and captured and locked up the pope until he agreed to restore the jesuit order. afaik it was a secret addendum in the treaty of vienna, which was also heavily rothschild (knights of malta templars) influenced.

In 1796, during the French Revolutionary Wars, French troops under Napoleon Bonaparte invaded Rome and took as prisoner Pope Pius VI. He was taken as prisoner to France, where he died in 1799. The following year, after a sede vacante period lasting approximately six months, Chiaramonti was elected to the papacy, taking the name Pius VII.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Pius_VII

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suppression_of_the_Society_of_Jesus

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 4 years ago (0 children)

[–]useless_aether[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 4 years ago (7 children)

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 4 years ago (5 children)

[–]useless_aether[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 4 years ago* (4 children)

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 4 years ago (0 children)

1.)

Would you mind reading this, not sure if everything is true in it, but I found it fascinating:

Yes, but Napoleon was staunchly against the English Oligarchy who waged war on France. Napoleon wished to restore a sense of self-sufficiency in France and to free the agrarians from the Octopus that was England and her free trade influence and Banking empire. At this expense, Napoleon resorted to protectionism; Napoleon refused to view the sea, around France to be a territory of Britain.

The London Oligarchy too used their allies during the great war to foment a war against Germany whom was a rising geopolitical economic powerhouse, which like Napoleon, wished to free itself from the tentacles of London's banking interests. That would thusly, include her own currency and moneymen who were the Frankfurt school of bankers. In fact the Civil war was fought because of the Rivalry between Englands banks and the Frankfurt school of banks.

Read this concerning Napolean which I find quite interesting. I think it puts into perspective his actions:

https://name789.wordpress.com/napoleon/

Read his other articles as well concerning international banking and the various money powers.

Posted by Yamaguchy:

Napoleon in 1809 attempted to wrench a planet from the hideous tentacles of this octopus, this British dominion strangling a world”

–J.A. Cramb, Germany and England

“The English oligarchy was determined to crush Napoleon. After deluging Europe in blood and woe, during nearly a quarter of a century, for the accomplishment of this end, it became necessary to prove to the world, and especially to the British people, who were tottering beneath the burden of taxes which these wars engendered, that Napoleon was a tyrant, threatening the liberties of the world, end that he deserved to be crushed. All the Allies who were accomplices in this iniquitous crusade were alike interested in consigning to the world’s execration the name of their victim; and even in France, the reinstated Bourbons, sustained upon the throne by the bayonets of the Allies, silenced every voice which would speak in favor of the monarch of the people, and rewarded with smiles, and opulence, end honor, all who would pour contempt upon his name. Thus we have the unprecedented spectacle of all the monarchies of Europe most deeply interested in calumniating one single man, and that man deprived of the possibility of reply.”

–John S.C. Abbott, The History of Napoleon Bonaparte

Deep unmitigated hatred of democracy was indeed the moving spring of the English Tories’ policy. Napoleon was warred against, not as they pretended because he was a tyrant and usurper, for he was neither; not because his invasion of Spain was unjust, but because he was the enemy of aristocratic privileges.”

–Major-General William Francis Patrick Napier History of the War in the Peninsula

Henry Clay, Tuesday March 30th (11:00–15:30) and 31st, 1824, House of Representatives:

The principle of the system under consideration, has the sanction of some of the best and wisest men, in all ages, in foreign countries as well as in our own –of our Franklin, Jefferson, Madison, Hamilton, at home. But it comes recommended to us by a higher authority than any of these, illustrious as they unquestionably are –by the master spirit of the age– that extraordinary man, who has thrown the Alexanders and the Cæsars infinitely farther behind him than they stood in advance of the most eminent of their predecessors –that singular man, who, whether he was seated on his imperial throne, deciding the fate of nations and allotting kingdoms to the members of his family, with the same composure, if not with the same affection, as that with which a Virginia father divides his plantations among his children, or on the miserable rock of St. Helena, to which he was condemned by the cruelty and the injustice of his unworthy victors, is equally an object of the most intense admiration. He appears to have comprehended, with the rapidity of intuition, the true interests of a state, and to have been able, by the turn of a single expression, to devolope the secret springs of the policy of cabinets. We find that Las Cases reports him to have said:”

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 4 years ago (0 children)

3.)

The economic views of Napoleon in two languages:– Las Cases’ Conversations of Emperor Napoleon at St. Helena

1st.—Agriculture; the soul, the first basis of the empire.
2nd.—Industry; the comfort and happiness of the population.
3rd.—Foreign trade; the superabundance, the proper application of the surplus of agriculture and industry. ____

Agriculture was continually improving during the whole course of the revolution."

"Foreigners thought it ruined in France. In 1814, however, the English were compelled to admit that we had little or nothing to learn from them."

“Industry or manufactures, and internal trade, made immense progress during my reign. The application of chemistry to the manufactures caused them to advance with giant strides. I gave an impulse, the effects of which extended throughout Europe."

“Foreign trade, which in its results is infinitely inferior to agriculture, was an object of subordinate importance in my mind. Foreign trade is made for agriculture and home industry, and not the two latter for the former. "

"The interests of these three fundamental cases are diverging and frequently conflicting. I always promoted them in their natural gradation; but I could not and ought not to have ranked them all on an equality."

“When I came to the head of the government, the American ships, which were permitted to enter our ports on the score of their neutrality, brought us raw materials, and had the impudence to sail from France without freight, for the purpose of taking in cargoes of English goods in London."

"They moreover had the insolence to make their payments, when they had any to make, by giving bills on persons in London."

"Hence the vast profits reaped by the English manufacturers and brokers, entirely to our prejudice."

"I made a law that no American should import goods to any amount, without immediately exporting their exact equivalent."

"A loud outcry was raised against this : it was said that I had ruined trade. But what was the consequence ?"

"Notwithstanding the closing of my ports, and in spite of the English who ruled the seas, the Americans returned and submitted to my regulations. What might I not have done under more favourable circumstances ?”

Translated:

[23 JUIN 1816 NAPOLÉON ÉCONOMISTE — LE « SYSTÈME CONTINENTAL » DIMANCHE 23]

...

He went from there to trade, to his principles, to the systems he gave birth to. The Emperor fought the economists, whose principles might be true in their statement, but became vicious in their application. The political combination of the various states, he continued, made these principles at fault; particular localities asked at all times for deviations from their great uniformity. The customs that economists blamed were not to be an object of tax, it is true; but they were to be the guarantee and support of a people; they had to follow the nature and purpose of the trade. Holland, without production, without manufactures, having only a warehouse and commission trade, had to know no obstacles or barriers. France, on the other hand, rich in production, in industry of all kinds, had to constantly be warned against imports from a rival that remained even superior to it; it had to be against greed, selfishness, indifference of pure commissionaires.

"I did not guard," said the Emperor, "to fall into the fault of men with modern systems; to believe me, by myself and by my ideas, the wisdom of nations. The true wisdom of nations is experience. And see how economists reason: they constantly extol England's prosperity, and constantly show it to us as a model. But it is the one with the heaviest, most absolute customs system, and they constantly protest against customs; they would like to ban them from us. They also outlaw prohibitions; and England is the country that sets an example, prohibitions; and they are, indeed, necessary for certain objects; they cannot be supplemented by the force of rights: smuggling and fantasy would be a failure of parliament's purpose. We still remain in France very backward on these delicate subjects: they are still foreign or confused for the mass of society. However, what not we had done, what a rectitude of ideas had not spread the only gradual classification I had devoted to agriculture, industry and trade! objects so distinct and of such a real and great graduation!

Foreign trade, infinitely below in its results to the other two, has also been constantly subordinated to them in my thinking. This one is made for the other two; The other two are not for him. The interests of these three essential bases are divergent, often conflicting. I have consistently served them in their natural rank, but have never been able or had to satisfy them at once. Time will make known what they all owe me, the national resources I have created for them, the liberation of the English that I had spared. We now have the secret of the 1786 Trade Treaty. France is still shouting at its author; but the English had demanded it or riskstarting the war again. They wanted to do the same to me after the Treaty of Amiens; but I was powerful and a hundred elbows high. I answered that they would be masters of the heights of Montmartre, that I would still refuse to do so; and these words filled Europe.

They will impose one today, unless the public clamor, the whole mass of the nation force them to back down; and this serfdom, indeed, would be yet another infamy in the eyes of this same nation, which is beginning to possess today real light on its interests.

"The licensing system was vicious, no doubt! God forbid I have put it as a principle. It was of the invention of the English; for me, it was just a resource of the moment. The Continental System itself in its scope and rigour was, in my opinion, only a measure of war and circumstance.

The suffering and annihilation of foreign trade, under my reign, were in the force of things, in the accidents of time. A moment of peace would have brought him back to his natural level immediately."

[Senator Thomas Hart Benton in the Senate, Thursday, January 16, 1840.]

France has tried both paper and gold, and the study of six years of her history — the study of it from 1799 to 1806 — from the exclusive depreciated paper currency of the Republic to the exclusive specie currency of the Empire — will teach all nations the easy way to reform a ruined currency, and to recover the solid one, which is the only sure basis of public and private — of national and individual, prosperity.

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 4 years ago (0 children)

4.)

The Great Emperor raised the currency of France from all paper to all specie, in six years. In 1799, when placed at the head of affairs as First Consul, he found the currency a mass of ruin — neither the Government, nor the people, had specie, nothing but assignats and mandats depreciated a thousand per cent; yet in six years that great man had chased away paper, and brought in above 500,000,000 gold and silver; enough to revive industry, to sustain prices, to reward labor.

[This is exactly what should happen here in the US. This would ruin Financialization and money speculation engendering and promoting agrarian prosperity.]

When called to celebrate the immortal days of Austerlitz, Jena and Friedland, when the gigantic wars, the internal ameliorations, the national defences, and the almost fabulous magnificence of the imperial court, had carried the annual Government expenses to eight hundred million of francs –$160,000,000– the whole was paid in gold and silver! and the same precious metals constituted the exclusive common currency of the forty millions of souls which constituted the population of the empire.

This is what one man did in six years; and can we not, in three or four years more, increase our specie from 90,000,000 to as much as will defray all the expenses of our Government in any war in which it can be involved, and furnish the common currency of our population besides ?

Surely we can; and nothing but the errors of vicious legislation can prevent us from doing so; and thus save a recourse, even in time of war, to the perilous resort of Treasury notes.

[Which the debt backed greenbacks, as you /u/useless_aether have advocated for were an evident harbinger, purposefully sought after and implemented to enact the National Bank Act and later the centralization of an incorporated central bank known as the Federal Reserve. ]

Yamaguchy has proven that conspiracy theorists have used the forgery of the Lincoln letter as false evidence that Lincoln was against the central banking scheme. In fact, the forgery evidently illustrates that Lincoln was staunchly against these bankers. And yet, when we rely on truth and not forgery, we see that Lincoln, 6 months before this forgery was signed and dated, enacted two pieces of legislation which issues the circulation of treasury notes.

Here's the stupid forgery:

My dear Colonel Dick:

I have long determined to make public the origin of the greenback and tell the world that it was Dick Taylor’s creation. You had always been friendly to me, and when troublous times fell on us, and my shoulders, though broad and willing, were weak, and myself surrounded by such circumstances and such people that I knew not whom to trust, then I said in my extremity, ‘I will send for Colonel Taylor — he will know what to do.’ I think it was in January 1862, on or about the 16th, that I did so. Said you: ‘Why, issue treasury notes bearing no interest, printed on the best banking paper. Issue enough to pay off the army expenses and declare it legal tender.’ Chase thought it a hazardous thing, but we finally accomplished it, and gave the people of this Republic the greatest blessing they ever had — their own paper to pay their debts. It is due to you, the father of the present greenback, that the people should know it and I take great pleasure in making it known. How many times have I laughed at you telling me, plainly, that I was too lazy to be anything but a lawyer. Yours Truly.

A. Lincoln

It is a fake.

According to the fabricator of above letter, in January 1862 Lincoln was so demented that he did not remember that short 6 months earlier he had signed two acts which authorized the issue of Treasury notes.

The South and West held to it to attack any centralization of power that might lead to the National Banking Act. The civil war was fought over this very issue.

And to illustrate how blood thirst Lincoln and company was in attacking the South:

[July 4th, 1861. House of Representatives Speaker of the House, Galusha Grow, speaking:]

No flag alien to the sources of the Mississippi river will ever float over its mouths till its waters are crimsoned with human gore; and not one foot of American soil can ever be wrenched from the jurisdiction of the Constitution of the United States until it is baptized in fire and blood.” (vociferous applause upon the floor and in the galleries, which lasted for many minutes.)

President Jackson called the attention of the people to the necessity of being vigilant, year after year; the necessity of constantly educating themselves –and not waiting for others, for cheer-leaders and heroes, to do the informing and the vigilance for them; to do the preserving their rights for them.

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 4 years ago (0 children)

5.)

Too bad the majority of citizens have disregarded this conciseness of vigilance and have instead fallen to the wayside, forgetting their past; advocating for principles which are staunchly contradictory to the peace, prosperity, and freedom of the common-man.

Yamaguchy writes here:

In which Lincoln states, on March 1, 1843—

a national bank, properly restricted, is highly necessary and proper to the establishment and maintenance of a sound currency, and for the cheap and safe collection, keeping, and disbursing of the public revenue

And on December 1, 1862, Lincoln adjusts his view on the form of central bank–

I know of none which promises so certain results as the organization of banking associations. To such associations the Government might furnish circulating notes, on the security of United States bonds deposited in the Treasury.

Lincoln on January 17, 1863–

currency can be furnished by banking associations, organized under a general act of Congress, as suggested in my message at the beginning of the present session. The securing of this circulation, by the pledge of United States bonds, as therein suggested, would still further facilitate loans, by increasing the present and causing a future demand for such bonds.”

Wuites in Yamaguchy's articlec, please read it.

Mr. corporate lawyer Lincoln was FOR a privately owned –because when he used the term “National Bank” he meant a Biddle bank-like, private institution–, nation-wide, currency-issuing bank, using the credit and indebtedness (bonds) of the Federal government as the foundation of its operations. Mr. Lincoln was all FOR a 3rd Bank o’ the U.S., but President Tyler vetoed the idea, twice! Had Lincoln been around and president, he would have approved the Fed Res Act. In 1863 Pres. Lincoln signed the National Currency Bank “Act to provide a National Currency, secured by a Pledge of United States Stocks,” which produced a banking system and currency, based on national indebtedness.

The idea of a Treasury Bank, after the fate of the treasury notes is not less ridiculous than its establishment would be dangerous. Is experience to teach us nothing ? —[ had such treasury bank been established in 1791, and bank charter and bank paper prohibited altogether, all the evil caused by bankers could have been avoided; but you don’t want that, you want bank paper, speculation, boom-bust credit cycle, permanent debt]

Yamaguchy in his address to greenback peddlers.

https://name789.wordpress.com/banks-banking/

All this connects to Napoleon too, if one reads the banking documents freely available in Libraries.

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 4 years ago (0 children)

Surely we can; and nothing but the errors of vicious legislation can prevent us from doing so; and thus save a recourse, even in time of war, to the perilous resort of Treasury notes.

fof

MODERATORS