Babylon's Bankers

SETTING UP THE DOMINOES

Well the globaloney coming from the banksters and their political lackeys never ends, does it? Last Friday the Daily Bell ran this rather interesting article on the latest ploy, and China's continuing reluctance to enter into partnership with the kooky and corrupt London-New York crowd:

New Crisis, New Currency?

Well, so much is predictable. The banksters have been wanting to set up regional, and eventually, a uniform global, currency system ever since the idea of monetized debt functioning as money was a gleam on some Sumerian bankster's eye millennia ago. It's more of the same, folks, just shuffling ever growing debts in their globaloney ponzi scheme from one central bank to another, to the ultimate ruin of middle classes worldwide. Methinks perhaps this is one reason the Chinese - who have about the only growing middle class left on the planet - are reluctant to buy shares in the latest ponzi scheme.

But all of this raises a teensy weensy little philosophical question, and it's one I've nowhere seen addressed, and perhaps I'm even being a bit simplistic and naive in even asking it. The problem is this: suppose the banksters do get their way, and get their nice shiny big version of the Bank of International Settlements and one world currency. That currency will inevitably be, as are all the pounds, dollars, pesos, and euros now sort-of-circulating, monetized debt instruments, and not real money. And as we all know, interest on these notes grows faster than the actual amount of such notes in circulation. This means inevitably that the banksters will either never be repaid on their worthless currencies, or that they will inflate their currency, as they always do (while intoning their millenia-old arias that central private banks are necessary to prevent governments from inflating their currencies at will). Inevitably, this will lead to a complete shut-down of the middle class, and an absolute halt to "production." In other words, the closed system of finance will end up in entropy, and everything will grind to a halt. Mr. Rockefeller will lose his wonderful mansion at Pocantico, and the Rothschilds will be out several baronial manors, because methinks that people at large will be, well....just fed up.

As I pointed out in Babylon's Banksters, there are really only two ways out of this mess of their own making: (1) either a return to debt-free money issued by states, and not loaned into circulation by banks, or (2) the "system" has to be opened up again, either by new "geographical frontiers" or new technologies (loathsome to the banksters unless they can monopolize it), or both.

Which leads us to the next problem, and to huge speculations. What, if any, are the "new frontiers" that could once again open up the system and allow the banksters to continue their schemes for more millennia? Well, one is the oceans right here on earth, and the other, much more promising venue, is of course, space. But that will require the advance of practical technologies - not rockets - to do so. Now this, in turn, raises yet another interesting speculative possibility. As noted, the banksters will want monopolies on any such technology, that is to say, they will, by necessity and by dint of their own cartelist ideology and outlook, seek to constitute themselves as an instance of Richard M. Dolan's "breakaway civilization."

I find it intriguing and suggestive to this hypothesis, therefore, to note the recent "space events," i.e., NASA's no-fly no-approach lunar zones, and China's announced intentions to send probes, and eventually men, to the Moon, coupled with China's still-enunciated reluctance to enter into the "international financial structure" in quite the way that the globaloney-ists would like. As was said some time ago, "Come Watson, the game's afoot!"

 

18 thoughts on “SETTING UP THE DOMINOES”

  1. What if the Chinese simply decide to target the Annunaki hybrids with an ethno-bomb? Surely, the homo sapien sapiens unique DNA has been detected and isolated in a laboratory setting by now. Maybe this was the reason for the rash of assassinations of biochemists globally in the last decade.

  2. Excellent commentary as usual Dr. Farrell, but no mention of what becomes to the vast majority of the population, the Working Class. even though Democrats have long ago dropped any usage of this term for their base, we still abound in spades.
    The middle Class supports the Upper Class, and fear working people will take ‘their’ money for social services needs and food. Working people have always cared for the needy and poor. Middle class people have swallowed the Reagan trickle-down pill, and believe they will become affluent without the regulation of their business exploits. And where does the Vatican figure in this scheme, and their BOS and CIty of London? They are always geographically and politically well-placed.

  3. Speaking of spaceflight, did anyone hear Richard C. Hoagland’s take on the NASA satellite that recently…DIDN’T…burn up in the atmosphere; on Coast to Coast AM the shortly after midnight CST on9/27/11?

    1. Yes, I did hear that one yesterday. More specifically, because no data was shown on infrared (rather than radar) tracking and no burning debris was visible (despite the vast stretches of nothing over the Pacific). He was incredulous that the Navy, Air Force and NASA couldn’t track this appropriately, but lost me when he speculated that “someone else” used a tractor beam or otherwise intercepted this big-as-a-bus satellite so that no one would get hit by it. Now that’s a conspiracy with kindness! Can I assume it wasn’t Martin Bormann?
      Seriously, sometimes Hoagland says some crazy shit, perhaps to pander to the huggy-feely UFO worshippers he hangs out with. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and I don’t see that he has that–rather, he has some missing data to point at, but that’s a long way from a benevolent cleanup crew in the sky. A review of Occam’s Razor would be good for him.

  4. China appears to have recognized that China is powerful enough in it’s own right, or at least a number of individuals high up in the Chinese party apparatus have, so that China can thumb its nose at the New World Order and its Master Plan.

    This could get “interesting.”

  5. The banksters have been wanting to set up regional, and eventually, a uniform global, currency system ever since the idea of monetized debt functioning as money was a gleam on some Sumerian bankster’s eye millennia ago.

    Great writing Doctor. Globaloney is genius too.

  6. Rather than a ponzi scheme, I think of what the elitists are doing as merely a withdrawl of funds from one account (our’s) and deposit to another (there’s). In a ponzi scheme the “older investor” is paid interest due them by the receipts received from “newer investors”.

    The greedy banksters we face today just declare a “bank bailout”, authorize a withdrawal of funds from the accounts of those who worked for those funds and deposits of said funds to the accounts of the elites.

    We are due for another “bank bailout” (for the IMF this time) See: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/8788223/Christine-Lagarde-IMF-may-need-billions-in-extra-funding.html

    They’ll continue this activity till we are left pennyless and no one is the wiser.

  7. How about a third alternative? Market money. Why should the power to create money be left in the hands of anyone? Why should we trust that this power won’t be abused by the crony capitalists when we see the lesson history has taught us and that we’re living through right now. It seems that from John Law to the tulip bubble, to the present day, the world has learned nothing and the ideas of fiat currency, with or without debt continue, vampire like to haunt and drain our wealth and prosperity.
    What’s wrong with each of us deciding what we will or won’t accept in the way of payment and what’s wrong with a free banking system based around a commodity that can’t be inflated like a balloon? Would anyone like to bet on or speculate what that choice might freely be if even given a chance? Hint. It can’t be printed or digitized.

    1. No, it certainly can not be printed or digitized but can it be “created”” through alchemy (… the creation of the mythical “philosopher’s stone,” which was said to be capable of turning base metal into gold)???

      1. I don’t think we’re at that point yet, do you? But it doesn’t negate the fact that letting the market select what is accepted as money isn’t far better alternative than leaving it in the hands of a small group of men, who as we all should know by now, can’t be trusted not to abuse the ability to “create” money for their own benefit.
        We don’t live in and never will live in a perfect world, but the closer we get to the “tao”, so to speak, the closer we are to harmonizing with the natural laws and forces of the universe, that will bring about a far better result for all and not just a favored few.

        1. In a hungry world, dominated by despots, silver and gold are of little value. Food, water, shelter, guns and ammo become the “currency of necessity” and little else, IMO. The time to reform the system is long ago and past. It was negated for lack of interest. Survival is now the name of the game.

          1. May I disagree? Historically, gold and silver to a lesser extent have always been accepted as money for the stability they impose and the intrinsic value as a storehouse.
            The chaos is the expected result of a fiat/debt monetary system and is caused by central planning and the banking cartel centered in the city of london. You’re describing what one would expect from this artificial system. Cut off this hydra headed monsters and the system completely falls apart and truly free markets will emerge to solve the problems and to best serve the needs of the consumer.

          2. Of course, you may disagree. No one, including me, has a corner on knowledge of what the future holds,

            Sorry, I just don’t see the desire in the USA to “Cut off (the) hydra headed monster…” . I imagine most would look glazzy-eyed at such a thought.

            My only point is that it is very important to be prepared, in a personal way, to protect your loved ones with water, food, shelter, etc. If I have a hundred cans of tuna and you are hungry but have a gold Krugerrand, it is I who determines value. Bottom line you can’t eat gold.

          3. I quite agree with you Mel, but first you’ve got to have something to buy your tuna with. My gold coin can buy a lot of tuna.

          4. Money, the CONCEPT of money is based on the portability of value, a value being that which one acts to gain or keep. Food, ammo, building supplies, automobiles, etc.; these are things that one acts to gain or keep. Yet it is often impractical for someone to trade these values straight up for other values.

            Trading a car battery, for example, for a gallon of roofing tar, or some cans of tuna fish can ONLY take place if both parties obtain what they need or seek from the trade. If somebody has an extra car battery and somebody needs a car battery but only has cans of tuna fish to trade to the person with the car battery but the person with the car battery needs only a can of roofing tar as they already have a whole pantry full of cans of tuna fish and the person offering the cans of tuna fish for trade does NOT have any roofing tar, then no trade will occur, not between these two people anyway.

            Here is where a medium of exchange that stores value comes into the trading process. The desirable properties for such a store of value are:

            1. It must be portable ( light weight and compact) so that taking it to the point of trade is not unnecessarily difficult.
            2. It must NOT be easily counterfeited nor faked so as to preserve the integrity of the medium.
            3. It must be recognized as a store of value by all parties to the trade.
            4. While NOT a must, initially anyway, it must have intrinsic value so that, at least beyond a point, it can NOT be inflated due to counterfeiting or faking.

            Whatever meets these criteria is what is known as “money.”

            While it is true that any number of things fit these four criteria, or at least the first three, the so called “precious” metals have a millennia long proven history of having worked.

            It is instructive that those who would come out AGAINST precious metals as money and oppose the use of precious metals for money only with food, guns, and ammo (romanmel above for example) often ignore the existence of the utilitarian principles behind money and the characteristics that it must have to work.

            They ALWAYS end up blathering about how eventually people get hungry and that food is the “money” of last resort. What these people are REALLY saying (romanmel above for example) is that they couldn’t care less about the truth of the matter but that they have a seething hatred of the concept of, and the under lying principles of, money in general and a seething hatred of those who recognize how accurately “precious” metals fulfill these criteria in particular.

            Notice how this type of person (romanmel above for example) ALWAYS make their point using food (and ammo) but that they NEVER suggest something like tally sticks, which have a centuries long history of successful use as money, or even just plain government issued debt free paper.

            SOMEBODY had to say this. You heard it from me.

    2. Spot on Vinnie. Currency is a commodity like any other. Take away forced-use, and bad currencies naturally disappear.

      Due to the historically unprecedented ability to share information provided by the internet, a transformation in philosophy is taking place. Young people world-wide are doing great work to develop and implement the philosophy of human freedom.

      In the future the institutional violence of collectivism with be as archaic and scorned as 19th century chattel slavery is today.

      Join us folks!

      http://tragedyandhope.com

      http://freedomainradio.com

      http://mises.org

      We need everyone’s help hammering out and implementing the philosophy of freedom.

  8. Yes, the Chinese refusing to join the Mockafeller Child of Roth club, I guess will provoke military attack?
    Hence all those bases in Iraq-und-Rollerbalistica…return-to-go-go-Sumeriastan?
    Sorry..i’m in a silly mood brought on by dint of necessity

Comments are closed.