The Knowing Racism of the US Federal Reserve

[Bill Ryan]

I think this may deserve its own thread, and I think (but am not sure!) that it belongs in Geopolitics, Politics. (But we're aware we may need to create a new section called Racism.)

This was Chris Martenson's video published last night. He shows clearly that the Fed's actions re monetary policy are

1. Racist (and they have to know this).
2. Deliberately increasing the divide between rich and poor.

Martenson is one of the very smartest people out there, with a deep knowledge of both human nature and macroeconomics (besides much else). Start at 7:07, at the section called Grapes for Them (Cucumbers for Us).

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=3jeJt72qCfM

The extract from Frans de Waal's TED talk that he references (about the monkeys who get super-upset about unfair reward) is here. Watch and be fascinated. The entire TED talk is here:

• https://ted.com/talks/frans_de_waal_...ior_in_animals

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=fZ7LwYPiA1I

[lunaflare]

I can't stand watching these stupid experiments that humans create. It's not in any way funny. Caging wild animals, dulling them down in a cage devoid of nature's stimuli, causing neurosis, then provoking them...
surprise, surprise at the result?
Here's an indicator of human cruelty--no need to look much further

[Patient]

? So they had to do an experiment in order to see.that animals have feelings?

I guess I am the ignorant one here - I thought we had figured that out already.

Animals are sentient. They have feelings, memories, etc. How do people not understand that?

I bet most people have pets and they know that their pet dog or cat has likes and dislikes.

I am really surprised, yet I shouldn't be. I guess I thought that I am just a normal person. I didn't realize that I could build a career by showing that animals are real beings.

Surprised that the monkey would want to have grapes as well? Did they think that they could give it dirt and it would eat it? Are they really surprised that it makes concious decisions?

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by Patient (here)
? So they had to do an experiment in order to see.that animals have feelings?

I guess I am the ignorant one here - I thought we had figured that out already.

Animals are sentient. They have feelings, memories, etc. How do people not understand that?

I bet most people have pets and they know that their pet dog or cat has likes and dislikes.

I am really surprised, yet I shouldn't be. I guess I thought that I am just a normal person. I didn't realize that I could build a career by showing that animals are real beings.

Surprised that the monkey would want to have grapes as well? Did they think that they could give it dirt and it would eat it? Are they really surprised that it makes concious decisions?

Yes.

The point was, of course, that the "underprivileged" monkey was quite happy working for his cucumber until he saw the inequality taking place with the other monkey getting a far better deal for no reason at all. Only then did he become really angry.

That's the same with many animals, with all primates, and certainly with humans.

[enigma3]

The Federal Reserve and all other central banks were created by the Rothschilds for their benefit and the benefit of other rich bankers. Using central banks, the rich never lose. All losses are on the rest of us. I was a small businessman for my career. I watched as the Fed and Congress created policy after policy that harmed small business. Racism is part and parcel with their plan to enslave us. All roads lead to the New World Order.

[shaberon]

Posted by enigma3 (here)
The Federal Reserve and all other central banks were created by the Rothschilds for their benefit and the benefit of other rich bankers.

It is correct that London was characterized by Jewish Goldsmiths and Lombards. None of them were Rothschilds.

The first shareholders in the Bank of England were William and Mary.

It was started under the conditions that:

The infamous seizure by Charles II. of £1,300,000, deposited by the London goldsmiths in the Exchequer, all but ruined these too confiding men, but clamour and pressure compelled the royal embezzler to at last pay six per cent. on the sum appropriated. In the last year of William's reign, interest was granted on the whole sum at three per cent., and the debt still remains undischarged. At last a Bank of England, which had been talked about and wished for by commercial men ever since the year 1678, was actually started, and came into operation.

The bank was a joint venture, obligated to scrounge this money in a short period of time in order to be chartered:

Paterson expressly tells us that the Bank Act would have been quashed in the Privy Council but for Queen Mary, who, following the wish of her husband. expressed firmly in a letter from Flanders, pressed the commission forward, after a six hours' sitting.

This typhoon of mess happened around Oliver Cromwell, the first head of state to decide to use the Jewish diaspora for hegemony. The first impulses towards the central bank were resisted by the English because it was "too Dutch".

The Rothschilds arose several years later, by means of managing the rental of Hessian merceneries.

But yes, the underlying intentions of the central bank is every kind of capitalism it can come up with, which perhaps gives a little chin music to "minor participants" while generally walking all over them with the same cartels which keep getting favoritism and bailouts.

Jews were involved, but, they were in conditions imposed on them by Christian laws. A Christian could not charge usury, but a Jew could. They were only allowed to work in finance, goldsmithing, and a few other professions such as butchery. The Lombard League or Venice itself was the international networking power of the time.

Racism is perhaps not a strong enough epithet; genocidal towards everyone is the effect provided.