Someone tell Alex Jones!So, the NWO has been confirmed to exist by leading British newspaper. The nutters were right all along!
Monday, 4 July 2011
Leader of NWO exposed
Someone tell Alex Jones!So, the NWO has been confirmed to exist by leading British newspaper. The nutters were right all along!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
20 comments:
LOVE that you are ignoring my posts under the Ron Paul story. LOVE that youre IGNORING posting the words of G. Edward Griffin and attempting to debunk them. Just admit you can't. That would be best.
Why don't you post the videos of Gordon Brown mentioning the NWO at the G8 Summit a few years ago and George H.W. Bush mentioning it? Ahhh yes, because you can't ridicule it if people are actually mentioning it for REAL. Right?
RTO the phrase "New World Order" is actually so old and meaningless now that if the global power structure actually did deviate away from what you think the phrase means you'd be the first to rise up in arms to defend the NWO in a fit of rightous corporate conservative indignation.
This headline should go down alongside Brown and Bush's mentioning of the NWO....
It's all the proof anyone needs, isn't it?
As far as Griffin goes, he's already been shown to be either dishonest, or incompetent.
The response by Griffin to Flaherty and Rough's criticism - which you quote, Larry - is quite funny. His supposed rebuttal only adds to the scale of his defeat.
But before we get to that, what do YOU quote Griffin as saying?
On the FED being under government control:
"Griffin: ...Flaherty is correct as far as he goes."
On whether the FED returns surplus to Government Treasury:
"Griffin: It is true that most of the money paid by the government for interest on the national debt is returned to the government. That is because the Fed’s charter requires any interest payments in excess of the Fed’s actual operating expenses to be refunded."
---
EXCATEMENT!!
You call that Griffin debunking Flaherty? lol.
And notice, Griffin concedes what you will not - that the surplus is returned to the Treasury.
Here's the funniest part:
Griffin: "Technically, there is no "profit" on this money. However, remember that creating money for the government is only one of the functions of the Fed. The real bonanza comes, not from money created out of nothing for the government, but from money created out of nothing by the commercial banks for loans to the private sector. That’s where the real action is. This is the famous slight-of-hand trick. Distract attention with one hand while the coin is retrieved by the other. By focusing on the supposed generosity of the Fed by returning unused interest to the Treasury, we are supposed to overlook the much larger river of gold flowing into the member banks in the form of interest on nothing as a result of consumer and commercial loans."
----------
Bwahahaha. That's a criticism of usury....a criticism of lending money at interest......a criticism of banking....
Sweet FA to do with the FED, beyond it being a bank.
Griffin wants to outlaw usury? He wants to outlaw interest? Well, fine - but don't pretend it's anything more. Don't pretend it's a critique of the particulars of the FED, or of central banking generally. It's just a VERY SIMPLE and VERY OBVIOUS complaint about interest. Nothing more.
The dude seems to have made a living out of such simple tripe served up as something profound and important.
There you go AGAIN, in your old tiresome tactic of cherry-picking tiny tiny parts of a gigantic text in order to advance YOUR agenda!
Griffin DID say Flaherty was right on CERTAIN things [I even posted Griffin's agreements with Flaherty in my March story], but for the most part he said Flaherty was flat out LYING and telling half-truths. You ONLY post the 1% of the VERY FEW times Griffin agrees with Flaherty. But in all your blatant dishonesty, you ONLY post those specific words as to make it appear as if Griffin agrees with EVERYTHING Flaherty says. BRILLIANT!
The FACT that you KNOW that Griffin debunks Flaherty and calls him a liar the reamining 99% of time is the SOLE reason why you do NOT post ANY OTHER words by Griffin OTHER than him saying Flaherty is right on the VERY FEW things he says Flaherty is right about. In fact, you're so AFRAID of Griffin's words and criticisms of Flaherty, it's what forces you to simply generalize and say:
"As far as Griffin goes, he's already been shown to be either dishonest, or incompetent."
Ahhh, yes---no need to actually copy and paste Griffin's words RIGHT? If he is SO dishonest, then do a story on him and post giant portions of his words and debunk them! Why are you afraid to do that??? You sure as hell are not afraid to do it to Rivero, right?? You post giant portions of HIS words and even screen shots from his site and you attempt to debunk him---CORRECT???
Why not do the same for Griffin????? Hmmmmmm??? Why do you feel the need to copy and paste Rivero's words on your blog and post screenshots of his words and attempt to debunk him point by point------BUT for Griffin it's enough that you just say "he's dishonest and incompetent"??? Post GIANT portions of Griffin's words and debunk him point by point you big fucking FRAUD---why are you AFRAID of that???
Hmmmmmmmm??????????
RTO:"...he said Flaherty was flat out LYING and telling half-truths."
Oh, he says that, even whilst admitting that Flaherty is dead-right about the points at issue.
Griffin can fantasise all he likes about Flaherty being wrong.....
The point is.....on the matters at issue, Griffin concedes Flaherty is right. More than you're prepared to do.
L/RTO: "You ONLY post the 1% of the VERY FEW times Griffin agrees with Flaherty."
I only care about the pertinent issues - and Griffin concedes Flaherty is right. The rest of Griffin's rubbish is just that, rubbish.
Griffin's general and common complaint about interest and fractional reserve lending is.....just another iteration of a regular enough criticism.
He doesn't stand-up what you think he claims.
RTO/L: "But in all your blatant dishonesty, you ONLY post those specific words as to make it appear as if Griffin agrees with EVERYTHING Flaherty says. BRILLIANT!"
Griffin does concede Flaherty is right about the issues at dispute. The rest is fluff.
"Oh, he says that, even whilst admitting that Flaherty is dead-right about the points at issue."
LOL, you kill me! He admits Flaherty is right about VERY FEW things! It's like me agreeing with Bill O'Reilly on VERY FEW things while 99% of the time I think he's bullshit, but you would interpret that as me agreeing with O'Reilly ALL THE TIME.
Ironic thing is, while Flaherty is trying to explain why the creation of the Fed is NOT a conspiracy, he admits it IS, saying the secret meeting DID take place. I guess you would agree with Flaherty that a secret meeting DID take place right??? Hence: conspiracy???
"I only care about the pertinent issues - and Griffin concedes Flaherty is right. The rest of Griffin's rubbish is just that, rubbish."
In other words, where Griffin agrees with Flaherty [which is VERY LITTLE] that's ALL that's important, but where he doesn't agree [which is ALOT] that's NOT important???
You really fucking kill me. This coming from the guy who just YESTERDAY said this about truthers:
"There is no tolerance whatsoever for anypoint of view that contradicts their dogma in any way."
In your statements about Griffin and Flaherty, you directly fall under your OWN definition of how you feel about truthers.
You have NO tolerance for where Griffin DISagrees with Flaherty, but have FULL tolerance of Griffin when he DOES agree with Flaherty!
What a shitfuck you are! I just destroyed you with your OWN words.
None of your post explains WHY you don't refute Griffin point by point like you with Rivero. You completely IGNORED that portion of my previous text. If Griffin is bullshit, then refute him POINT BY POINT using his OWN words by copying and pasting them into a story LIKE YOU DO WITH RIVERO.
Ohhh nooooo, you won't do that will you??? Are you AFRAID of Griffin's words??? If not, POST THEM THEN and REFUTE them!
What you m,iss is that ON ALL POINTS OF FACT, Griffin concedes Flaherty is right - and that YOU are wrong.
Griffin can have his opinion on things that are opinion, but not on FACTS.
You don't understand the difference. Your problem.
"What you m,iss is that ON ALL POINTS OF FACT, Griffin concedes Flaherty is right - and that YOU are wrong."
A bold faced LIE. Read my fucking March story asshole, or look at THIS link:
http://www.freedomforce
international.org/freedom
content.cfm?fuseaction=
meetflaherty
&refpage=issues
You will see that with MOST things Griffin says he is LYING outright or stating half-truths.
Ya fucktard.
That's exactly what I am taking my quotations from, Larry.
Griffin says:
---"Flaherty is correct
----"It is true [what Flaherty says]....."
---"Flaherty presents facts that in no way contradict what I said in my book..."
----I never wrote or implied... that "any independent inspection would reveal the Fed’s treachery."
---"Flaherty is basically correct, and I have never claimed in my book or in my lectures that it was otherwise."
------------------
SHOW US EXAMPLES OF WHAT EXACTLY GRIFFIN DEBUNKS ABOUT FLAHERTY'S CLAIMS?
OR SHUTUP??
Larry, you either agree with Griffin, and therefore Flaherty, or you disagree with Flaherty AND Griffin.
About
1) currency issued at interest
2) FED being government agency under government control
3) about the fallacy of Money Masters' claims of debt virus where debt exceeds ability to pay.
If you agree with Griffin on those points, then you also concur with Flaherty.
if not, then you don't agree with Griffin.
Which is it?
We already know that you claim currency is issued at interest.
We already know you don't believe the FED returns its surplus to the Treasury.
We already know you believe there isn't enough money to pay the debt by dint of the (fallacious) debt-virus argument.
So........are you going to admit you disagree with Griffin? Or are you going to pretend you never made such claims?
Until you provide a reasonable effort at addressing the prior questions, Larry - you are not posting here anymore. OK?
"Until you provide a reasonable effort at addressing the prior questions, Larry - you are not posting here anymore. OK?"
So, in OTHER words, you fall under your OWN category when you claimed this about ME:
"There is no tolerance whatsoever for anypoint of view that contradicts their dogma in any way. If you challenge it then they instantly go into bully mode...."
Hmmmmmm. isn't that what YOU'RE doing from your recent quote, at the very top of this post?
You can constantly IGNORE my questions but I MUST answer yours??? So, you have NO TOLERANCE WHATSOEVER FOR ANY POINT OF VIEW THAT CONTRADICTS YOUR DOGMA??? You are going into BULLY MODE by threatening to BAN me again! That's what BULLIES do: they threaten and ban people. So your definition of truthers actually describes YOU, not ME.
Here is how many times Griffin DISAGREES with Flaherty:
Here are snippets of Griffins words followed by what Griffin is addressing of Flaherty:
Flaherty: Nearly all the interest the Federal Reserve collects on government bonds is rebated to the Treasury each year, so the government does not pay any net interest to the Fed.
Griffin: Here is another half-truth that is a whopper deception
------------
Flaherty: The meeting did take place, but plans for a return to central banking were already widely known. Regardless, the proposal that came out of the Jekyll Island meeting never passed Congress
Griffin: Here again we have a half-truth that functions as a deception. Plans for a return to central banking, indeed, were already known, but they were unpopular with the voters and large blocks of Congress.
------------
Flaherty: The Federal Reserve consistently resists attempts to audit its books. This is because any independent inspection would reveal the Fed’s treachery.
Griffin: I never wrote or implied, as Flaherty says, that “any independent inspection would reveal the Fed’s treachery.” What I wrote is: (1) The Fed resists external audit; (2) If it were audited by an independent party, I suspect there would be nothing illegal found; (3) The problem is not that it steals from the American people illegally but that it does so legally; (4) Therefore, we do not need to audit the Fed, we need to abolish it.
--------------
What you fail to comprehend is that since Flaherty is attempting to debunk Griffin and not the other way around, then it's inaccurate to say that Griffin is agreeing with Flaherty......Flaherty is agreeing with Griffin! FLAHERTY is the would-be debunker---NOT Griffin, so Flaherty is agreeing with GRIFFIN.
It was Flaherty who set out to debunk Griffin's book. If Griffin says that Flaherty is correct on Flaherty's would-be criticisms, then it is FLAHERTY who is agreeing with Griffin since FLAHERTY is the one doing the critique of GRIFFIN! You don't see that??
Did you forget that **YOU** claimed Griffin 'debunked' Flaherty?
Now you're happy to agree that Griffin finds nothing to fault with what Flaherty says.....
------
So how come there's so much confusion about a dispute when they seem to agree on everything?
Clearly, either Griffin misrepresents himself, or others misrepresent him, or both.
But what is clear is that you WRONGLY believe Griffin supports your view.
You were earlier claiming that
1) currency is issued with interest
and that
2) it's impossible to pay off the debt (the debt-virus fallacy)
Whereas, in fact, Griffin does **NOT** believe it.
Interesting that so many people appear to believe, as you do, that Griffin does believe those things.
Amongst patriot and conspiro groups it's an ever present meme....and Griffin is invariably mentioned.
Yet clearly he doesn't actually believe it - at least not when called to account.
So.....assuming Griffin is being honest in his 'rebuttal', it begs the question how Griffin has been so badly misrepresented, doesn't it? By people such as yourself....
"Now you're happy to agree that Griffin finds nothing to fault with what Flaherty says....."
Geee, I guess you just IGNORED what I JUST posted?? They ARE the issues Griffin finds fault with Flaherty!!!! God you are a giant penis head!!! LOL.
I think you just like hearing yourself talk, because you just babble the SAME SHIT over and over.
Oh, I babble the same shit?
After you posted "Griffin debunks Flaherty" 300 times?
WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO ADDRESS THE SIMPLE QUESTION OF WHETHER YOU BELIEVE THE MONEY-VIRUS FALLACY?
WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO ADDRESS WHETHER YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH GRIFFIN'S ADMITTANCE THAT THE FED TURNS OVER ANY SURPLUS TO THE TREASURY?
;)
Here's Griffin:
"It must be realized that, while money may represent an asset to selected individuals, when it is considered as an aggregate of the total money supply, it is not an asset at all. A man who borrows $1,000 may think that he has increased his financial position by that amount but he has not. His $1,000 cash asset is offset by his $1,000 loan liability, and his net position is zero. Bank accounts are exactly the same on a larger scale. Add up all the bank accounts in the nation, and it would be easy to assume that all that money represents a gigantic pool of assets which support the economy. Yet, every bit of this money is owed by someone. Some will owe nothing. Others will owe many times what they possess. All added together, the national balance is zero."
---------------
The national balance is zero, he says.
But then he concludes
"What we think is money is but a grand illusion. The reality is debt."
--------
LOL. A net balance of zero is "debt"? No it isn't, it's ZERO. Obvs?
And he omits to mention non-cash assets - such as homes, factories, buildings, capital equipment, all things that exist as REAL ASSETS and which are FULLY PAID OFF. etc etc etc.
In addition we then have the definite potential of LABOUR - and unquestionable DEMAND for production.
That's what ultimately backs the currency, of course. Not gold.
"Oh, I babble the same shit?
After you posted "Griffin debunks Flaherty" 300 times?"
You were DELETING it, because it was packed with FACTS, but you eventually gave up because you know only 2 people look at your blog.
Ah...no answers then.
Big shock.
Post a Comment