Hei pahvi, mulle jäi vähän epäselväksi vielä se että mitä yritit kiistää paskalinkkeinesi? FED:in omistuspohjaa, rahanpaino-oikeutta vai jutku-kontrollia?
Ah, lisää näitä Dunning-Kruger -potilaita. Paskalinkkejä ne ovat luonnollisesti siksi, että ne ovat ristiriidassa hieman koomisen, voisi jopa sanoa epäempiirisen maailmankuvasi kanssa. No, laitan nyt jotain rationalwikista ja wikipediasta, en jaksa kahlata alkuperäislinkkejä läpi kouluttaakseni sinua, tässä tiivistelmää:
1. FEDIn "omistus"-pohja:
...There is also the misconception that the Fed is completely independent or private. This is false as it is a quasi-public entity. The Fed, like most central banks in the world, is considered "independent," which is basically a term of art meaning that its
day-to-day operations are not overseen by the federal government; it's similar to how state broadcasters (say, the
BBC) are protected from becoming
propaganda outlets.
However, its chairman and board of governors are appointed by the president, it is subject to Congressional oversight,[13] and its mission of maintaining price levels and full employment is determined by Congress.[14] It is also subject to certain types of audits by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), and any profits the Fed earns go straight to the Treasury Department.
The extent to which banks "control" the Federal Reserve is that they technically "own" it, but not in the way that shareholders own Microsoft. Since the Federal Reserve was created by Congressional charter, they are not organized like a normal corporation. Shareholder banks have no voting power, and all decisions are made by aforementioned government-appointed policy wonks.
Shareholder banks elect 6 out of the 9 members of each regional Federal Reserve Bank's directors, but these regional directors have no power over monetary policy; that power lies solely in the hands of the central Board of Governors. In fact, compared to the Postal Service, the Fed seems like a marvel of reasonable bureaucratic design.
Harhaisessa maailmassasi tämä tosin on vain osoitus siitä, että "jutkut" omistaa kaikki pankit USAssa JA niillä on yhteinen agenda. En pidätä henkeäni että pystyt tätä mitekään osoittamaan.
2. Accusations of controlling the media
One well-known antisemitic cliché is that "the Jews control the media".
[68][69] Historically, it has been traced to discredited early 20th-century publications such as the
Protocols of the Elders of Zion (1903) and to
Henry Ford's
Dearborn Independent.
J. J. Goldberg, Editorial Director of the newspaper
The Forward, in 1997 published a study of this myth regarding the United States,
[70] concluding that, although Jews do hold many prominent positions in the U.S. media industry, they "do not make a high priority of Jewish concerns" and that Jewish Americans generally perceive the media as anti-Israel.
[71] Variants on this theme have focused on Hollywood, the press,
[72][73][74][75] and the music industry.
[76][77][78][79][80]
Lisätään vielä, että MUUN maailman massamedioista 99.9% ei luultavasti ole juutalaisomistuksessa, tai sitten maailmasta loppuu folio sinun hattuasi varten, jos alat lässyttää että esim. IRNA on "jutkujen" omistuksessa.
3. Accusations of controlling the world financial system
The
Anti Defamation League documented various antisemitic canards concerning Jews and banking,
[81] including the myth that world banking is dominated by the
Rothschild family,
[82] that Jews control
Wall Street,
[82] and that Jews control the United States
Federal Reserve.
[83] The ADL notes that the canard can be traced back to the prevalence of Jews in the money-lending profession in Europe during the Middle Ages, due to a prohibition against Christians in that profession. The
Protocols of the Elders of Zion repeated this canard.
In an article written by activist
Tim Wise about such accusations of Jewish financial control, he wrote:
Of course, in keeping with the logic of anti-Jewish bigots, perhaps one should ask the following: If media or financial wrongdoing is Jewish inspired, since Jews are prominent in media and finance, should the depredations of white Christian-dominated industries (like the tobacco or automobile industries) be viewed as examples of white Christian malfeasance? After all, 400,000 people per year die because of smoking-related illnesses, and tobacco companies withheld information on the cancerous properties of their products. Likewise, should executives at Ford and Firestone be thought of as specifically white Christian criminals, due to recent disclosures that defective tires were installed on SUV’s, resulting in the deaths of over 150 people worldwide? Is their race, religion or ethnic culture relevant to their misdeeds? If not, why is it suddenly relevant when the executives in question are Jewish?"[84]
Ja vielä:
The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion is a faked booklet written by Mathieu Golovinski, a French-Russian
Okhrana operative. It purports to detail the agenda for a
Jewish conspiracy to take over the world, including how to control the media, the banks, and the government.
Suosittelen muuta lukemista juutalais"tietojesi" päivittämiseksi.
Ja se Euroopan keissi, että pelastettiinko ne suurpankit roska-assetteineen niillä eurokommunistien junailemilla tukipaketeilla, vai miten se nyt meni?
Tähän en ottanut mitään kantaa, olet luultavasti oikeassa.
Löytyykö tähän jotain linkkiä, jossa esinahattomat puhuu paskaa ja nauraa matkalla pankkiin?
Ymmärrän toki että demaria harmittaa rikkaat, menestyvät, lahjakkaat ja älykkäät juutalaiset, mutta eikö toi "Jewsdidit" ole jo vähän 1930-lukua?
muaddib
