New World Order and Scientology

[Mystic]

I accuse

What's the real name for it and what is the secret handshake? Do I need a decoder ring too?

I've been accused of doing many stupid things, but voting for George Bush would be the worse.

The fact that you think my views somehow equate with the fact that I must have voted for Bush is really ridiculous.

The Anabaptist Jacques

I accuse you of not voting for Georgie Bushit.

Smile, we're on KosmiK Kamera.

 

[Mystic]

Ugly

I've run across information on this in several different ways. Regardless, it's FUCKING UGLY. Not that I believe or disbelieve this, but that this information is passing around our culture.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNPn2JLz7Jc&feature=related

 

[Dulloldfart]

Anyway I have been observing LRH's connection with Freemasonry for years now. In LA his birthday event is always held at the Shrine, which is a branch off of Freemasonry.

Events are held at the Shrine because it is a very useful venue, with the large seating accommodation, the Exposition Hall right next door and easy access to the Stage area etc. I've been on post at events in LA for ten years in other places and none of them are anywhere near as useful as the Shrine with that Expo Hall.

Paul

 

[michaelangelo]

I've read that Hubbards symblolism used by the C of S is similar to that of occult fremasonry.

 

[angel]

Aleister Crowley also used the Shrine for his events

Paul,

I agree the Shrine is the perfect venue with the Expo Hall. That is a good point, I can't think of another with the same set up. I remember reading about Crowley having his seminar's at the Shrine. This would have been around the same time period when LRH belonged to his cult. That's what got me paying more attention. I dont think its a coincidence. It's the perfect venue, but I have a feeling the Church has never had to pay much for using it. I think LRH had a free pass. The only other locations that I had been to was the auditorium in Pasadena that has a new name now, and the Paladium when LRH dropped his body.

Off topic I just had a flashback of being ordered to work at the Shrine for LRH's birthday as a greeter. It was tag your it, the ED picked you, get there early. They gave me a sash to wear, like Miss America. The greeters were all young ladies. It made me angry and I was embarrased being reduced to a body. Degrading.

Michaelangelo, good point. I do not know which symbols in Scientology are the same or similar to those in Freemasonry, but LRH appears to have brought forward the tradition. I have heard that LRH used the triangle/pyramid and the S/snake to communicate and indentify who we were or where we stand to anyone who may invade from outside our planet. I don't know if this was written, I'm assuming.

It's because of Scientology that I became so aware of the use of symbolism that I no longer felt comfortable pledging allegiance to the flag, of freemasonry because I do not know what the symbols on the flag mean. The stars, are they five pointed? blue background, red and white stripes. I have seen earlier flags in Scotland and England that had bits and pieces of our flag. I wondered if they are bits and pieces and colors of crests, because I have also seen shields with sections similar to our flag.
Jen

 

[michaelangelo]

Paul,

I agree the Shrine is the perfect venue with the Expo Hall. That is a good point, I can't think of another with the same set up. I remember reading about Crowley having his seminar's at the Shrine. This would have been around the same time period when LRH belonged to his cult. That's what got me paying more attention. I dont think its a coincidence. It's the perfect venue, but I have a feeling the Church has never had to pay much for using it. I think LRH had a free pass. The only other locations that I had been to was the auditorium in Pasadena that has a new name now, and the Paladium when LRH dropped his body.

Off topic I just had a flashback of being ordered to work at the Shrine for LRH's birthday as a greeter. It was tag your it, the ED picked you, get there early. They gave me a sash to wear, like Miss America. The greeters were all young ladies. It made me angry and I was embarrased being reduced to a body. Degrading.

Michaelangelo, good point. I do not know which symbols in Scientology are the same or similar to those in Freemasonry, but LRH appears to have brought forward the tradition. I have heard that LRH used the triangle/pyramid and the S/snake to communicate and indentify who we were or where we stand to anyone who may invade from outside our planet. I don't know if this was written, I'm assuming.

It's because of Scientology that I became so aware of the use of symbolism that I no longer felt comfortable pledging allegiance to the flag, of freemasonry because I do not know what the symbols on the flag mean. The stars, are they five pointed? blue background, red and white stripes. I have seen earlier flags in Scotland and England that had bits and pieces of our flag. I wondered if they are bits and pieces and colors of crests, because I have also seen shields with sections similar to our flag.
Jen

I don't agree with everything Michael Tsarion says but he mentions Scio symbols on a video on you tube, called Michael Tsarion-Symbolism part 4 of 11. After about 2.5 minutes and again after 4 minutes.

Apparently the Scientology cross. The "double cross" is the same as Crowley and also the Rosicrucians used.

 

[Royal Prince Xenu]

As someone who has known of the NWO for many years, I assure you that a "State Religion" is not part of the agenda. The only "religion" that will exist is the status quo of "science".

The World Health Organization just spent $millions studying the causes of obesity in the industrialized world. Answer: Over-eating! (Seriously).

The IRS is not a U.S. government organization, nor is the Federal Reserve. The whole thing is a fake.

Oh, my Ford! I've just let the cat out of the bag.

 

[michaelangelo]

I don't agree with everything Michael Tsarion says but he mentions Scio symbols on a video on you tube, called Michael Tsarion-Symbolism part 4 of 11. After about 2.5 minutes and again after 4 minutes.

Apparently the Scientology cross. The "double cross" is the same as Crowley and also the Rosicrucians used.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Enr0HOBUMw

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

As someone who has known of the NWO for many years, I assure you that a "State Religion" is not part of the agenda. The only "religion" that will exist is the status quo of "science".

The World Health Organization just spent $millions studying the causes of obesity in the industrialized world. Answer: Over-eating! (Seriously).

The IRS is not a U.S. government organization, nor is the Federal Reserve. The whole thing is a fake.

Oh, my Ford! I've just let the cat out of the bag.

The IRS is part of the Federal Government and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System is an independent agency under the U.S. Government. Yahoos and conspiracy theorists have made these ridiculous claim that they are not part of the government for years. It is really just a tantrum on their part. They say it over and over again thinking that makes it true, and shout down anyone who points out the obvious to them. Not unlike a cult I know of, which is why I consider the conspiracy theorists who believe in the new world order a cult.

The Anabaptist Jacques

 

[Mystic]

Ah...er....

Ah...er...Ana honey, delve a bit deeper into the FedRes.

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

Ah...er...Ana honey, delve a bit deeper into the FedRes.

I have. Very, very deeply. Just because Hubbard and Ezra Pound and Father Coughlin say it is private does not change any of the actual facts.
It was formed by an act of Congress.
The Board of Governors and all the chairmen of the regional banks are appointed by the President and approved by the Senate.

The capital base is 10% of the capital from each of the member banks of which they receive an annual 6% fixed return.

The member banks have no voting rights and none of the member banks can be owned by foreign nationals. The rest you hear about the Rothschilds owning it is pure bullshit.

After the 6% interest on the capital, and after operating costs are paid, the entire profits at year end go back to the United States Treasury.

The FED conspiracy stuff is a complete and utter red herring proposed by people who do not understand how things operate.

I learned all this by going to the Library of Congress, the Treasury Department, and the Federal Reserve itself and spent weeks verifying and checking facts and balance sheets and laws and the Congressional Record from 1913.

I didn't just look for things on the internet that agreed with my opinion like the Yahoos and conspriracy theorists do. I purposely looked for all the things I disagreed with.

I used to believe in the None Dare Call It Conspiracy bulllshit until I actually check with primary sources and not just what other people wrote about conspiracies.

The Anabaptist Jacques

 

[programmer_guy]

The member banks have no voting rights and none of the member banks can be owned by foreign nationals.

Then the ownership (or any possible change) must be published regularly? Are you kidding?
Where can I get the most current info (URL) on this?

The FedRes is not a publically traded corporation (stocks) so how would the general public find out who owns it?

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

Then the ownership (or any possible change) must be published regularly? Are you kidding?
Where can I get the most current info (URL) on this?

The FedRes is not a publically traded corporation (stocks) so how would the general public find out who owns it?

Because nobody owns it like nobody owns the IRS. It is not a private corporation. It is a government agency. The profits, after expenses, go back to the U.S. Treasury. Just look for crying out loud. Look at the actual thing. Don't go by what someone said, that someone said, that someone quoted out of context.
You can probably get a Federal Reserve Bulletin at your local library. You can get a U.S. Treasury report at your local library. You can probaly get a list of the member banks from the FED. Anything you want to know you can check. I use libraries, I don't use the internet.

The Anabaptist Jacqaues

 

[RogerB]

Let's Be Exact here . . .

Because nobody owns it like nobody owns the IRS. It is not a private corporation. It is a government agency. The profits, after expenses, go back to the U.S. Treasury. Just look for crying out loud. Look at the actual thing. Don't go by what someone said, that someone said, that someone quoted out of context.
You can probably get a Federal Reserve Bulletin at your local library. You can get a U.S. Treasury report at your local library. You can probaly get a list of the member banks from the FED. Anything you want to know you can check. I use libraries, I don't use the internet.

The Anabaptist Jacqaues

One needs to make a distinction between "The Fed" and the network of Federal Reserve Banks. I have been to the NY Fed Reserve Bank and gone through its library and spoken at length with the info officer . . . and I also have its own docs in my office here stating categorically that each of the Fed. Reserve Banks (not the Board in DC) are in fact private companies set up under the original law passed under Pres. Wilson. Each of the regional Fed. Reserve Banks is a private company owned by its member banks. These banks are separate organizations to "the Fed" in DC.

All the other stuff TAJ is saying is what the apologists say in order to make "the Fed" system seem as though it is a government agency.

I've read William Greider's book that TAJ cites . . . I threw it out a year or so ago to make reoom for better stuff

I don't have time to pull out all the details, and argue over the dotting of "i's" but what is put out in most of the newspapers and "acceptable" books is what makes the Fed system seem acceptable to the mug public.

TAJ asserts, for example that the meeting on Jekell Island were "not secret" as there were newspaper men who accompanied the party down there . . . well the meetings were not secret, but they were conducted in secret, and what was made public was the acceptable public consumption info. Etc.

TAJ refers to the appointing of members of the Board of Governors in DC . . . . well they are all picked and recommended by the regional Res. Bank boards who are in turn selected by their owning member commercial banks . . . .Oh yes, there are some putative nominees for the "public" but guesse who nominates them? The owning banks

In my view, what TAJ is pushing on this and his related thread where he started calling folks morons etc., makes him look as though he is an apologist for the bad guys and is trying to put down exposure of truth with sleight of hand.

The fact is, the Fed System has given the commercial member banks the privilege of a monopoly on creating money out of thin air to the detriment of the rest of society. That is the big secret that the founding of the Fed System was about.

I explain the mechanism in depth in my post on the board here:
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=9875

RogerB

 

[Mystic]

The FedRes is a corporation in which Rothschild OWNS 57% interest.

Not only that, this PROVES beyond all doubt that the NWO exists.

http://www.fknnewz.com/view/273/i-am-the-nwo/

 

[programmer_guy]

From: FEDERAL RESERVE BANK of NEW YORK - website
http://www.newyorkfed.org/aboutthefed/fedpoint/fed35.html

Operations at each Federal Reserve Bank also are subject to review by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the audit arm of the U.S. Congress. However, GAO auditors are restricted by law from reviewing monetary policy operations and transactions carried out by the Federal Reserve on behalf of foreign central banks. This restriction was imposed by Congress to assure the independence of the Federal Reserve from political influence.

Now, this is "interesting" info - to say the least.

 

[programmer_guy]

Who Owns the Fed?

http://libertyunbound.com/archive/2004_10/woolsey-fed.html

This is a bit complicated but this person's analysis seems to boil down to this:

The chief problem with the theory that the private owners are making huge profits from the Fed is that the Fed transfers large amounts of money back to the U.S. Treasury each year. In 2003, the amount transferred was $22 billion. Since that is exactly how much interest the Fed earned from U.S. securities, the net cost of the Federal Reserve to the U.S. taxpayers was zero.

The rough equivalence between the interest the Fed earns from the government and the amount it transfers to the U.S. Treasury causes most economists to see these financing issues as a shell game. Since nearly all the interest paid on debt sold to the Fed is transferred back to the U.S. Treasury, there isn't really any interest paid. The government uses the Fed to partly finance its deficit by creating money and spending it. The end result is no different than if the U.S. Treasury just printed up "greenbacks" and spent them. The process is just a bit more "efficient" than the ancient practice of melting down silver coins and mixing in lead. Most economists would argue that the Fed created $36 billion for the government in 2003. That is the change in the monetary base (currency and reserves) less the expenses of operating the Federal Reserve system.

According to this person this is just a tricky "shell game" where the U.S. federal gov't deficit spending is the real issue... not any foreign ownership.

Comments?


P.S. Now I'll hafta look up the original Federal Reserve Act and how it may have been changed in later years.

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

One needs to make a distinction between "The Fed" and the network of Federal Reserve Banks. I have been to the NY Fed Reserve Bank and gone through its library and spoken at length with the info officer . . . and I also have its own docs in my office here stating categorically that each of the Fed. Reserve Banks (not the Board in DC) are in fact private companies set up under the original law passed under Pres. Wilson. Each of the regional Fed. Reserve Banks is a private company owned by its member banks. These banks are separate organizations to "the Fed" in DC.

All the other stuff TAJ is saying is what the apologists say in order to make "the Fed" system seem as though it is a government agency.

I've read William Greider's book that TAJ cites . . . I threw it out a year or so ago to make reoom for better stuff

I don't have time to pull out all the details, and argue over the dotting of "i's" but what is put out in most of the newspapers and "acceptable" books is what makes the Fed system seem acceptable to the mug public.

TAJ asserts, for example that the meeting on Jekell Island were "not secret" as there were newspaper men who accompanied the party down there . . . well the meetings were not secret, but they were conducted in secret, and what was made public was the acceptable public consumption info. Etc.

TAJ refers to the appointing of members of the Board of Governors in DC . . . . well they are all picked and recommended by the regional Res. Bank boards who are in turn selected by their owning member commercial banks . . . .Oh yes, there are some putative nominees for the "public" but guesse who nominates them? The owning banks

In my view, what TAJ is pushing on this and his related thread where he started calling folks morons etc., makes him look as though he is an apologist for the bad guys and is trying to put down exposure of truth with sleight of hand.

The fact is, the Fed System has given the commercial member banks the privilege of a monopoly on creating money out of thin air to the detriment of the rest of society. That is the big secret that the founding of the Fed System was about.

I explain the mechanism in depth in my post on the board here:
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=9875

RogerB

Your whole argument, like conspiracy theorists, depends on distorting and omitting historical facts, including my own, but especially in American history.

First of all, I called one person a moron-once. I did not "started calling folks morons etc." as you said. But this is typical of the distortion and embellishment of facts that you have written here.

It is irrelevent that the meeting at Jekyll Island was secret or not. Certainly, like you said, the meetings were conducted in secrecy. But that is irrelevent.

What came out of the meeting was the basis of the Aldrich Bill, which was defeated by the Congress. Why do you mislead people on that fact by implying what they planned at the meeting became the FED?

The Bill that was adopted three years later called for government control of the FED and that's what we got. Why do you mislead people on that fact?

You claim that "The fact is, the Fed System has given the commercial member banks the privilege of a monopoly on creating money out of thin air to the detriment of the rest of society." Commercial member banks do not have the privilege of creating money out of thin air. Why do you mislead people on that fact?

The Fed was put in place because prior to 1913 commercial banks could create money out of thin air, and most of them did. Why do you mislead people on that fact?

There were times between 1860 and 1913 there were as many as 12,000 private currencies in circulation in America of which 5,000 were estimated to be counterfeit. Why do you mislead people on that fact?

I know you read this because you said you read one of the books it is documented in and then threw out the book. Why do you mislead people on these facts?

All the profits from all the Federal Reserve Banks go back into the United States Treasury. Why do you mislead people on this fact?

The whole argument that the Federal Reserve is a conspiracy to run the economy by private bankers is entirely depended upon distorting and obfuscating American history.

The Anabaptist Jacques

 

[programmer_guy]

The Fed does create money "out of thin air".
That is what fractional reserve banking is.

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

The Fed does create money "out of thin air".
That is what fractional reserve banking is.

The Fed is not a commercial bank. And all American banks prior to the Fed had fractional banking. The difference with the creation of the Fed is that now they have to leave a fraction on reserve.

Prior to the Fed, banks printed their own money and most banks had a life expectancy of three years. So people routinely were left holding the bag.

The reason the banks went under so often is that they printed their own currencies with no reserve. The U.S. Treasury took over the currency and all the Fed did was to require the banks keep some reserves.

The Anabaptist Jacques