Connect with us

Conspiracy Theories

The Truth Is Finally Out: Money Is Just An IOU & The Banks Are Rolling In It

The things “conspiracy theorists” have been saying for years are coming true one by one. The more recent mainstream topic is the revelation that money is just an IOU. This comes as the Bank of England published a paper called “Money Creation in the Modern Economy” which revealed how our financial system functions and what role money plays.

Another recent conspiracy theory that was revealed as true involved fluoride, which was classified officially as a neuro-toxin in the world’s longest running and most popular medical journal, The Lancet. This after so-called conspiracy theories had been saying it for decades. It’s important to mention 9/11 has been proven beyond any reasonable doubt that the official story is false. Mainstream ad campaigns have been popping up over cities in North America to raise awareness and hopefully force the US government to re-visit and admit what they’ve been hiding.

Now sure, not all of this financial system information was hidden completely from the public, but one had to go looking pretty hard to find out that banks are actually operating under behaviour that would be illegal for you and I or that the central banks who lend money to our governments are not actually government run, but instead are private institutions with more power than any government on earth. Yes, these things that were once only said by few and were once laughed at and ridiculed as be conspiracy theories are now becoming very public and mainstream knowledge. The question becomes, when will we the public, realize that we are being enslaved and lied to and choose to do something about this on a mass scale?

The Guardian, a fairly mainstream news and media site, was the first I saw posting about the fact that money is now being publicly called an IOU. This is another positive step forward as we see the awareness of people and the overall consciousness of our planet changing which results in a change in the way we see our world. Amazing times we are living in.

Written by: David Graeber
The Guardian

Back in the 1930s, Henry Ford is supposed to have remarked that it was a good thing that most Americans didn’t know how banking really works, because if they did, “there’d be a revolution before tomorrow morning”.

Last week, something remarkable happened. The Bank of England let the cat out of the bag. In a paper called “Money Creation in the Modern Economy“, co-authored by three economists from the Bank’s Monetary Analysis Directorate, they stated outright that most common assumptions of how banking works are simply wrong, and that the kind of populist, heterodox positions more ordinarily associated with groups such as Occupy Wall Street are correct. In doing so, they have effectively thrown the entire theoretical basis for austerity out of the window.

To get a sense of how radical the Bank’s new position is, consider the conventional view, which continues to be the basis of all respectable debate on public policy. People put their money in banks. Banks then lend that money out at interest – either to consumers, or to entrepreneurs willing to invest it in some profitable enterprise. True, the fractional reserve system does allow banks to lend out considerably more than they hold in reserve, and true, if savings don’t suffice, private banks can seek to borrow more from the central bank.

The central bank can print as much money as it wishes. But it is also careful not to print too much. In fact, we are often told this is why independent central banks exist in the first place. If governments could print money themselves, they would surely put out too much of it, and the resulting inflation would throw the economy into chaos. Institutions such as the Bank of England or US Federal Reserve were created to carefully regulate the money supply to prevent inflation. This is why they are forbidden to directly fund the government, say, by buying treasury bonds, but instead fund private economic activity that the government merely taxes.

It’s this understanding that allows us to continue to talk about money as if it were a limited resource like bauxite or petroleum, to say “there’s just not enough money” to fund social programmes, to speak of the immorality of government debt or of public spending “crowding out” the private sector. What the Bank of England admitted this week is that none of this is really true. To quote from its own initial summary: “Rather than banks receiving deposits when households save and then lending them out, bank lending creates deposits” … “In normal times, the central bank does not fix the amount of money in circulation, nor is central bank money ‘multiplied up’ into more loans and deposits.”

In other words, everything we know is not just wrong – it’s backwards. When banks make loans, they create money. This is because money is really just an IOU. The role of the central bank is to preside over a legal order that effectively grants banks the exclusive right to create IOUs of a certain kind, ones that the government will recognise as legal tender by its willingness to accept them in payment of taxes. There’s really no limit on how much banks could create, provided they can find someone willing to borrow it. They will never get caught short, for the simple reason that borrowers do not, generally speaking, take the cash and put it under their mattresses; ultimately, any money a bank loans out will just end up back in some bank again. So for the banking system as a whole, every loan just becomes another deposit. What’s more, insofar as banks do need to acquire funds from the central bank, they can borrow as much as they like; all the latter really does is set the rate of interest, the cost of money, not its quantity. Since the beginning of the recession, the US and British central banks have reduced that cost to almost nothing. In fact, with “quantitative easing” they’ve been effectively pumping as much money as they can into the banks, without producing any inflationary effects.

What this means is that the real limit on the amount of money in circulation is not how much the central bank is willing to lend, but how much government, firms, and ordinary citizens, are willing to borrow. Government spending is the main driver in all this (and the paper does admit, if you read it carefully, that the central bank does fund the government after all). So there’s no question of public spending “crowding out” private investment. It’s exactly the opposite.

Why did the Bank of England suddenly admit all this? Well, one reason is because it’s obviously true. The Bank’s job is to actually run the system, and of late, the system has not been running especially well. It’s possible that it decided that maintaining the fantasy-land version of economics that has proved so convenient to the rich is simply a luxury it can no longer afford.

But politically, this is taking an enormous risk. Just consider what might happen if mortgage holders realised the money the bank lent them is not, really, the life savings of some thrifty pensioner, but something the bank just whisked into existence through its possession of a magic wand which we, the public, handed over to it.

Historically, the Bank of England has tended to be a bellwether, staking out seeming radical positions that ultimately become new orthodoxies. If that’s what’s happening here, we might soon be in a position to learn if Henry Ford was right.

Source:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/18/truth-money-iou-bank-of-england-austerity

Comments

Conspiracy Theories

Exploring a strange satellite: Iron arguments of Soviet scientists about the purpose of the moon

At the end of last year, in Indianapolis, astronomers filmed the moon and were surprised to find that an object of unknown origin hovered near the Earth’s satellite. There is no explanation for this phenomenon, from the point of view of official science, like many others, in the long series of lunar phenomena that astronomers observe. 

Recently, Dr. Robert Jastrow, the first president of the NASA commission, even called the moon the Rosetta stone of the planet, meaning that it is on the moon or inside the moon that the answer to the mystery of the origin of life on earth is possible.

Iron arguments of Soviet scientists about the purpose of the moon

“As soon as people got the first telescopes, back in the 18th century, already at that time on the Moon, some kind of activity was constantly observed, and it is clear that it was inhuman, which flies by against the background of the moon. “

Vladimir Kukolnikov (researcher)
Space, Moon
Space, Moon

A lot of unexplained phenomena associated with the Moon have accumulated in recent years. Recently, against the background of the Moon, incomprehensible lights were again seen, this time they were green. Astronomers all over the world are lost in conjecture, they are trying to analyze incomprehensible flares and catch some system, but they have not found a rational explanation. 

One thing is clear, on the celestial body closest to the Earth, there is a certain technical device for generating intense light. Where it is located is difficult to say. These can be both stationary beacons and those installed on mobile machines or aircraft. The fact is that scientists constantly record moving lights. What all this means is not yet clear. Ufologists consider this to be direct evidence of the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence there. 

Periodic flares and flickering lights on the moon it is impossible not to notice anymore. The fact is there, but no one can explain it. The main version is that these lights are of technogenic origin. However, some researchers put forward hypotheses fighting to fall. They believe that it could be the natural, phosphorescent light of the lunar fauna, a kind of giant moon fireflies.

Flashes of light on the moon
Flashes of light on the moon

“Apart from that, there is information, of course unverified and unreliable about the selenites, that is, the inhabitants of the moon. It states that they, in the form of some kind of crustacean, crawled out of their shelters.”

Pavel Sitnikov (researcher)
Luminous Lunar Plankton))
Luminous Lunar Plankton

Professor Hakan Kajal, of the Julius Maximilian University in Würzburg, decided to try to sort out this problem. To collect information, he used a private observatory in Spain. Two telescopes with an automatic flash fixation system will be used. 

In addition, this system is connected to an artificial intelligence system that will analyze all the unusual phenomena on the moon. And maybe, as the researchers believe, they will be able to grasp elements of logic in them, or even read a certain message that the inhabitants of the Moon are likely sending to recipients unknown to us.

Iron arguments of Soviet scientists about the purpose of the moon

An anomalously accurately selected stationary circular orbit, its height, course, speed, all this could not have developed in the course of random circumstances. She’s too perfect, and mathematically accurate. Besides, the Moon is extremely unlike all other satellites. In addition, some scientists believe that the moon is much older than Earth. 

Meanwhile, take a look at the photo below, from the University of Arizona’s space research site. An official scientific source publishes a photo of an apparently artificial structure on the moon. Call it a crater, it just does make sense. 

This is an absolutely regular hexagon, similar in appearance to the building of the Lunar Base. Everything is clearly planned, the outer walls, the central elevation, and the ring system of unknown purpose. Researchers are confident that this is an exit or entrance into the moon.

Unidentified Lunar Object

“The fact is that the meeting with representatives of other worlds took place long ago. If there were no meetings with representatives of alien worlds, we would not have been in the form in which we are, do you understand ?! The moon would not have been in orbit, as it is today, all the time one side is turned to the Earth. This is done on purpose. On the other side, there are bases, and not only on the other side. “

Anton Anfalov (candidate of economic sciences, researcher)

Artificial objects are clearly visible in this photograph, taken by the Soviet automatic station Luna-13. The remains of some kind of machine, or mining mechanism. Moreover, there are two of them in one picture. 

On the left side of the frame, these are paired discs, similar to rollers from a lunar rover, and on the right, these are the same discs mounted on one axis. Both objects cast shadows, and appear as alien, man-made objects on the lifeless surface of the Earth’s satellite. 

Did they accidentally hit the shot, or were Soviet scientists looking for something purposefully? Recently, more and more scientists are inclined to the hypothesis that the Moon is an artificial satellite or even a ship in the form of a planetoid, which was specially placed at a specific point in space.

Iron arguments of Soviet scientists about the purpose of the moon

“It was put into Earth’s orbit on purpose, with one side on purpose, all cycles were synchronized, and it is used as a base for observations. It is not completely hollow, there are separate voids, cavities, very large cavities that are used.”

Anton Anfalov (candidate of economic sciences, researcher)
Iron arguments of Soviet scientists about the purpose of the moon

Few people know that this theory, back in the sixties, was put forward by Soviet scientists Mikhail Vasin and Alexander Shcherbakov from the USSR Academy of Sciences. 

This means only one thing, if these academics risked their reputation so much for the sake of scientific truth, then they had iron arguments.

Continue Reading

Conspiracy Theories

TR-3B’s are absolutely real but who ‘owns’ them?

In early October, on many UFO channels, two very unusual UFO videos were discussed. Their unusualness is that, in contrast to many similar clips, their reliability is beyond doubt and the “discs” can be seen very well there – you can even see some details. 

The first video was filmed from the International Space Station. For readers who, due to the remoteness from the city, have too expensive traffic, we present an enlarged program image of the “plate”

Well, this is the video itself:

A lot of incomprehensible video material comes from the ISS, but most often there are either just luminous objects in the frame, or some vague shadows, which skeptics later call pieces of foil, but here it is definitely not foil, and in general terms you can understand how these “saucer plates” look. 

The second very unusual video was filmed the day before over the state of New York:

Direct link to the original mufon.

This is not a computer graphics, nor a secret drone. This is a TR-3B, which, as we can see, exists and can be viewed in detail. In the center there is some kind of basic, apparently, an engine, three engines (nozzles?) in the corners and they obviously work on some other principle – their color is different.

What are the three small lights along one of the edges of the triangle is not clear. Either it is some kind of device for taxiing the apparatus, or signal lights. And this thing bears little resemblance to some kind of “extraterrestrial device”, which causes more and more concern among people. Why? 

If the Pentagon has had such aircrafts for a long time (triangles have been observed in the sky for at least 30 years), then why all this circus with F-35 and other airplanes? To keep people busy in their production and rip off money from buyers? Or are the squadrons with these strange vehicles not under the control of the Pentagon? But who do they obey then? 

Conspiracy theorists are now offering two main explanations for the situation – good and bad.

A good explanation suggests that Trump and his Space Forces are behind these secret ‘ashtrays’. That is, either these TR-3Bs report directly to him, or Trump was promoted to the White House by the people who are behind the development of these devices. And now, visually flying over some cities of the United States, some secret military from Area-51 made it clear to the Deep State who is in charge in America and in the world in general:

 The second possible explanation for the flashes of TR-3B is already very pessimistic and suggests that the military behind these technologies is precisely the same Deep State. In this case, the collapse of America is a foregone conclusion and no Trump can do anything there. 

In any outcome of the elections, first unrest will begin in America, then China, the UN and other “peacekeepers” will climb there to restore order, during which the Chinese MiG-21s will bring down F-35 packs, since an invisible UFO will fly in front of them and do all the work … And the whole world will be surprised by the “great Chinese power”. 

Then China will begin to establish its own order, spreading hegemony throughout the world. Someone will fall under it voluntarily, but someone will not agree with such a new order and a hefty war will begin that will cover the entire planet. The last battle will obviously be somewhere in the Syrian desert, where the Chinese, according to prophecies, will bring 200 million people. And at that moment, TR-3B will appear from the clouds and burn all the army – both from one side and the other.

Further landing ramps will fall, some cyborgs or genomutants will be dumped from the miracle-ships in formation and will report that so they say and so – from now on we will all live without wars, according to new rules, in a new global and friendly world. This will be followed by a general command to chip. 

We do not know which of the options is correct. We hope for the first, but the second is also not excluded. Everything will become more or less clear only after the US elections…   

Continue Reading

Conspiracy Theories

Chatham House – The Open Conspiracy Organization Emerged 100 Years Ago

HG Wells  in “The Open Conspiracy. Blue Prints for a World Revolution”(1928) wrote that in the twentieth century the world entered a dangerous phase of development, which could end in catastrophe and even destruction of mankind. The only way to prevent a catastrophe, Wells instructed, is the elimination of sovereign states and the creation of a One World Government, headed by a small group of people – representatives of the intellectual elite and big business.

The Open Conspiracy: Blue Prints for a World Revolution

The idea of ​​world domination has been nurtured for centuries by various secret societies (Templars, Freemasons, Illuminati). However, their plans and activities were hidden from the eyes of the authorities and the people. In the twentieth century, there was an argument to open these plans. And it was necessary to hurry, because scientific and technological progress was accelerating, remaining uncontrollable. The arms race continued and accelerated in exactly the same way.

At the 1919 Paris Peace Conference, these issues were discussed openly. It was decided to create the League of Nations, through which the British and Americans expected to begin building a new world order. True, there were disagreements between the ruling circles of the United States and Great Britain. London believed that the ideal basis for a united world was the British Empire, over which“the sun never sets.” In Washington, it was believed that America became the No. 1 power after the First World War and that it was she who should lead the movement towards a new world order.

Colonel House
Colonel House

However, both in the USA and Great Britain there were politicians who considered these imperial ambitions to be “prejudices of nationalism”, considering themselves a single elite of the highest Anglo-Saxon race. Such was Edward Mandel House  (1858-1938) – diplomat, adviser to President  Woodrow Wilson  (Colonel House). Lord Alfred Milner  (1854-1925), one of the key figures in the cabinet of David Lloyd George, was also a consistent supporter of Anglo-Saxon mondialism.

Lord Alfred Milner
Lord Alfred Milner

Colonel House was very upset when, while at a conference in Paris, he learned that Washington had rejected US participation in the League of Nations, the provisions of which were laid down in the Versailles Peace Treaty. He very much hoped that the League of Nations would become an instrument for the creation of a United State. After that, in the same place, in Paris, Colonel House met with British partners. They agreed that two organizations would be created in the United States and Great Britain, closely interacting and implementing the Anglo-Saxon project of building a new world order.

The first of these organizations was established a hundred years ago, in the summer of 1920. It was the  British Institute of International Affairs (BIIA) , renamed toThe Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA)  in 1926  and still exists under that name. The Institute is also known as Chatham House, which is the name of the building in which it is located (next to Westminster Palace in central London). In 1961, the  RIIA  changed location, but the Chatham House name remained.

The preparatory work for the establishment of the  RIIA  was carried out by  Lionel Curtis , Lord Milner’s secretary. The status of the institute is a non-governmental non-profit organization that exists at the expense of voluntary donations. The first donation of £ 2,000 was made by Thomas Lamont  of J.P. Morgan Bank. John D. Rockefeller  has contributed  £ 8,000 annually to the RIIA since 1932. Later, the  RIIA  began to regularly receive large regular donations from American charitable foundations (the Rockefeller, Carnegie, and others).

The first head of the institute was  Robert Cecil  (1864-1958) – British lawyer, parliamentary, public and statesman, active employee and ideologist of the League of Nations, winner of the 1937 Nobel Peace Prize (for services to the League of Nations). Lionel Curtis was promoted to RIIA Honorary Secretary. The leadership of the institute also included former Foreign Minister  Edward Gray , former Prime Minister  Arthur Balfour , Lord Lothian, renowned English economist  John Maynard KeynesAlfred Zimmerman  (Oxford professor, author of The League of Nations and the Rule of Law). Zimmermann had a capable student, Arnold Toynbee (1889-1975). On Zimmerman’s recommendation, Toynbee became the institute’s first paid employee. Toynbee was later appointed director of the institute. At Chatham House,  Toynbee played the leading role for three decades (1925-1955). He directed scientific research and was at the same time a high-ranking officer of the British  MI6  (intelligence) service. Much of the RIIA research was done on behalf of MI6 .

Arnold Toynbee
Arnold Toynbee

RIIA did not arise out of nowhere. It became a superstructure over the rather secret organization “Round Table”. According to historians, this society arose as a secret in 1891 in South Africa at the initiative of Cecil John Rhodes (1853-1902), a famous figure of British imperialism, who linked his life with the British colonial expansion in South Africa. Rhodes, a gold and diamond miner in South Africa, was associated with the Rothschilds. In 1910, the Rothschilds established the Round Table in London; the main public figure for the Round Table was Lord Alfred Milner. During the Lord’s lifetime, the Round Table was often called the Milner Group. Many historians believe that at the beginning of the 20th century the composition of the Round Table and the composition of the Committee of 300 (the world elite).

As Nicholas Hagger notes  in The Syndicate, the history of the creation of a secret world government and the methods of its influence on world politics and economy ”, the activities of the Round Table had two contours – external (open activity) and internal (secret activity). The task of the Round Table, writes the famous American historian  Carroll Quigley (1910-1977) in the book Tragedy and Hope, was “no less than the creation of a world system of financial control, concentrated in private hands and capable of influencing the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system will be completely feudally governed by the central banks of the world, acting in accordance with secret agreements concluded at frequent personal meetings and conferences. Quigley was very fond of the Round Table, being the official historian of this society.

The Round Table set out the task of creating a world government governed by international bankers. Many researchers of the Round Table activities believe that the program of this organization as a whole coincides with the program of the Illuminati Order in the 18th century. The successors of the Illuminati, members of the Round Table, viewed England as an Atlantic force, not a European one, and counted on the creation of a federation of English-speaking countries. Milner has established Roundtable Groups in South Africa, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, India and CIF. They were all run from England. They included the most famous politicians of the British government, and they were all devoted to the idea of ​​world government. The Roundtable has always wanted to transform the British Empire into a federal system that would eventually include both the United Kingdom and the United States.

The RIIA  was a continuation of the Round Table. After the death of Lord Milner in 1925, references to the Round Table became rare, and more often people began to speak of the Royal Institution. In 1931, Toynbee gave a speech in Copenhagen, in which he declared:  

“We are currently working with all who can make all the nation-states of our world forget about the mysterious power called sovereignty. And we constantly deny what we really do .

Nicholas Hagger believes that Toynbee was more American than British, as most of the funding came from overseas, from the Rockefellers:  

“For 40 years, Toynbee was actively involved in the RIIA’s efforts to create a world government. In his writings, Toynbee argues that nation states are withering away and will be supplanted by the “Rockefeller” world government. Although Toynbee’s work is fascinating, it is unfortunately completely unreliable .

Toynbee was a prominent member of the Fabian Society, ideologically close to the Labor Party. Toynbee and his associates Herbert Wells,  Bertrand RussellBernard Shaw, brothers Julian and Aldous Huxley did not rule out that the international socialist movement would become one of the possible ways to create the One State. In particular, Toynbee and his associates were very impressed by the Bolsheviks’ commitment to internationalism, although the Fabians and employees of the Royal Institute did not share communist views.

Among those who surrounded Toynbee, many understood that the building of the One State was a task for the distant future. It is necessary to move towards the cherished goal gradually. The creation of a united Europe, in which individual states would dissolve their sovereignty, was considered as a closer goal. Toynbee managed to live up to this time, when the Treaty of Rome was signed in 1957 by six European states (1957), and later the European Economic Community (EEC) began to be created.

A year after the establishment of the RIIA, a mirror institution was created on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean, called the  Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) . The origins of the organization were Colonel House and  Paul Warburg  (1868-1932) – one of the initiators of the creation of the US Federal Reserve System. CFR members   included Woodrow Wilson, Colonel House, and a number of other influential politicians, bankers and businessmen. Particularly noteworthy are members of the Council such as  John Foster Dulles  (served as Secretary of State under President  Eisenhower ) and his brother  Alain Dulles (future first head of the CIA). A close informal relationship was established between John Dulles and Arnold Toynbee. John Dulles, as Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Rockefeller Foundation, has helped ensure that the Royal Institution receives regular financial support from the Foundation.

All publications on the Royal Institution usually refer to the  Chatham House Rule . It assumes that participants in closed meetings have no right to disclose the authorship of those other opinions outside the small circle of RIIA members  . Opinions can be published, but as impersonal. The rule is intended to encourage maximum openness and frankness in internal meetings. The official mouthpiece of the institute is International Affairs  and World Review .

Since 2005, the Royal Institution has established a prize – the  Chatham House Prize . It is awarded annually to “the statesman or organization that Chatham House members believe have made the most important contribution to improving international relations in the past year .” 

Continue Reading
Advertisement

DO NOT MISS

Trending