White Beard
Active member
Perhaps I’m wrong, but I believe ‘Shoah’ is the Hebrew term for the composite Jewish experience of life with Nazis.
-
ICMag and The Vault are running a NEW contest! You can check it here. Prizes are seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!
Mass of an ass going critical
- Thread starter Gry
- Start date
Alot of the whole Jewish resentment I see is around finance/banking/money - because those that understand power also understand that you need to be able to create/make/print money to gain and retain power - particularly within a capitalist society.
Here is some history around Jewish finance, from what looks like a Jewish source:
The following article recounts the history of the main commercial occupation of Jews in Christian Europe, moneylending.
Jewish Law Took an Interest in Interest.
General histories of the Middle Ages, and even more specialized ones such as those on medieval commerce, say two things about Jews: they were “usurers” and they engaged in the slave trade. One of the oldest Christian accusations against Jews in the medieval period was, indeed, that of usury. If by “usury” we accept the Canon Law definition of any profit whatever, then Jews were of course usurers; but the modern understanding of the term is rather the taking of excessive interest, and to avoid that argument, and the pejorative connotations of the term, “moneylending” is preferred in this article.
Biblical law forbids taking or giving interest to “your brother” (a fellow Jew), whether money or food or “any thing.” The Talmud interpreted this very strictly, so much so that even greeting someone from whom you have borrowed, if such greeting had not previously been the custom, is forbidden. [For Biblical law regarding moneylending, see, for example, Exodus 22:24, Deuteronomy 23:20-21, Leviticus 25:35-37.]
The Bible further permitted lending money on interest to a “stranger”, but prohibited it to a fellow Jew (“your brother”). The Talmud observes that even the borrower transgresses the commandment if he borrows on interest…
Originally, the medieval rabbinical attitude toward lending money on interest to Gentiles was very conservative, restricting it to scholars (not only as a means of income but because it was felt that they would be cautious about such loans and limit the interest charged) or to cases where it was absolutely necessary for livelihood.
Moneylending Yielded High Profits for Little Risk.
Ultimately, however, the potential of great profits and the widespread demand for moneylending made it universal among Jews. Mordecai B. Hillel of Germany (b. 1298) wrote that there is no profit in any form of commerce like that to be made in lending money. Ibn Adret in Spain observed that it has become permitted for everyone to charge interest on loans to Gentiles, “and now all have made themselves ‘sages’ in this respect, adding that he heard in the name of Rashi, that this is because taxes have constantly been increased and there is no longer any limit to “because of livelihood” (i.e. in order to meet their tax burden, Jews had no alternative.)
As noted elsewhere, fanciful theories have been advanced as fact with regard to Jews either having been “forced,” or voluntarily choosing to abandon landholding, and with no alternative choosing moneylending as a livelihood. Not one scrap of evidence has ever been produced to support such theories, and in fact there is no evidence. Undoubtedly the above statement by authoritative rabbis are correct: the ever increasing tax burdens, on the one hand, and the relatively large profits to be made with virtually no risk, on the other, encouraged Jews to engage in moneylending on ever larger scales.
Christian Moneylending: Ignored Laws, High Interest.
Another factor that has sometimes been suggested, the lack of alternative availability of lenders owing to church prohibitions on usury, ignores reality in favor of theory. While it is true that canon law, beginning in the late twelfth century and throughout the thirteenth, placed absolute prohibitions and harsh penalties on Christian lending on interest, it is also true that these measures were frequently ignored in practice even by churches, monasteries, bishops and the popes themselves.
Italian merchants were present in France and Germany and ever ready to lend money, charging such rates of interest as the market would allow. It has frequently been pointed out that the rates of interest charged by Jews never approached the rates charged by Christian lenders, including Church authorities…
Strange Relationships.
Just as Jews lent money to Christians, so they also frequently borrowed money from them, also on interest. Indicative of this strange and often uncertain relationship that existed between Jews and Christians is an interesting response concerning a Jew who had borrowed money from a Christian and asked a Jewish friend to give him the money to repay the debt. Then some other Christians came and robbed the houses of the Jews (the question was whether the debtor was not required to return the money that his friend had given him, since it would anyway have been stolen, had he not given it to him: the answer was. that he was obligated to repay it.).
However piously Church officials protested against “usury;” they were themselves quite willing to borrow money from Jews. Already in the ninth century we hear of priests selling church vessels to Jews, and later such object were frequently given as pledges for loans, in spite of the protests of the cantonists and civil law…Jews also had to be careful about taking surety objects that later could be claimed to have been stolen (although at times laws protected Jews against such charges) or “bloodstained garments” that could be suspicious.
It was certainly prudent and necessary to have some form of security, in the way of pledges, for loans to Christians, since it was often easy enough for the borrower simply not to repay the loans…Eventually it became necessary for civil authorities, and particularly the kings, to enact measures protecting the moneylending privileges of the Jews and to ensure that they were repaid.
Did Jews Actually Charge Exorbitant Interest?
There is not doubt that some Jews, at least, charged what today would be considered exorbitant rates of interest. There is the report, for example, of the abbey of Saint-Benigne in Dijon (France), which in 1196 borrowed 1700 livres (pounds) from a Jew at the rate of 65 percent. For eleven years the abbey could not pay anything on the loan so that the debt had grown to 9825 livres. In Marseilles, the abbey of Saint-Victor in 1185 owed 80,000 sous to the Jews of the city and granted them some property, which would have included churches in payment. To avoid this “scandal” of Jews owning churches, the bishop of Antibes assumed the debt himself.
On the other hand, it must be realized that these rates of interest were annual, and rarely did loans to individuals, at least, remain unpaid for as long as a year…As we have seen, though, in some cases the debtors made few or no payments for years, and then complained bitterly about the high interest.
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/jewish-moneylending/
Here is some history around Jewish finance, from what looks like a Jewish source:
The following article recounts the history of the main commercial occupation of Jews in Christian Europe, moneylending.
Jewish Law Took an Interest in Interest.
General histories of the Middle Ages, and even more specialized ones such as those on medieval commerce, say two things about Jews: they were “usurers” and they engaged in the slave trade. One of the oldest Christian accusations against Jews in the medieval period was, indeed, that of usury. If by “usury” we accept the Canon Law definition of any profit whatever, then Jews were of course usurers; but the modern understanding of the term is rather the taking of excessive interest, and to avoid that argument, and the pejorative connotations of the term, “moneylending” is preferred in this article.
Biblical law forbids taking or giving interest to “your brother” (a fellow Jew), whether money or food or “any thing.” The Talmud interpreted this very strictly, so much so that even greeting someone from whom you have borrowed, if such greeting had not previously been the custom, is forbidden. [For Biblical law regarding moneylending, see, for example, Exodus 22:24, Deuteronomy 23:20-21, Leviticus 25:35-37.]
The Bible further permitted lending money on interest to a “stranger”, but prohibited it to a fellow Jew (“your brother”). The Talmud observes that even the borrower transgresses the commandment if he borrows on interest…
Originally, the medieval rabbinical attitude toward lending money on interest to Gentiles was very conservative, restricting it to scholars (not only as a means of income but because it was felt that they would be cautious about such loans and limit the interest charged) or to cases where it was absolutely necessary for livelihood.
Moneylending Yielded High Profits for Little Risk.
Ultimately, however, the potential of great profits and the widespread demand for moneylending made it universal among Jews. Mordecai B. Hillel of Germany (b. 1298) wrote that there is no profit in any form of commerce like that to be made in lending money. Ibn Adret in Spain observed that it has become permitted for everyone to charge interest on loans to Gentiles, “and now all have made themselves ‘sages’ in this respect, adding that he heard in the name of Rashi, that this is because taxes have constantly been increased and there is no longer any limit to “because of livelihood” (i.e. in order to meet their tax burden, Jews had no alternative.)
As noted elsewhere, fanciful theories have been advanced as fact with regard to Jews either having been “forced,” or voluntarily choosing to abandon landholding, and with no alternative choosing moneylending as a livelihood. Not one scrap of evidence has ever been produced to support such theories, and in fact there is no evidence. Undoubtedly the above statement by authoritative rabbis are correct: the ever increasing tax burdens, on the one hand, and the relatively large profits to be made with virtually no risk, on the other, encouraged Jews to engage in moneylending on ever larger scales.
Christian Moneylending: Ignored Laws, High Interest.
Another factor that has sometimes been suggested, the lack of alternative availability of lenders owing to church prohibitions on usury, ignores reality in favor of theory. While it is true that canon law, beginning in the late twelfth century and throughout the thirteenth, placed absolute prohibitions and harsh penalties on Christian lending on interest, it is also true that these measures were frequently ignored in practice even by churches, monasteries, bishops and the popes themselves.
Italian merchants were present in France and Germany and ever ready to lend money, charging such rates of interest as the market would allow. It has frequently been pointed out that the rates of interest charged by Jews never approached the rates charged by Christian lenders, including Church authorities…
Strange Relationships.
Just as Jews lent money to Christians, so they also frequently borrowed money from them, also on interest. Indicative of this strange and often uncertain relationship that existed between Jews and Christians is an interesting response concerning a Jew who had borrowed money from a Christian and asked a Jewish friend to give him the money to repay the debt. Then some other Christians came and robbed the houses of the Jews (the question was whether the debtor was not required to return the money that his friend had given him, since it would anyway have been stolen, had he not given it to him: the answer was. that he was obligated to repay it.).
However piously Church officials protested against “usury;” they were themselves quite willing to borrow money from Jews. Already in the ninth century we hear of priests selling church vessels to Jews, and later such object were frequently given as pledges for loans, in spite of the protests of the cantonists and civil law…Jews also had to be careful about taking surety objects that later could be claimed to have been stolen (although at times laws protected Jews against such charges) or “bloodstained garments” that could be suspicious.
It was certainly prudent and necessary to have some form of security, in the way of pledges, for loans to Christians, since it was often easy enough for the borrower simply not to repay the loans…Eventually it became necessary for civil authorities, and particularly the kings, to enact measures protecting the moneylending privileges of the Jews and to ensure that they were repaid.
Did Jews Actually Charge Exorbitant Interest?
There is not doubt that some Jews, at least, charged what today would be considered exorbitant rates of interest. There is the report, for example, of the abbey of Saint-Benigne in Dijon (France), which in 1196 borrowed 1700 livres (pounds) from a Jew at the rate of 65 percent. For eleven years the abbey could not pay anything on the loan so that the debt had grown to 9825 livres. In Marseilles, the abbey of Saint-Victor in 1185 owed 80,000 sous to the Jews of the city and granted them some property, which would have included churches in payment. To avoid this “scandal” of Jews owning churches, the bishop of Antibes assumed the debt himself.
On the other hand, it must be realized that these rates of interest were annual, and rarely did loans to individuals, at least, remain unpaid for as long as a year…As we have seen, though, in some cases the debtors made few or no payments for years, and then complained bitterly about the high interest.
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/jewish-moneylending/
St. Phatty
Active member
The use of the Battle of Waterloo to first crash and then bubble-fy the English stock market, as it existed in the early 1800's, is worth learning about.
The Rothschild's are at the center of that particular manipulation - including reporting of the war.
If you're going to control finance, it also helps to control the media.
The Rothschild's are at the center of that particular manipulation - including reporting of the war.
If you're going to control finance, it also helps to control the media.
What I can make of it is that the Jews became Europe's main money lenders, hundreds of years ago, and they kept that trade in the family and grew internationally - for hundreds of years - and today that group could be said to control global finance - many of whom are also said to be Zionists and are (what some people would say) over-represented in controlling finance and media particularly, along with a myriad of other global corporate interests.
The Ashkenazi Jews are the group that got heavily into 'Usery' or finance - lending and supplying money - and you find that this ethnic group comes out at the top of any surveys or reports done on human intelligence, with at least 15 points on IQ over the average - so those Ashkenazi successful at money-lending etc bred with others in their group with similar mental attributes, and this trait/discipline/skill in mathematics/calculus has possibly been passed on for centuries.
Due to their intelligence, wealth and power - everyone should be aware of and understand how this came to be - and how it still is today.
If you control the banks and the media - then there is not much outside of your control.
The Ashkenazi Jews are the group that got heavily into 'Usery' or finance - lending and supplying money - and you find that this ethnic group comes out at the top of any surveys or reports done on human intelligence, with at least 15 points on IQ over the average - so those Ashkenazi successful at money-lending etc bred with others in their group with similar mental attributes, and this trait/discipline/skill in mathematics/calculus has possibly been passed on for centuries.
Due to their intelligence, wealth and power - everyone should be aware of and understand how this came to be - and how it still is today.
If you control the banks and the media - then there is not much outside of your control.
Top Trump aide sought Israeli help in online manipulation during 2016 election - report
https://www.rt.com/usa/440768-trump-aide-sought-israeli-help/
https://www.rt.com/usa/440768-trump-aide-sought-israeli-help/
Only due to this? You did not mention hutzpa, which is part of their specific intelligence.
Ha-Ha-Ha!
Yes, must not forget the 'Hutzpa!'......
I find the whole Jewish history quite interesting - most seem to only learn about the holocaust etc - when there is so much more to learn about these people.
Yes, must not forget the 'Hutzpa!'......
I find the whole Jewish history quite interesting - most seem to only learn about the holocaust etc - when there is so much more to learn about these people.
St. Phatty
Active member
In the late 90's, Clinton had a CFTC chairperson who was extremely concerned about credit derivatives, and their ability to cause a liquidity crisis a la 2007-8-9.
Commodities Futures Trading Commission Chair, Brookesley Born.
She wanted to do her job, and to regulate Credit Derivatives, a lot more.
Since they're a form of insurance, the obvious move is to require writers of CD's to amass financial reserves to back the insurance they wrote, just like insurance companies are supposed to.
3 bankers stood in Ms. Born's way.
Rubin, Greenspan, and Summers.
3 Jewish bankers.
It was very much a heads we win, tails you lose type market.
Many $Trillions were made on the way up, from the 1990's to about 2008.
The obvious answer to this massive fraud, was to claw back earnings, to pay for the rescue/bailout.
But the Gentiles - American tax-payers - were left with the bill.
That's Racist Finance, as practiced by Jewish Bankers.
Commodities Futures Trading Commission Chair, Brookesley Born.
She wanted to do her job, and to regulate Credit Derivatives, a lot more.
Since they're a form of insurance, the obvious move is to require writers of CD's to amass financial reserves to back the insurance they wrote, just like insurance companies are supposed to.
3 bankers stood in Ms. Born's way.
Rubin, Greenspan, and Summers.
3 Jewish bankers.
It was very much a heads we win, tails you lose type market.
Many $Trillions were made on the way up, from the 1990's to about 2008.
The obvious answer to this massive fraud, was to claw back earnings, to pay for the rescue/bailout.
But the Gentiles - American tax-payers - were left with the bill.
That's Racist Finance, as practiced by Jewish Bankers.
When you combine intelligence and finance - it will most often create great power - and today that power is not in one nation or another - its global - as now we see just about every nation on the planet in debt to these bankers, some to the tune of trillions of dollars.
Banks own nations these days - nations never really owned their own banks - banking was usually a profession owned by private interests - and so it still is today with the Federal Reserve and the Bank of England - and just about every other 'National Bank' on the planet being owned in some way, shape or form by these central, private, banking interests - many, or most of which have links to known Rothchild Zionist control or ownership.
If you notice that the nations that don't allow the western bankers to proliferate always seem to be made out to be the 'BAD-GUYS', and soon war is brewing (check Libya)....Makes you feel like its all just about the money anyway.
Banks own nations these days - nations never really owned their own banks - banking was usually a profession owned by private interests - and so it still is today with the Federal Reserve and the Bank of England - and just about every other 'National Bank' on the planet being owned in some way, shape or form by these central, private, banking interests - many, or most of which have links to known Rothchild Zionist control or ownership.
If you notice that the nations that don't allow the western bankers to proliferate always seem to be made out to be the 'BAD-GUYS', and soon war is brewing (check Libya)....Makes you feel like its all just about the money anyway.
I do believe what you posted is true. Power is end all be all. I believe this is the reason so many ‘rich’ peolple end up w such massive falls. At some point, money is just another thing when you have generational money and can literally buy whatever whenever. I think people start looking for a new ‘high’.
Another interesting thing to me is how much outrage there was when Kavanaugh supposedly grabbed a gals titty when in highschool 30 years ago, but still no outrage about the chosen ones vile ‘religious’ sacrament. But when narrative is controlled guess it’s just part and parcel
www.apnews.com/amp/4990a0f866bc43a49dd8329f96a5cf92
I
Ignignokt
Last edited:
White Beard
Active member
Sorry, the extra contempt has driven out the proper nouns, so it’s impossible to guess what you, or your broken link, are driving at...somehow I don’t think you mean our Feckless Leader’s twitterrhea....
Wow...
Is that like the Tuskegee experiment?
Is that like the Tuskegee experiment?
St. Phatty
Active member
And Jews
The one group no one can criticise.
Shut it down
St. Phatty
Active member
Thanks to groups like the Jewish Federation, California students who simply protest Israel's Holocaust of the Palestinians, are forced to give up financial aid.
A potent example of how Jews try to control speech.
Holocaust Denial is now written into Calif. State Law.
