| Subject: | Re: [socialcredit] straw vote (Joe replies to Ken) Addendum | | Date: | Sunday, November 20, 2005 00:16:29 (-0800) | | From: | Joe Thomson <thomsonhiyu @....ca>
|
| In reply to: | Message 3127 (written by Kenneth Palmerton) |
Hello Ken,
Yes, you did mention you were a Channel Islander. And I recall the debate
that went on here over the nature of Guernsey money, (the "State's Notes"),
back some months ago. I believe it was Ted Knight who initiated an
interesting proposition as to the true nature of those "Notes", and Bill
Ryan expanded on that in some detail.
Including the way many a famous figure's supposed 'monetary reform'
pronouncements, possibly including some on the "State's Notes", had been
hijacked, altered, and propagandised by those who want the 'government' to
have the monopoly of credit creation. "Greenbackers", was the term I
believe Bill used to describe those who believed that. Whether any definite
concensus on the "State's Notes" was reached before that debate ended, I
don't recall now. Somehow I doubt it.
Joe
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kenneth Palmerton" <kenpalmerton@cix.compulink.co.uk>
To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
Cc: <kenpalmerton@cix.compulink.co.uk>
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2005 12:25 PM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] straw vote (Joe replies to Ken) Addendum
> In-Reply-To: <000701c5ec08$ef280cc0$bad44246@cc.shawcable.net>
> Hi Joe.
>
> It looks as though we are in general agreement. And unless we wish to turn
> ourselves into banking technicians, what we know from our studies is
> enough to tell us that there is a serious problem.
>
> At branch level, even amongst the management, there is, I find too, very
> little understanding of how money REALLY works. Again as you say I think
> this is ignorance that can be forgiven because those who decide bank
> POLICY have kept us all in ignorance. Again I believe deliberately.
>
> Often I wonder what would have happened if it was 2005 rather than 1694
> when Patterson went before what passed for Parliament at the time to
> propose his great con trick.
>
> With our present level of communication, and our level of representation,
> flawed as it still is, I suspect he would have been laughed out of court
> :-)) Or rather, I would hope so :-(
>
> As for your last comment Joe, remember that you DID say "cash".
>
> In the UK anyway, that is correct. BUT "cash" is not the bulk of money.
> Here it is only some 3% of our money supply. The rest, 97%, they still
> create for us, out of nothing, and at tiny cost.
>
> That is my condemnation of the trading banks, and is what they should not
> be allowed.
>
> I think I told you that I come from the Channel Islands, Jersey. There
> money creation has histrionically been the role of the States, the
> parliament. And the reason for there being no "National " debt there. So
> very low taxation.
>
> Ken.
>
> -------- Original Message --------
>
> X-Envelope-From:
> socialcredit-return-3105-kenpalmerton=cix.co.uk@elistas.comReceived: from
> q43.elistas.net (q43.elistas.net [216.66.20.150]) by
> mta04.mx.cix.co.uk (8.13.4/CIX/8.13.4) with SMTP id jAI8ZD7c025287
> for <kenpalmerton@cix.co.uk>; Fri, 18 Nov 2005 08:35:13 GMTReceived:
> (qmail 16436 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2005 09:54:23 +0100Received:
> from mail.e-listas.com (66.7.164.206) by 192.168.0.152 with EMQP; 18 Nov
> 2005 09:54:23 +0100Mailing-List: socialcredit@elistas.com
> X-No-Archive: yes
> List-Post: <mailto:socialcredit@elistas.com>
> Reply-To: socialcredit@elistas.com
> List-Help: <mailto:socialcredit-help@elistas.com>
> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:socialcredit-unsubscribe@elistas.com>
> List-Subscribe: <mailto:socialcredit-subscribe@elistas.com>
> Delivered-To: list socialcredit@elistas.com
> Delivered-To: moderator for socialcredit@elistas.com
> Received: (qmail 9557 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2005 07:20:47 +0100
> Received: from unknown (HELO pd2mo2so.prod.shaw.ca) (24.71.223.10)
> by mail.egrupos.com with SMTP; 18 Nov 2005 07:20:47 +0100
> Received: from pd2mr5so.prod.shaw.ca (pd2mr5so-qfe3.prod.shaw.ca
> [10.0.141.8])
> by l-daemon (Sun ONE Messaging Server 6.0 HotFix 1.01 (built Mar 15
2004))
> with ESMTP id <0IQ500IQ40IJM220@l-daemon> for socialcredit@elistas.com;
> Thu,
> 17 Nov 2005 23:25:31 -0700 (MST)
> Received: from pn2ml7so.prod.shaw.ca ([10.0.121.151])
> by pd2mr5so.prod.shaw.ca (Sun ONE Messaging Server 6.0 HotFix 1.01 (built
> Mar
> 15 2004)) with ESMTP id <0IQ5002IR0IJ8PC0@pd2mr5so.prod.shaw.ca> for
> socialcredit@elistas.com; Thu, 17 Nov 2005 23:25:31 -0700 (MST)
> Received: from default (S010600e02995b7b5.cc.shawcable.net
[70.66.212.186])
> by l-daemon (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.18 (built Jul 28
2003))
> with SMTP id <0IQ500MB40II71@l-daemon> for socialcredit@elistas.com; Thu,
> 17 Nov 2005 23:25:31 -0700 (MST)
> Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 22:25:56 -0800
> From: Joe Thomson <thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca>
> To: socialcredit@elistas.com
> Message-id: <000701c5ec08$ef280cc0$bad44246@cc.shawcable.net>
> MIME-version: 1.0
> X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
> Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
> Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
> X-Priority: 3
> X-MSMail-priority: Normal
> References: <memo.803912@cix.compulink.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: [socialcredit] straw vote (Joe replies to Ken) Addendum
> X-Envelope-To: kenpalmerton@cixcouk.cix.co.uk
> X-UIDL: _PLG.CJZfDB.mta04.mx
>
> Hello Ken,
>
> 'Banking' isn't the easiest subject to understand, I agree. And it's not
> helped by the fact that either by accident or design, or maybe both, there
> was virtually no exposure to the inner workings of it offered when I was
in
> school, over 40 years ago now. And from what I can glean from my older
> son,such is still the case today.
>
> >From conversations over the years with several accredited professional
> accountants, and also some 'friendly' bankers, I gather even they are not
> totally certain how it all functions. Some of them, I would say, even
> though skilled in their particular fields, seem to have a poorer
conception
> of it than even I do now. And that's not saying much.
>
> But I don't think understanding it all is an impossibility. Bill Ryan,
for
> one, seems to me as if he's mastered it. We haven't 'stuck him' yet,
> anyways. And what can be learned by one, can certainly be learned by
> others. Albeit with a lot of help, and more than a lot of patience (on
the
> part of the teacher!.).
>
> Joe
> BTW, I think the banker still does need customer deposits to a degree,
> sinceit seems to me that must be where his 'cash' comes from. Now on that
> subject, until I learn some more, I think I'm going to follow the advice
of
> that old rhyme:-
> " A wise old owl sat in an oak,
> The more he heard, the less he spoke,
> The less he spoke, the more he heard,
> Now wasn't he a wise old bird."
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kenneth Palmerton" <kenpalmerton@cix.compulink.co.uk>
> To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
> Cc: <kenpalmerton@cix.compulink.co.uk>
> Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2005 4:57 AM
> Subject: Re: [socialcredit] straw vote (Joe replies to Ken) Addendum
>
>
> > In-Reply-To: <000f01c5eac6$242d4d20$bad44246@cc.shawcable.net>
> > Hi Joe.
> >
> > You may well mark me down as being excessively cynical my friend, but I
> > think you will find that trying to get to the bottom of arcane banking
> > practices is a bit like trying to gather water in a sieve.
> >
> > After many years of struggling, as you say you have, to understand their
> > system I have come to the conclusion that we are not intended to
> > understand, just stand and marvel at the sheer audacity of their trade,
> > that holds us all in hock. A Trade that holds, as a close monopoly,
> > something that our complex society can now hardly do without. And have
> the> right to create what we need out of nothing, and at tiny cost.
> >
> > As I have said as much on many occasions I have been accused of being
> anti> bank. This is not so.
> >
> > I believe that as a trade they are in dire straights. They could lose
all
> > they have in a matter of hours, as Bernard Leitier for one warns.
> >
> > This I think is not inevitable. They COULD, if they were sensible,
> > continue to offer the community its essential services as the skilled
> > bookkeepers that they are, and draw a good profit from the service they
> > are entitled to be paid for.
> >
> > So struggle on friend Joe, if you must. And if you do in fact sus out
the
> > nature of that devious trade, let us all know please :-)))
> >
> > Ken.
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
> http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
> You're subscribed to this list with the email kenpalmerton@cix.co.uk
> For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
>
>
>
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message