| Subject: | Re: [socialcredit] Joe's Question | | Date: | Sunday, December 9, 2007 15:23:23 (-0700) | | From: | Martin Hattersley <jmartinh @....ca>
|
| In reply to: | Message 5128 (written by Joe Thomson) |
It would seem to me, that when fortunes in the billions can be made by
currency and commodity speculation financed by bank credit, getting anyone
on the inside of the banking system to listen to Social Credit explanations
will be almost impossible.
The only thing that I think could do this would be outright terror in the
banking fraternity at the prospect of complete economic collapse. I think
Douglas foresaw the time when this might happen, and where the situation
might be saved by a small band of people who "know what to do and how to do
it." Perhaps someone on the list (?Wally) would be able to cite the exact
quotation.
Martin Hattersley, 5929-189 St.,
EDMONTON AB CANADA T6M 2J1
Phone (780) 483-5442
e-mail <jmartinh@shaw.ca>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Thomson" <thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca>
To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2007 7:26 PM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Joe's Question
" I think it is a mistake to assume that the bankers
understand the Douglas theory. Very few Social
Crediters have understood the theory. It is difficult and subtle." ~ Bill
Ryan
>
"One of the barons of Bay Street, Sir John
Aird, was reduced to pleading the "we do not want theories introduced into
banking. If you get into theories you are on dangerous ground." ~ excerpted
from "Chapter Three: William Irvine
and the Farmers in Politics"
------------------------------------------------
(Joe asks:-) I wonder, would the attitude amongst bankers today likely be
the same as that expressed by Aird above?
Or would today's top bankers be more receptive to 'theories', (maybe
especially right now!), than they were then. And the Douglas theory in
particular if it were put forth in a less "difficult and subtle", but still
correct, manner than Douglas managed to do?
If it were put to them ~ if it could be ~ in such a manner that it couldn't
help but be properly understood, and they still rejected it, might this not
put them in a spot where they'd clearly have to explain 'why'?
What if that 'why' turns out to be the same reason given by Sidney Webb when
Douglas explained his scheme to him and answered every 'technical'
objection? Only to be told the 'soundness' didn't matter, "....it's its
object I don't like."?
Well, I for one sure hope it could be put to them in such a manner, and
attitudes have changed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 jmartinh@shaw.ca
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.17/1178 - Release Date: 08/12/2007
11:59 AM
--
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 19194 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message