comp.sys.mac.advocacy

In article <0001HW.C4212D9D00111BFBF01846D8@news.comcast.net>,
George Graves wrote:

> On Tue, 8 Apr 2008 11:50:35 -0700, Alan Baker wrote
> (in article
> ):
>
> > In article <0001HW.C421089A00086F6BF01846D8@news.comcast.net>,
> > George Graves wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 8 Apr 2008 11:04:10 -0700, Alan Baker wrote
> >> (in article
> >> ):
> >>
> >>> In article <0001HW.C420FC31000586C2F01846D8@news.comcast.net>,
> >>> George Graves wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Tue, 8 Apr 2008 09:14:29 -0700, Maverick wrote
> >>>> (in article ):
> >>>>
> >>>>> George Graves wrote:
> >>>>>> On Mon, 7 Apr 2008 16:55:28 -0700, Maverick wrote
> >>>>>> (in article ):
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> George Graves wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Hmmm... looks like I've found another avenue of exploration. Was
> >>>>>>>>>> there
> >>>>>>>>>> ever a period in time when Jews had to use the barter system that
> >>>>>>>>>> didn't
> >>>>>>>>>> include money and how did they ever gain any wealth off this
> >>>>>>>>>> system?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> At some point in every civilization, barter is used. Even in
> >>>>>>>>> colonial
> >>>>>>>>> America, European settlers would barter with the native Indians,
> >>>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>> each
> >>>>>>>>> other for what they needed. Even as late as the middle of the 19th
> >>>>>>>>> Century,
> >>>>>>>>> trappers and "mountain men" were still bartering with the Plains
> >>>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>> Western
> >>>>>>>>> Indians such as the Nez Pierce and the Crow, and Sioux, Arapaho,
> >>>>>>>>> etc.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I got interrupted.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> To continue. At some point, currency always replaces barter as a
> >>>>>>>> means
> >>>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>> exchange. After all, it's far easier to carry a coin purse than it
> >>>>>>>> is
> >>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>> carry several live chickens and bags of grain.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I think that you are barking up the wrong tree, here.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Not really. You've proven to me that they weren't involved with
> >>>>>>> barter
> >>>>>>> or were not successful at it. But with money they are.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I guess, it would help if I understood what you are getting at. Since
> >>>>>> barter
> >>>>>> is irrelevant in the overall scheme of things, I can't see what your
> >>>>>> fixation
> >>>>>> on it in the context of this discussion.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The barter system doesn't use money. A moneyless system probably would
> >>>>> eliminate the Jews problems... but barterering isn't a fair system
> >>>>> anyways and was looking for a system that is actually better than money
> >>>>> may do the world a better deal. But I don't have any ideas and haven't
> >>>>> seen any suggested anywhere.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Money seems to be the Jews pitfall here. Of course I don't know what
> >>>>> money and their religion have to do with each other.
> >>>>
> >>>> Nothing, really. The New Testament says that The Christ threw the money
> >>>> lenders out of the Temple at Jerusalem. This seems to be the cause of
> >>>> the
> >>>> Catholic Church's edict against Christians lending money. The Jews had
> >>>> no
> >>>> such laws and since there was an unfulfilled need, Jews started to do
> >>>> what
> >>>> Christian Europe could not.
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>> Jewish usury had
> >>>>>>>> nothing to do with barter. After all, this was the post-Roman era
> >>>>>>>> we're
> >>>>>>>> talking about here and the idea of monetary exchange was firmly
> >>>>>>>> embedded
> >>>>>>>> in
> >>>>>>>> European culture. While at some level, some bartering continued,
> >>>>>>>> states
> >>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>> wealthy noblemen did not use it as a basis for their wealth. They
> >>>>>>>> used
> >>>>>>>> gold
> >>>>>>>> and jewels and coin of the relm. When a king needed to raise an army
> >>>>>>>> for
> >>>>>>>> some
> >>>>>>>> military adventure, it was gold and silver coinage (or more likely,
> >>>>>>>> letters
> >>>>>>>> of credit backed by the Jewish banking cartels) that he borrowed
> >>>>>>>> from
> >>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>> Jews, not chickens, goats, and hens' eggs.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> That I can understand and agree with. I figure that they couldn't
> >>>>>>> manage
> >>>>>>> a way to get a form of usuary in a barter system, other than gold or
> >>>>>>> silver in some form. I guess that old 'ops' Major I worked for back
> >>>>>>> in
> >>>>>>> the 60s was correct. He said that it is the banks that run the world
> >>>>>>> and dictate policy.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> He's more than partially right. While international banking is just
> >>>>>> one
> >>>>>> of
> >>>>>> the pillars of power in the world, it is obviously one of the most
> >>>>>> important
> >>>>>> ones. Money, after all, makes the world go around. Control it and you
> >>>>>> have
> >>>>>> gone a long way toward controlling the world. But I think that the
> >>>>>> Jewish
> >>>>>> experience shows that controlling the money is not enough to insure
> >>>>>> security
> >>>>>> or to obtain a foothold on power. You need other things too. Which
> >>>>>> might
> >>>>>> explain why, after WWII, Jews diversified their "power" base.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Another thing the Major did mention that WWII and WWI were nothing more
> >>>>> than a financial instrument for increased gains.
> >>>>
> >>>> Many people blame both wars on the House of Rothschild.
> >>>
> >>> Many people are idiots.
> >>
> >> While that statement may be true, not knowing the truth of some event or
> >> events in history does not automatically make one an idiot. If it did, we
> >> all
> >> qualify on a number of historical events where we were not told the truth.
> >> Remember, history is written by the world's winners, I.E., those on top.
> >> They
> >> are always going to spin history to look as if they are on the side of
> >> goodness and light. Some things that are hidden at the time do eventually
> >> come out (such as the details of the Cuban Missile Crises) and some are
> >> purposely hidden from us (Like the details of Kennedy's Assassination -
> >> which
> >> are sealed until the 75th anniversary of the event or Nov 22, 2038), and
> >> then
> >> there are things that we'll likely never know (such as the extent of
> >> Nixon's
> >> actual participation in the Watergate break-in or whether or not LBJ KNEW
> >> that the Gulf of Tonkin Incident was phony, or whether or not FDR had
> >> prior
> >> knowledge of Pearl Harbor, etc.)
> >
> > Not knowing the truth doesn't make one an idiot. Not knowing but forming
> > an opinion does.
>
> >
> > And even being shown to be correct later doesn't matter if one didn't
> > have the requisite knowledge at the time one's opinion was formed.
>
> When has that ever stopped anybody?

Which is why I said what I said...

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."