There's the ever-popular Rothschild conspiracy on Facebook today only now it is presented as unbiased research with a highly-indignant writer greatly offended that I have charged bias in singling out the Rothchilds. The author is currently apoplectic on the matter as she claims thirty years of experience as a researcher / broadcaster and is outraged that I charge anti-Semitism. Nevertheless, if the shoe fits ...
There are eight exceptionally powerful families in world banking and some of them have Jewish roots but it would have to be all of them if you want to document a conspiracy. That there is a large Jewish influence on banking shouldn't be a surprise when historically Jews were forced into money management because they were prevented in working in anything else. A large influence still doesn't constitute a conspiracy so you need some evidence. (GlobalResearch: The Federal Reserve Cartel)
An ex-friend from Australia said with great authority, "It's the Jews, mate."
That was his evidence. Dumb ass.
The Rothschilds had tremendous influence historically but that influence has changed over time. In the early days the family was relatively small but now it is quite large with many branches and their focus is management of the massive funds of bonds they have accumulated. They are routinely charged with starting / stopping wars but that makes little sense when such activity would reduce the value of their bonds. (Wiki: Rothschild Family)
The charges usually go first against the Rothschilds as they comprise the richest banking family in the world but, thus far, I've never seen anything beyond garden-variety envy. It's not my purpose to defend them and certainly not international banking but I see it as inherently biased to focus on them, particularly when other aspects are left out. You can review Rothschild support for charities. Whether it's enough is for you to judge but it's flawed reporting to ignore it.
There are eight exceptionally powerful families in world banking and some of them have Jewish roots but it would have to be all of them if you want to document a conspiracy. That there is a large Jewish influence on banking shouldn't be a surprise when historically Jews were forced into money management because they were prevented in working in anything else. A large influence still doesn't constitute a conspiracy so you need some evidence. (GlobalResearch: The Federal Reserve Cartel)
An ex-friend from Australia said with great authority, "It's the Jews, mate."
That was his evidence. Dumb ass.
The Rothschilds had tremendous influence historically but that influence has changed over time. In the early days the family was relatively small but now it is quite large with many branches and their focus is management of the massive funds of bonds they have accumulated. They are routinely charged with starting / stopping wars but that makes little sense when such activity would reduce the value of their bonds. (Wiki: Rothschild Family)
The charges usually go first against the Rothschilds as they comprise the richest banking family in the world but, thus far, I've never seen anything beyond garden-variety envy. It's not my purpose to defend them and certainly not international banking but I see it as inherently biased to focus on them, particularly when other aspects are left out. You can review Rothschild support for charities. Whether it's enough is for you to judge but it's flawed reporting to ignore it.
No comments:
Post a Comment