Hopefully this will be better than the last AMA with the guy who was openly Zionist lol

link?

Sure, http://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/2p13qt/im_david_cole_aka_stein_the_jewish_holocaust/cmsf3k7

ty

Good grief you never learn. At this point I am utterly sure you don't even know what Zionism is, in any context at all.

Oh please enlighten us goyim with your knowledge? Ffs Zionism is retarded, it taints Judaism

Is that how you explain what you think Zionism is? Cause... you didn't do very well.

Let me just fast forward this and we can skip the whole thing.

You say "blahblahblah what do YOU think it is" or "I don't think YOU know what it is" or some variation of passing off the whole thing so you don't actually have to provide any evidence as to what it actually is.

Can we skip the whole argument now?

Read your stupid ass comment again. You are being argumentative.

I really called that one didn't I rofl

"And thooooose are the facts"

-Bill O'Reilly

and yet nobody is embarassed that they can make quips and still can't explain themselves.

Late 90's they played the "The Money Master" on Public Access channel here in San Diego mid-week, till this day it has no equal.

It's a terrible documentary. It is filled to the brim with fake quotes, which form the basis of what Still expounds on in the documentary. That shows the depth and breadth of the research.

Bill Still himself eventually decided to disassociate himself with it, admitting there are about a dozen fake quotes(there are actually more), and he's upset he isn't allowed to go back and fix it.

ye olde "fake quote" attack vector.

There is no shortage of them on topics such as this. Take two of the most famous:

I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men." -Woodrow Wilson, after signing the Federal Reserve into existence

If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered...I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies... The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs. -Thomas Jefferson

Both fake.

source?

Looks like smw3 already covered it nicely. http://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/2p9v3j/bill_still_investigative_journalist_and/cmx3a21

If you guys were 1/100th as quick to demand sources from Bill Still, you would have known about this long ago.

so, no sources for your claim the quotes are fake? o.k. gotcha.

such proof, many links

The Thomas Jefferson one doesn't even sound like any of the other things he's written and the language he would use. Did people tell about corporations in the 1770's?

Got any sources to show those are fake quotes?

How do you source something wasn't said? That isn't how it works.

You have to source something was said, in order for it to be a valid quote, something which is not done for either of these two.

The Woodrow Wilson one appears to splice together 2 real, but unrelated to the Fed quotes, with plain made up material. http://www.salon.com/2007/12/21/woodrow_wilson_federal_reserve/

The Jefferson one is just plain made up, totally. http://www.businessinsider.com/thomas-jefferson-quotes-that-were-actually-just-made-up-2013-9

Inflation and deflation were economic terms which didn't even exist during his life. That page has 18 other fake Jefferson quotes.

Not a single link was produced that day.

Bill Still himself eventually decided to disassociate himself with it

Got any sources on that?

He's stated it in many interviews.

Here you can see him touching on the issue on his message board... http://s6.zetaboards.com/Bill_Still_Reforum/topic/1177385/1/

Thanks, do you have any links to the interviews since this is a forum where anyone could pose as Bill?

It's not a forum where anyone could pose as him, it's his own forum, and he's the admin, named Bill Still.

If this credulity was shown towards the documentary, it would be known very easily that quotes such as Wilson's "I'm a most unhappy man" are fake, instead of being repeated. And that doesn't even touch on the bad economics he spouts.

I'll tell you what-just ask him in the AMA that is in a few days. That will end any ambiguity, unless you think the guy doing the AMA isn't him either.

That's a good idea. I just wanted the undeniable stuff. Not saying this is the case but I've seen fake blogs and forums that completely destroy peoples reputations.

It's not a forum where anyone could pose as him, it's his own forum, and he's the admin, named Bill Still.

how do you know it is actually him?

What documentary would you have recommended in the 90's on this subject matter?

Bill Still himself eventually decided to disassociate himself with it,

Well thats a tune changer, he made no such mention of that in Seattle. With that said, just a hunch from a personal take on documentaries, could not many of them use some updating, or all they home run hitters with no mistakes. I have always believed that discretion must at all times be used on any subject matter, and left to the individual to further his or her knowledge. History is like conceptual semantics, I wasn't around to witness the facts, so I have to break it down through various avenues of information to come up with the simplest lie possible, which I then feel is maybe the truth.

That's right, he wants to go back and change it, but doesn't actually hold the legal rights to the documentary, so he can't revise it. Unfortunately, the documentary still gets passed along as fact by many, and Still's research ability doesn't seem to have vastly improved with his latest works.

Still is a legend, a true patriot

Orangutan clutch once again. nice pickup. thanks for setting this up.

just be careful what you ask, the mods here will ban you if they don't like your question.

Like what?

[deleted]

I meant more along the lines of "what were the question (s) that you were banned for?".

If it's just you posting the same accusations in everythread instead of creating your own, that would look like intentional derailment/stalking/whatever which maybe broke a few rules.

Haha that user was just shadowbanned two days ago by the admins for vote manipulation. You just confirmed that the /r/conspiracy mods are on top of it.

On a completely unrelated note, hey look your account is two days old!

Every time, dude? Every time we mention an AMA, we're gonna hear this?

This is a serious accusation.

Please link to the users and offending comments.

Otherwise you're just spreading falsehoods.

Just checking: he's not a zionist, right?

Can we be a bit more organized this time? A lot of great questions in the last AMA were buried and were left unanswered while softballs made it to the top. What about a preliminary thread where we post questions and the users vote for the best ones. Then, in the actual AMA thread, the mods can post the top questions with their mod colors turned on so they receive a higher chance of being answered?

[deleted]

The mods Axol and flytape set up the holocaust revisionist's AMA who turned out to be a 9/11 narrative supporting Zionist.

Was there many answers related to this? I only remember Cole admitting that he was a Zionist in one comment and that he adamantly believed that muslims did 9/11 in another. Was there more to it than that?

muslims did 9/11 [citation needed]

http://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/2p13qt/im_david_cole_aka_stein_the_jewish_holocaust/cmseero

[deleted]

I'm old. What is this?

No.

This user is trying to incite folks against the /r/conspiracy mods.

The users that were supposedly "banned" by the mods here for "asking questions" actually ended up getting shadowbanned by the reddit admins.

Notice how the account is 2 days old...that's when the shadowbans occurred.

They're trying to make an "issue" out of the fact that Cole identifies as a Zionist, when that's been common knowledge about Cole for decades.

This same group of folks were the ones who initially tried to discredit us for having a "neo-nazi" for an AMA.

When it became clear that he's nothing of the sort, they reversed course and chose the Zionist route instead.

The amusing thing is their laziness...if they had actually taken two seconds to look up David Cole, they would've learned that he's a Zionist Jew and that he dismisses a large amount of conspiracy theories.

Again, the goal of folks like this is to sow the seeds of discontent here.

It's nice though...it's extremely indicative that we're doing something right.

Hey look, a 2-day-old user making the exact same complaints as the folks that were shadowbanned 2 days ago for vote manipulation.

I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.

Is it true though?

If it's true, it doesn't matter who is saying it. Sounds like you're trying to skirt around the issue.

Agreed. Responding with an ad hominem and disregarding the substance is evasive. If you (axo) have already responded, copy and paste the response and note that. This makes you seem to be the petty one, even if you might not be.

I'll engage with you. Rockran, not so much.

Also, /u/FreeFallAcceleration has already been banned from /r/conspiracy. Go figure.

If you (axo) have already responded

I have. Many, many times. The goal here is to wear me out until I stop bothering...at that point it finally makes me look bad. They'll keep making new accounts and then ask the same stupid questions as long as it gets them off.

copy and paste the response and note that.

What specifically would you like me to address?

My comment history over the last couple of days will contain everything you're interesting in, but if that's too much of a hassle, I'd be happy to paste any previous responses. Again.

This will be the last. fucking. time.

That last line...

[deleted]

That is a correct observation.

so many of them are dishonest i actually appreciate a straightforward zionist every once in a while, i might disagree with most of what he has to say, but if he is honest i find it worth hearing as these people will give you the underlining reasons they are zionists instead of trolling you around, and they can be interesting and even legitimate reasons for some (like they want a land, that's legitimate imo, where I disagree is when they want someone else's land, but if a zionist's drive is simply to have a land for his tribe, it's not enough for me to consider him evil or enemy, i understand the need).

edit: this being said most actually believe they have been chosen to rule the globe lol

I agree with you completely. I was just making a sly reference to the "drama" revolving his "coming out" as a zionist. Most had a knee jerk reaction and acted like everything he said was garbage after realizing this.

I thought his views on the details of the holocaust were reasonable and interesting.

I guess I'm just not funny.

Oh he was referring to Zionism, I couldn't find much else to his illusion in the thread and wondered if it was a reference to being gay :x

The problem I see with this is what happens with brigaded questions - if it's a vote system and the softball questions, as you describe, get the most votes what then? Then it's already derailed or it's someone arbitrarily deciding the questions which is soft censorship (not accusing mods of censorship).

Just a thought.

Can't have Zionists, amirite?

eyeroll

Personally, I would like to know more of why he thinks his Greenbacker theory is better than Austrian theory economics. Does it really not matter what is backing a nation's currency?

Exactly. He thinks that as long as the currency is debt free, it's fine. The problem is that even if the treasury issues the money, the people who run monetary and fiscal policy will still be corrupt.

I believe his argument is that government is the best mechanism we have to facilitate a debt free currency (which appears desirable) and that as long as there's no compound interest attached, inflation will be negligible. But like you, I have doubts with this and in all honesty, I don't exactly understand how it works or what the global economic implications of such a solution are.

See, the problem is that the production of money is monopolized by the state, not just that there's interest to be paid back on every dollar created. There is quite literally no power more coveted than the control of money. The real solution is to legalize competition in the production of money.

Of course, the state will never willingly give up that power which is why personally I think the way to defeat the powers that be, the illuminati or whatever you want to call them is to disengage from their money. IMHO I think bitcoin has some very real potential to peacefully create the separation of money and state in the same way we have separation of church and state.

Totally. I think we need competing currencies and to let the market decide which one(s) are desirable. Still said he's a fan of Quark and admitted to openly bashing Bitcoin before, but it looks like he's in favor of cryptocurrencies, overall. Should be an interesting AMA.

The state already gave up that power a long time ago. The only way to have a fair currency that works for a society is to have it nationalized. That way its the tax-payers money, not some third party and not the government's. Bitcoin is a pipedream.

But if the treasury produces money, monetary policy won't be subject to the ultra wealthy?

It is but money will always be influenced by trading. Unless you want to become isolationist. Which I am all for. Globalism is a scam. It's used by the wealthy to fix rates and let them destroy economies and wages. However, even under globalism, if your money is backed by something solid it can work. Like under the NSDAP in Germany, they based their money off of services and labour provided. They were surrounded by sanctioning nations but their society grew despite that and they began barter trading with neighbours who recognized their strength. Money is imaginary. The people behind it are not. Bitcoin is imaginary and there's no one behind it. Thus it won't be effective. And since people already pay taxes, they should get something for it. Like a currency that works for them. Something they don't need a chip to use and spend. Since America gave away all its gold or rather was forced to give it away to European bankers and investors under FDR, they should think about what the NSDAP did and back their money with something even better. The hard work of the people. You can rig the trading game but labour is labour in any nation. It's worth a lot.

The real solution is to legalize competition in the production of money.

Yes. Competing currencies that are actually competing with one another and not just pretending to in order to collude and drive collective prices up.

You know the Fed returns its profits to the Treasury each year, right? $88.4 billion in 2012 and $77.7 billion in 2013. http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2014/01/10/fed-sent-77-7-billion-in-profits-to-treasury-last-year/

Yes, but that is a pithy amount compared to the $85 billion they were printing every month earlier this year. A small return on money created out of nothing that is used to finance wars and a surveillance state (while overall staying in the red) is not an argument for why the Fed is needed.

That isn't how QE works. $85 billion in also means $85 billion out-it's an asset swap, not a one way thing.

Am I in the right place?

I hope so. I'm here too, hopefully to gain some insight and enlightenment from the great Bill Still

So... Still nothing? :)

This dude is a hack. I saw Money Masters and shot him an email about the Banker's Association quote he built so much of his film upon - wondering about a cite on it. He claimed it was in the Federal Register. Nope. It's a made up quote yet he insists on it. All I need to know about Bill Still. Of course, he doesn't make any money at this.

That's what's particularly egregious about it, there aren't just fake quotes all over the documentary, they form the basis of almost the entire evidence used to form his thesis. It's a real shame. I don't think I'll be here for the AMA, but I hope someone brings this up.

Does anyone know if Still's position on Quark (cryptocurrency) has changed? Does he still support/endorse it as fervently as he did initially? Does he feel any regret for his part in what seems to be a pump and dump scheme?

Source it

Email him, he'll probably respond.

as far as I can tell he still owns about 20% of his original stake, and there is nothing wrong with making a profit. with a little digging you should be able to figure out approximately how many he has.

Interesting debate between Bill Still and Austrian economist Robert Murphy.

*Skip to 35:13. This is the crux of the problem and Still is left speechless.

I hope I remember to be here. I have questions maybe!

Use /u/RemindMeBot!

how do you use it? It says put in time after command, what's that mean?

This is more like it. That last AMA was a major failure in multiple ways.

This man is the single most important (and unrecognized) documentary film producer for the financial industry on Earth. Kudos to the mod who made this happen!

This thread has been linked to from elsewhere on reddit.

• [/r/conspiratard] test 3

^{If you follow any of the above links, respect the rules of reddit and don't vote or comment. Questions? Abuse? Message me here.}

I wish I had your optimism that this can be solved without war or revolution. What I am most interested in is how to best pick up the pieces after it has all fallen apart.

Bill, you seem to have a really strong grasp on economic concepts and principals. Did you receive any formal training or did you just pick it up as you went, or maybe both?

Greetings gentlemen! Dear Bill Still, thanks for your awesome documentaries! I'm russian and it would be great to hear your view on what's going on in Russia these days, the ruble has fallen 200% already, seems like a typical managed crisis like US's great depression, but the thing is that in RF the heads of it's Central Bank are put in place by dictator Putin himself.

Bill as a student of finance about to write a large research paper, what is a good way to go about the studying the measurement reduction of our nations purchasing power and how it relates to the FED and how we can shine light on ending it?

Do you have references to back up the historical claims you make in this film? You've gotten rid of many of the obvious myths that were in Money Masters, but there are still many questionable statements in it, as well as some clear errors.

(Again, this is in reference to the 2 hour version I saw.)

For example, one quote that you give is said to be in a letter from JP Morgan to his brother, but it is actually from Henry Adams to his brother.

In another place, you say that only 22% of the House of Representatives stayed to vote on the Federal Reserve Act, but it was actually 78% who stayed and 22% who were absent.

There are quite a few other things that I think are wrong, but if you gave references to support them, I might be convinced.

You claim, about Richard Lawrence, the attempted assassin of Andrew Jackson, that "after his release from prison, Lawrence boasted to friends that powerful people in the banking industry had engaged him for the assassination and promised to protect him if he were caught."

Lawrence spent the rest of his life in an insane asylum. I've never seen this quote before. Andrew Jackson never said anything about suspecting that bankers were behind the attempt.

You claim that the Rothschilds stopped lending in America because they were "incensed by the defeat of the 2nd Bank", but they were only involved with the Bank of the United States after the defeat of the rechartering. While the Bank was still a national bank, they were associated with Baring. From what I know, the Rothschilds stopped doing business in America several years later, when a state government defaulted on its debt and the federal government refused to do anything about it.

There are many things you say about the Rothschilds that I haven't seen any good evidence for. You claim, as a few others have, that the Rothschilds had an influence on the Jekyll Island meeting. But is there actually any evidence for this? Or even evidence that they knew about the meeting beforehand? It was claimed that Warburg was their agent, but he denied it when asked, and I haven't seen any evidence that he was. Certainly it was August Belmont & Company who officially acted in their behalf in America.

You also say something like "Napoleon knew that the Rothschilds would not rest as long he was in power unless ..." The Rothschilds were pretty small players until after Napoleon left power. Did he even know about them?

Even though you have cut out some of them compared to earlier works, there are still quotes and documents you cite that are almost certainly hoaxes. For example, the quote from Salmon Chase, "My agency in promoting the passage of the National Banking Act was the greatest financial mistake in my life," is unknown until after his death. The American Bankers Association Memo and the Panic Circular put words in bankers mouths like "farmers will become tenants as in England", which they would have no reason to say, but make sense if someone is trying to depict them as villains.

I'm curious if he has been threatened by"them", many of us have.

Have you?

Israeli cyber attack, it happened to others also but no one on here that I am aware of. Just threats, I asked some FB friends who really are the ones at the seat of the info and they are threatened all the time. But obviously those close to the incidents get whacked

[deleted]

It's a vote of approval/disapproval.

I believe his argument is that government is the best mechanism we have to facilitate a debt free currency (which appears desirable) and that as long as there's no compound interest attached, inflation will be negligible. But like you, I have doubts with this and in all honesty, I don't exactly understand how it works or what the global economic implications of such a solution are.

But if the treasury produces money, monetary policy won't be subject to the ultra wealthy?

Oh please enlighten us goyim with your knowledge? Ffs Zionism is retarded, it taints Judaism

There is no shortage of them on topics such as this. Take two of the most famous:

I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men." -Woodrow Wilson, after signing the Federal Reserve into existence

If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered...I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies... The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs. -Thomas Jefferson

Both fake.

Not a single link was produced that day.