Skip to content

Major computer malfunctions at three of the Dutch too big to fails

by on April 5, 2013
Banks busted

This week three banks, ING, Rabo and SNS, simultaneously suffered major computer malfunctions, leading to a temporary closure of their on-line facilities. Their problems were ‘unrelated’. It is completely unprecedented. The chances of a coincidence are close to zero. For years some in the blogosphere have speculated that ‘computer problems’ might be a good excuse for the Money Power to call a bank holiday and ‘reorganize’ their system. This looks like a drill.

By Anthony Migchels for Henry Makow and Real Currencies

ING’s problems were the worst, it’s off-line again today. ING is one of the biggest banks in Europe with a trillion plus balance and one of the living dead. It’s a zombie bank, propped up with massive credit lines from the ECB and handouts and guarantees from the Dutch taxpayer. It has 40 billion of Spanish debt on its books and it needs to write off untold billions, maybe as much as hundreds of billions, from its commercial real estate portfolio. Obviously this would vaporize the Dutch economy over night, should it have to bail out ING.

The Dutch economy is one of the worst in the world in terms of debt. All the nonsense about ‘lazy Greeks’ and ‘thrifty and frugal Dutch’ is just that: complete baloney. We have a usurious debt based monetary system. However hard one works, eternally growing debt and interest charges are inevitable, it has nothing to do with character.

Meanwhile, the economy is being destroyed with ridiculous austerity, 45 billion was taken out of the budget over the last two years. The Government loses 80 cents in income due to falling aggregate demand in the economy for every euro it takes out of the economy through taxation or austerity. Same thing that destroyed Southern Europe. It’s incredible that this kind of insanity can happen in the modern age.

Considering the situation in Cyprus and depositors now knowing they are fair game, it seems clear that the Money Power is organizing a bank run to further the depression it wants so badly.

However unpleasant it is to be on the same side as these vultures in this case, the advice remains the same: get your money out of the bank now. The advice is now not just correct because of moral imperative, it is becoming a matter of personal financial survival. True, it is becoming harder and harder to find safe havens, but the bank is absolutely not one of those, that’s for sure.

Why is the Money Power busting its own banks? They don’t really care: all the major banks own each other. 100% market share remains guaranteed, even if some of them drop. Also, the smaller banks go first and they are gobbled up by the big boys, often with ECB/Fed/taxpayer financial support. So this crunch is also a major consolidation effort by the Money Power. Busting the banks is a good way to plausibly sell the many that the good days are over.

So what does this computer malfunction mean? It’s an exercise. And probably not for Holland itself. The Dutch economy is midsized and a good place for a drill for something bigger. Like the US, which is the real target here. Two weeks ago, Chase Manhattan had some problems too: accounts were suddenly drained and set to zero. Interestingly, this was also going on with ING.

The US has been coasting relatively unscathed through the crunch up to now. Because the Fed printed like crazy, all in all some 16 trillion were lent out to its buddy insider banks worldwide to prop up their balances. This money never enters the real economy, because it used as capital to replace losses to the Mortgage Backed Securities scam that popped in 2008. Hence no inflation.

But this is coming to an end and in the next round of the crunch something major is going to go down.

Conclusion
We have the funniest stockmarket boom ever, bankers resigning all over the place, Cyprus, and now this.

Something’s on. And it’s big.

Addendum: I forgot (but Henry didn’t) to mention ABN-AMRO, another one of the Dutch Big Five, who two weeks ago let their customers know they would stop physical delivery of Gold and that all those with a Gold account would be paid in Euro if they liquidate their account. I’m sure most readers connected this dot, though. This certainly adds to the notion that there is some kind of trial run going on in the Netherlands.

Related:
The Few Banks that Own All
Take your Money out of the Bank NOW! (Video)
High Noon in Nicosia: what really happened in Cyprus?
At long last: savers will pay for their folly of trusting banks

About these ads
37 Comments
  1. REN permalink

    Brown’s latest article explains how our deposits can be confiscated:

    http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/03/28-5

    It has a link to this important paper:

    http://www.fdic.gov/about/srac/2012/gsifi.pdf

    Whenever there is a law change, or a rule change, it changes the nature of money. The legal agreements behind money are one of the factors that shape money. We should always be on guard for a ruling or law change.

    In this case, private bankers have codified an understanding on how to confiscate deposits and turn them into bank stock. In this way the lower loop funds the upper loop. The upper loop has usury compounding and demanding to be paid, as required by mathematics that underpin their debt contracts. Also, unlike the FED, the treaty of Lisbon makes it hard for ECB to fund sovereign entities. Sovereign debt is a problem in Europe.

    http://michael-hudson.com/2012/08/financial-predators-v-labor-industry-and-democracy/

    Double entry ledger mechanics tell us that we are the original creditors. We give up our credit to become hypothecated. Banker’s then issue their banker credit in exchange for our credit. At that moment in time, we become debtors to the bankers credit. We liquified i.e. created new banker money (BM) with our credit, and in the process put ourselves on a debt hook. So, it is a simple logical step to confiscating BM and converting it to another less liquid form of money e.g. promise to pay bank stock.

    In the U.S., it is derivatives that will demand stabilization and funding from the lower loop.

    • REN permalink

      Anthony, You also once asked me about silver debts. A quote below excerpted from the above Hudson link:

      ———–

      A review of history shows that such debt cancellations were normal practice from c. 2500 BC down to the time of Jesus. Rulers at the outset of civilization and commercial enterprise in the ancient Near East proclaimed Clean Slates to restore the status quo ante, a citizenry free from personal (barley) debts. (Commercial “silver” debts were left in place.) Babylonian andurarum edicts and kindred royal proclamations are found over a period of nearly three thousand years, and were the model for the Biblical Jubilee Year (deror). Rather than destabilizing economies, this practice preserved widespread property ownership, stable prices and liberty from debt bondage.”
      ——————

      My comments: Silver debts were commercial, and were NOT jubileed. Silver debts were generational and had to be paid. Also, consider at the time of Jesus, Jews owned the East West Mechanism, whereby Roman silver was traded for Eastern Gold at usurious exchange rates. The overland trading routes and entrepot cities were also controlled by these money masters. The Protocols mention that Gold was “very good” but leave out the exchange rate mechanism. Now we know how to refine silver, and it is not so rare.

      The east west exchange rate mechanism operated for over a thousand years. Jesus probably knew he would be sold out for silver.

      Canceling debts incurred as a function of positive interest (usury) is one way of looking at the world. Hudson, Keen and many others view the world that way. But, why go there? Usury is financial rents on money, so why be against all types of rents (land and monopolies) yet not focus on money rents?

      • Thanks REN.
        “But, why go there? Usury is financial rents on money, so why be against all types of rents (land and monopolies) yet not focus on money rents?”

        Indeed: that’s why I continue maintaining The problem is not debt, it’s Interest

        It’s not exactly the same point, but why treat a symptom, not the disease?

        This is also what I have against Social Credit as a solution, combined with their incomplete gap analysis (although I recently realized that these compound profits are probably responsible for a greater part of the Gap than I previously thought):
        Social Credit compensates without ending the wealth transfer. So it solves only the pain for the loser in the money game, not the horrible avarice the usurer burns with.

        • Ahmad permalink

          Anthony,
          May you please elaborate on the reason you are against social credit as a solution since it was not clear for me if you dont mind.

          • well, it does not stop the pay offs for the usurers. SC is debt free money spent into circulation. It compensates the payers of usury, but it does not stop the drain.

            • REN permalink

              Whereas my update to SC, where it is seigniorage money spent as demurrage, does eliminate the gap. All of the loop equations come into balance and the drain goes to zero. Gaps go away because the interest rate drops to zero and hence is not compounded.

              I would also like to see mutual credit to add diversity to the system and encourage local economies.

              I’ve spent a good deal of thought on the various systems, and haven’t found many faults yet with this form of updated Social Credit. Criticism is always welcome.

              The problem with demurrage has always been conversion from symbolic numbers to physical currency, whether it be in paper form of coin form. It is easy enough to calculate demurrage when it is electronic digits, or numbers on a ledger. Most economists cannot fathom how to have actual physical currency depreciate.

              Some economists contend that carry costs of small denomination bills will prevent flight into this type of physical currency (to maintain purchase strength). In other words, no large bills in circulation is all we need to do. Small bills are such a hassle, few will store wealth in this manner.

              Or, bills can be recalled periodically, and reissued in smaller volumes…effectively a demurrage holding tax. Recalling bills yearly during tax season is an option.

              The main thing is that capital does not need to seek aggressive usurious returns. When capital is satisfied with simply maintaining at zero gain, or less, then a different kind of capitalism emerges on the world scene. The world changes.

              I also happen to believe that people should own their own money power, and hence the monetary authority should be a fourth branch of government controlled by the people through legal and electoral means. The monetary authority would be something like electing a sheriff, who is independent and answers only to the people.

              The proper relationship of man to their government, is when government has to tax away the people’s money. Government is not the monetary authority. New money erupts at the base of the population, and for government to use it, they negotiate with the people to tax and recycle.

              But, good luck getting politicians or private money powers to relent, and give to the people what is theirs.

              • I agree REN, that demurrage on Social Credit will solve things regarding the usury issue. I’ve also thought of it as a viable way to keep existing units interest free. It’s my main beef with Dick, he insists on usurious full reserve banking. This, by the way, is also the basic problem with the Chicago plan and the Modern Greenback.

                The only additions I’d lack to add are flexible demurrage, in the endgame of demurrage, it might no longer be necessary, or at a alower level, as all outsting debts have been settled.

                Furthermore, I’m not sure how Social Credit will not inflate after satisfactory amounts have been spent in circulation. The handouts must stop at some point, only adding enough to facilitate growth of transactions in the economy.

                • REN permalink

                  All seigniorage money is issued against the money supply, and by extension all of the wealth of a country. It has no force vectors on it to return to a ledger to disappear, and hence it is floating. It is an independent entity, a force unto itself. The floating money must maintain VOLUME in relation with all of the goods and services provided. This is proper in that money is used by a sovereign people to sell their goods and wares. Their money becomes their tool, and matches the output of labor. Additionally, since it is at zero percent interest, capital no longer seeks marginal utility, and many of the distortions go away.

                  Floating seigniorage is why the monetary authority can only issue NEW money. At some point it must stop issuing money if there is inflation. The monetary authority is under lawful orders to watch the consumer price index and manage the money supply as an agent of the people. Government simply diverts (taxes) the wealth output of the people and uses it for the things government does best, e.g public commons and inelastic markets.

                  Government recycles money by taxing and spending, the money authority only issues new money or it spends (recycles) from demurrage taxes. The money authority then has some drain power with demurrage holding tax. The MA can not respend the holding tax, thus allowing the money supply to drain. In other words, the money authority has some knobs to control the economy by being able to add new money, or to drain at the rate set by demurrage tax.

                  Local disruptions, like depressed areas requiring recycling from rich to poor, are a function of the political sphere. A sovereign polity can agree on how to recycle for their brothers, otherwise it is not a nation.

                  Once all of the debts have been settled, people acquire savings (at zero interest). The people self fund each other, with banks as a paid agent. Banks cannot make money. The loops are all low and balanced.

                  Even overseas holders of demurrage money are encouraged to spend – buying goods from the originating country, thus preventing the hoarding/war problems of usury capitalism.

                  Mutual credit is wrong, you cannot just pump away with seigniorage floating money and not have it accumulate. At some point all of the negative banker credit has been satisfied, and the money supply starts to bloat.

                  But, very good mental leap on your part. Thanks Anthony.

                  • “Mutual credit is wrong, you cannot just pump away with seigniorage floating money and not have it accumulate. At some point all of the negative banker credit has been satisfied, and the money supply starts to bloat.”

                    I agree many MC promoters fall for that trap, I handled it here: Mutual Credit and Inflation

                    The conclusion is volume must managed properly and the credit space available shared equitably.

                    It’s a little bit unfortunate, that we need a currency board of some sorts, but on the other hand: I have not seen any system capable of avoiding it, other than by creating artificial scarcity like with Gold and Bitcoin.

      • bourchakoun permalink

        “Whereas my update to SC,…” On Social Credit forms:

        Actually there would be no reason to fear an electronic form of social credit. The current small local alternative currencies are often electronic.
        Example of a state-run system: Everyone gets a seperate account and a debit card. Let us say 1000 $ or Euros are transferred to that account monthly. All funds must be spent – cannot be transferred otherwise and if not spent, all funds have a demurrage of 2% by the end of the month. That way the state gets a hefty 24% tax in return if it is not spent and it is a good incentive to keep up the circulation. Of course assuming also that usury-financing of the state is forbidden, fractional reserve system is banned and real-estate can be bought interest-free on certain rules. If those things were met it would mean that we have won anyway and it would be a surprisingly new world on more than the financial level.

        Many options are possible and I am sure that we could work it out easily, but of course everything is out there to make sure it will never happen. They will not allow any of those steps – it is a life or death issue to them. A highly negative system needs constant cash-flows to continue functioning – conscience has to be corrupted again and again.

        • REN permalink

          My worldview is that there are sheep, sheepdogs, and wolves. I count myself among the sheepdogs, who are looking for wolves in sheep’s clothing. We’ve allowed the wolves to roam freely (under disguise) to take rents on money, land, and make monopolies.

          I agree, any advanced money system must account for all of the variables, and that means accounting for fiscal policy (taxes), land rent, and rents in all spheres.

          An advanced society would have an institution devoted to rooting out rents in order to keep money innocent. That institution would be staffed by monetary sheepdogs, who follow agreed upon law. A deep understanding of man’s defects should also be part of this new sheepdog priesthood.

          The average sheeple person does not even see the wolf in their midst. In many cases innocent sheep are slaughtered by their “wolves” (e.g. innocent jews).

          Money has many properties, which is why I call it an accounting identity. Some properties are the accounting function, law, force, demand, and unfortunately – wealth storage. Other properties are path, that is the route it takes and the compelling forces that make it take that route. In the case of BM, there is yet another force vector that makes it disappear.

          The idea of rents and the morphing nature of money is too much for the average sheeple to comprehend. They have trust built up by thousands of years of gift societies. They want to remain sheeple so they can concentrate on their chosen profession. I once was a sheeple who perceived that I was being abused, and then looked up. Sheeple want us to get it right, and to root out the wolves.

          So, we sheepdogs need to build up a common language and have a common agreement. There are many possible money systems, and all of them have some weakness. Those weaknesses just need to be non-fatal.

          The money power wolves cannot be beaten at the ballot box, because the many voters will never understand money. The many will never understand nuclear physics either, because it takes energy and devotion, and a deviation from your chosen profession.

          Alternate money systems based on good principles are a path we can lead the sheep in, on a destination to something great. By good system design, the money power wolves are locked out of an alternate system. An updated SC system is an ideal that allows a future advanced society to emerge. Updated SC is certainly is a goal worth considering and perhaps holding onto.

          In addition to alternate money systems, we sheepdogs need a place to debate and come to some sort of agreement. The movement is nascent and filled with competing ideologies, such that the sheepdogs are diverted, wasting energies.

          • bourchakoun permalink

            You are right. The wolves right now have ammassed simply too much control already – most importantly control over the masses through propaganda and they have succeeded too much at dumbing down of the population.

            Often when looking at the forums of mainstream-media-outlets I am more and more convinced that mankind deserves it all. They even fight to keep up the disinformation despite available information to the contrary. I myself “woke up” just through such a mainstream-media-forum link. But at least I took a look at it and continued researching and even experimented with some stuff in real life to check the validity. But to automatically reject and then attack everything just because it does not fit your old viewpoints? That is one hell of an indoctrination!

            That is why Edward Bernays despised the masses – they are manipulated so easily! The sheep will turn around and hang the sheepdog who tries to wake them up and the wolves will have a good laugh.

            But maybe you are right with something – a secret positive “sheepdog”-priesthood might be a good idea. It worked for those sheisters, so it might work with a positive one – though that might be a project for centuries – just like theirs.

  2. Ahmad permalink

    Excellent article Anthony…

    Just a question out of the topic….I just finished reading (Rethinking Money) written by Bernard Lietear
    What other books you suggest will be a good read in the topic?

    • Hi Ahmad,

      thanks!

      Well, it depends a little, do you mean about purely complementary units? Or Usury? Charles Eisenstein comes to mind, but I think he’s rather comparable to Lietaer.

      Or the historic battles? Many books on that, the ‘Babylon woe’?

      I must say that I don’t really have some kind of bibliography, I read most on line, often via articles etc. The problem with books is that they contain a few nuggets and a lot of stuff that is less relevant. That’s why I like the internet. On the other hand: google is killing our brain and I actually can feel it sometimes………..

      • Ahmad permalink

        Thanks for your swift response.
        I totally agree with you….online is were I came to know about you, Margrit Kennedy and others.

        I was always interested finding alternatives for usurious transactions (which may also happen in bartering in 3 different forms as per Islamic economic system which is not implemented) and was first introduced to the problem of the usury that is intrinsically built in current monetary systems through you guys.

        • then giving back a little to the internet has served its purpose Ahmad! Thanks for letting me know!

          • REN permalink

            Gesell’s book, “The Natural Economic Order” should be high up on any reading list. He is weak on credit theory, but otherwise is good on money. In his era, banker credit did not have the large impact on the economy it does today.

            Unfortunately, there is nobody who weaves it all together completely; history, credit and money. A monetary historian should define the money system operative at that time, and they (historians) almost never do.

            For example, Stephen Zarlinga is good on history, but ignores the usury problem, and focuses on the State money as a solution. Major Douglas is good on gap theory, gets that banker credit is bad, but has troubles understanding the gap is usury for the most part. Keynes understood a lot more than he let on, but came up with Government printing as a solution that just kicked the can down the road.

            Dick Eastman is important for learning about unbalanced flows. His loop theories are a good framework that I use.

            Dr. Michael Hudson is good for flow of funds and history, but he cannot see past our current “banker money” paradigm. All of his MMT (modern monetary theory) friends at UMKC have various theories that are accurate, then break down at some point, so it can be confusing if you are not well grounded.

            Margrit Kennedy teaches us the embedded costs of usury as they compound in production cycles.

            Ellen Brown is good on State Banking, but glosses over the usury that vectors into the system i.e. usury can be re-spent politically. Never mind that the aggregations are tough to tax away and recycle…plus the pride defect of politicians/bankers combined is terrible to consider.

            Eisenstein is good, just finished his book myself. However, you should read all the above first. Eisenstein is similar to Lietaer as Anthony mentions.

            Modern Monetary Realism is analyzing our current system and seems to have it down, unfortunately they just want to tweak the existing system to make it work, i.e. platinum coin. They “don’t go there” when it comes to the downsides of usury or banker money. They shill for more base money in the system to make banker credit work. Their motivations seem to be predatory, that is, understand the system to make money on it.

            Name’s website, Yamaguchy (sp?) is good for history.

            • Ahmad permalink

              Wow…thanks REN
              That was informative and will help a lot in making me decide where to search for what I need.

  3. Conrad permalink

    Interesting – I haven’t heard anything about the Dutch Bank problems yet – you are the first.

    Regards,

    Conrad Jones.

  4. veronique foster permalink

    Where do you put your money??

    Sent from my iPad

    • I’m the luckiest guy in the world: I have none.

  5. Gary S. permalink

    Anthony, Join the discussion on MarketWatch.com–an important place to plant ideas–the people on this site are engaged in the “real” world and therefore have the capacity to actually efect change–with that in mind–try not to alienate–my handle–chuck scofield

    • Thanks Gary, I’ll have a look!

  6. bourchakoun permalink

    I do not think that they want to see a bank run. A controlled depression is already happening, it is just not perceived as badly as in the 1930s, because of social security, good unemployment benefits still in some EU countries and some other factors like extremely increased mobility or (still) good family support in Southern European countries.

    Fast unorganized and potentially volatile break-downs of the system are extremely hard to control – besides their goal is a cashless-society and this cannot be built by wiping out the cashless-banking-system.

    However you are probably right – Cyprus was a test to see whether many people would pull out their savings. Obviously they did not – they call that solution bail-ins now and promote it already in the financial press:

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-04/unicredit-s-ghizzoni-favors-using-big-deposits-in-bank-failures.html

    If more people had withdrawn their savings in the EU or the US than they might have scrapped bail-ins for a while. Now they obviously know that it will work and they will proceed world-wide.

    As far as the real reason for those “malfunctions”. Who knows? They certainly can shut down anything, but that would serve no purpose. Maybe that way they confiscated some billions of criminal funds – well at least some of those organized criminal organizations that were not authorized by them (you know – those few left which actually fight the CIA and their cartels). Would not surprise me if some customers’ balances remained at zero and were then informed to ask at Interpol about the whereabouts of the funds :). A complete unannounced “malfunction” shut-down would have prevented insiders to pull the cash out. But of course that is only speculation.

    • >>>>as badly as in the 1930s, because of social security

      We learned from the 1930s that on empty stomach people start thinking, and might vote for somebody like Huey Long, or get on the train to go to Ottawa to clean house, or force the government to nationalize the central bank; or some other foolishness

      (no one would have voted for Hitler if Bruning had been allowed to fire up the economy)

      • That sure is a fair point. It’s undoubtedly part of the story why there is still not any credible opposition to the Eurocrats.

        • bourchakoun permalink

          Actually it is almost a surprise why there is that pittance of growing alternative thinking, which I would not even call an opposition yet.

          They work in concert for hundreds of years now and they are currently employing thousands of foundations, NGOs with unlimited finances, they control education from base to beyond university, they own the banks and most big corporations, they control politics employing presidents as actors, they own the entire big media outlets, they develop and keep the highest technology to the most upper level, they own and create the medical and agriculture fields in order to dumb down and sicken people on purpose and let us not forget their ever-vigilant button-men of secret services or troops beyond which are always able to extinguish any flame that starts burning too bright. Oh – and let us add the infiltration, the sheer nonsense and the ready-made disinformation agents out there in the so called alternative field – even people in the alternative are often unaware whether one person is an agent or someone who is simply unaware of a point in the agenda.

          An effective opposition would mean an active resistance and ACTIONS against each point on the agenda with awareness of the alternatives. I do not think that the people will become aware enough in time.

          However that does not mean that all of this is for nothing. Mankind develops in steps forward, then backwards, then forward again. THEY know and have written in their own books – Charles Galton Darwin and others – that there were civilizations of men of even higher level of technology than what we have now. Obviously those civilizations have risen and fallen completely to the levels of barbarism. In that respect the size of our current population and diverse availability of base knowledge works to our advantage.

          I am a firm believer in the law of cause and effect – you always reap what you sow – thus sooner or later THEIR great master-plan will be either stopped from within or from without. Of course they have no belief whatsoever in things like soul, divine guiding essence or even a positive reason for life itself.

          Opposition? I am pessimisticly optimistic – mankind will survive THOSE BUGGERS – hopefully there will be enough of us left to build anew then – fortunately I don’t believe it will be from the stone age up again.

          • I couldn’t agree more.

      • Brownhawk permalink

        This isn’t how it went down

        The Zionist’s plan all along was to use Hitler and pave the way for his coming to power. But they had to make it look good to the German people as part of the overall plan for a 2nd World War. So they ‘allowed’ Germany to operate a money system independent of their, the Zionist’s money.

        • I’m still not sure on where I stand with Hitler. He remains a bit of an enigma……..

          I felt like this for years, but The Red Symphony certainly states very clearly that Hitler was a real problem. According Rashkovsky he was originally built up to deal with Stalin, who left the internationalist’s line by getting rid of Trotsky and went for national communism and a partly Russian nationalist reaction.

          But then, according to Rashkovsky, Hitler went his own way and started bartering with his allies, getting rid of the financiers for trade.

          On the other hand: his central bank director Schacht was a freemason and close personal friend of Montague, BoE boss. He was also acquitted at Neuremberg.

          • Brownhawk permalink

            Sorry Anthony if this is going off topic. Although I often find it informative when comment threads like this one sometimes take on a life of their own.

            My own sense is that Hitler going his own way was a HUGE problem for the Zionists. In their arrogance they get cocky and over-confident with their manipulations. For example,while incorporating a similar m.o.in the 1770’s the plan was to incite the Americans and foment a Revolution. Upon which the “invincible” British army would easily defeat the “American rabble” on the battlefield and implement an early version of a NWO. Sometimes the best laid plans…

            I think Hitler almost pulled off a similar ‘miracle’ starting in 1941 with the all-out attack on the Soviet Union. Woulda Coulda Shoulda. Just imagine how history would have changed with a success of that operation. The World really DID hold its breath with that one. Including the Zionists.

        • Brownhawk permalink

          You have to remember, by the time 1930 rolled around the German people had had it up to their eyeballs with the jews. Which of course was the master plan of the Zionists. Stab them in the back in 1918 after the German army had for all intents and purposes won the war on the battlefield, but lostin the boardrooms.

          With the harsh and punitive Treaty of Versailles their misery worsened with only a slight respite in the 2nd half of the 1920’s. Then the Wall st. crash and by then the people were starving for a true revival of a Volksreich. No way they would have fallen for an infusion of ‘jewish capital’, and the Zionists of course knew this.

          Hitler didn’t let them down and after 1933 the new free-money system in Germany began. The great military build-up commenced
          and the Zionists were monitoring it all the way while planning the orchestration for the 2nd World War.

          Their plan almost backfired though with an underestimation of German military power. They had to scramble with the disingenuous American “lend-leases” to both Britain AND the Soviet Union in order to keep to the script.

          • “Their plan almost backfired though with an underestimation of German military power. They had to scramble with the disingenuous American “lend-leases” to both Britain AND the Soviet Union in order to keep to the script.”

            I’m not arguing with you, I’m exploring this: You could also say: German might got out of hand because Hitler left the script and built a usury free economy.

            • Brownhawk permalink

              Actually that reply wasn’t to you Anthony but to “name789″ Thread gets confusing sometimes.

              Having said that, and I hope I’m not simply parsing words here, I don’t think Hitler was ever on board with the script. It was a cat n’ mouse game all the way until June of 1941. This is when he had that moment akin to Churchill, when he said he felt as though his whole life was but a prelude to his becoming Prime Minister after the German invasion of Norway in April of 1940. Hitler’s moment came in June 1941 with Operation Barbarossa.

              I’m sure he knew all about Albert Pike’s revelation of the Protocol plan for three World Wars. The intent with the invasion of the Soviet Union was to thwart that plan.

              This was the only fight he wanted.

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. Major computer malfunctions at three of the Dutch too big to fails | Secret Code
  2. War, False Flags And The Economic Collapse - News Brief - Episode 31 |
  3. Major computer malfunctions at three of the Dutch too big to fails | Real Currencies | Logan's Week

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,106 other followers

%d bloggers like this: