Banker confronted

such is the definition for open and transparent discussion worldwide in politics and other things that actually matter. I wonder how long we are going to sit on our asses and watch this show go on.. :PPP
He's an Irish Tv Political presenter, but good question :)
wonder why he didn't just mention that the european zone is a collective and to ensure the survival of the financial sector within it everyone would have to do it's share?!
(not that i 100% know what this is/was about now anyway - or that i'd believe it, it owuld just be an answer anyway^^)
thats what our Finland President told me yesterday, about supporting the union and being in all this together, but I was simply asking why are we lead into slaughter as a country, this presenter's question is more precise in addressing the issue about paying the failing of banking institutions that are not related to the irish people.
*are not related to anyone
of course they are related to someone, mainly to the big players who steer the world into the direction they wish it to go. It is important to collect wealth from the people so they wont gain independence of the system/matrix in place. Imagine it as yet another tax, next to regular and inflation based tax.
i knew that but couldnt describe it in words like u did

now the main issue is, if we are not inferior minded comparing to those inbreds how can we implement equality and crush a twisted/squishing/opressive system

we dont want them to control into their own benefit, because there is a massive global thing called human+natural course of life
They are very smart, no doubt about that.
They control the system, no doubt about that either.
When something has been learned, it's hard to unlearn.
To undo the control they have is something that is next to impossible but there are ways.
Something as little as 10% of people need to be aware in order to make the change available for all of humanity. I'm no mathematician so I can only predict on hunch but about 10-30% of the resources 'they' are using is required to spread enough information that the 10% of humanity wakes up to reality of certain matters and thus works as a catalyst bringing this change for the rest of mankind.
This works because truth is a powerful force and it cannot be covered with lies once it has surfaced. When people become aware, they can't be put back to sleep with the same tricks anymore.
Obviously they too are aware of this and they have invested a lot of resources into wide variety of tricks to keep the masses unquestioning and passive so they wouldn't wake up in the first place.

Now assuming this would work and people would become more aware of the system's true nature, this awakening process can be steered like anything else in this society.
It can be mislead, Zeitgeist etc are pointing out the mistakes in the monetary system, but the real problem is not the money, but the men behind the money. We can butcher bunch of bankers and make changes to our economy, but if we do not make changes on a much deeper level, nothing will fundamentally change. As long as people are happy, they don't want change. They are used to change bringing bad things and who can blame them with these people in charge?

There are other ways also, but fundamentally they all have something to do with awareness. Being aware of possibilities will make you reach out for them. Ignorance is a bliss. You can be aware of the conspiracies and the system, natural way of living or good ethical and moral code - whatever it is, you live through it and thus influence your surroundings. It's really simple actually, be the change you want to see in the world.
QuoteThis works because truth is a powerful force and it cannot be covered with lies once it has surfaced.
well the truth certainly is a powerful force, but quite frankly you can't convice the masses of wrongdoing by stating facts. you can serve them as many proofs as you like as long as the other one is appealing to the peoples emotions there is no way you can beat them on the long run. and how are you going to conquer fear, definitely being one of the strongest fealings people have? quite frankly you could only by a) take that fear off them, which they wouldn't allow or b) create even greater fear (which so far noone seemed to bother with...and lets face it, it's a very cruel thing to do.)
like you said, they dont allow it. whatever "it" is, they won't allow it if it's threatening their interests. thats greed 101.

this is why you require 10-30% (guessful prediction) of the resources they have in use. even if they use their resources 100%, your 30% will counter 15% of their influnece and like stated, it requires 10% of population (this was on some scientific research) to take up an idea or thought and fit it into the consensus also known as common sense.

image: kdu77

this is slightly related to the topic (and mostly to the consensus):
yep. just an issues there:
common sense is very rare to find these days amongst 'the masses'

well what i meant by allowing "it" is to take the fear off people, which would require people to not be faced with it constantly. "them" just standing by, watching you destroy their work.
though with greater fear they can only try to top that again and again. sure that's not a nice and bright thought, but eventually one has to fail. and when that happens you could still start giving the people hope again.
other than that maybe hate would be something you could go for, though that wouldn't make the people "listen" to you, it would make them want to fight, so be aggressive, which brings no peaceful solution imo. though them "fearing" 'you' makes them want what you tell them they want.
common sense IS the masses, don't you see?

and it doesnt matter what "it" is. fear is surely the strongest force used to control but there are other methods of control and there are plenty. You are not allowed to do plenty of things and people would call that a conspiracy if I were to list some of those things.
But I already answered to this with my previous writing, maybe you should read it with more thought?

ps. read my reply to tace
well i'm refering to 'common sense' as in to know what's
a) good for oneself and
b) what's good for 'everyone'(the majority)

and i mean actually good, not what feels good at the moment.
sure "brainwashing" would be also one method, but imo the one with greater resources would be more successful at it (on a legal scale). to be fair, i consider fear mongering part of brainwashing too. what else are you refering to?

well, war is inevadable with syria+iran (imo). whats to be decided is only what part everyone ecept israel and the us are going to play in it.
the us can't stop going to war in yet another country simply to justify their military expanses
what is the part you dont agree with me? I dont quite get it.
that you say that common sense would be the masses. if you take 10 million people and 9 million of them are plain stupid and want to spend all tax money on porn, that's not a sign of applying common sense (in my opinion)

though that's what the masses would want, so it would be common sense after your juding, or did i misunderstood you there? if so we actually don't disagree^^
couldnt quite find the one I was looking for.

What I meant was that the consensus reality, the most believed beliefs, true or false ARE the common sense. it is common sense that man cannot fly.

of course "common sense" means standard level of sensibility as in you should know you drown if you cant swim, but in reality it's far more when in fact beliefs that are approved by masses turn out to be false. This becomes the matrix, a reality inside reality where false things can be true because people believe in them.
as i said, not the logic i'd apply, but what they reason with.

well, if you argue from a perspective where the eurozone under no circumstances may fall, for any country, i might even understand them, that everyone has to do it's bit, because otherwise we'd all be ruined.

BUT there's two things
1. the finance system (well you can't do much about that, so lets agree that thats a fixed system... well it could have alternatives, maybe some other regulations and so on but...thats not exactly easily doable imo)
2. is from every countrys perspective the country itself really ruined, just because the eurozone collapses/because the country is no longer part of it?
sure, alot of countries profit from it, germany being one of the most profiteering ones (though i also wonder if it's still really worth the money they pump into it. they should start balancing rather it being worth the effort and resources, actually all countries should) well already for the greece affair... well, the country is pretty much f*, yet they keep it alive for a few more years, they're past the point of return, it can not be saved, noone (except maybe the chinese, but they likely got no interest in greece) have the money to do so, so why even bother to push the unevadable. just so a few sorry a*s can save their money, of whom our governments think of being unable to exist any longer without them being around.

tbh i also wonder why germany even bothers borrowing money from america, if it would get far better conditions from china. (well the chinese probably should stop pumping money into america too, since there is no way they'll get their money back from them either, so why lend them, so they can give it to someone else, if they could just aswell skip america (the chinese AND germany) and try to get rid of them on the long run?!
I dont understand what youre trying to say? keep it more simple if you can.
However I'd appreciate if you dont use countries but rather 'entities' since "country thinking" is highly outdated. Powers that be are beyond countries and thus limiting the conversation to country level is pointless.

European Union is an entity.

Banking Industry is an entity.

Banking Elite is part of banking industry, but not the same.

Country can be part of another entity such as EU or UN.

Now if we break the video down, It's the banking elite that wants a country to participate in their project called EU and representative of this elite is being asked why should a country participate in this project if it won't benefit the country at all, but rather damage it and all the other countries as well. Obviously he's reluctant to give the answer because it's something that he doesnt want to spill out and would reveal the true nature of the banking industry.
well in short all i meant was that he could've just applied marketing skills and tell them how much the EU (and each country - thats why i refer to countries, since they're still individuals and exist also as such and not only as the EU) would need to be part of this joint :)

the rest was just rumbling about that they should get a grip and dump greece for good and at least consider leaving the eu as a possibility or argue WHY it would be good (after having thought it through, and actually having calculated it) to stay in it
youre not addressing the issue here. Imagine me asking you for money to a business I had that went bankrupt. You see no point in it but I demand you to pay me, or else..

That's called blackmailing. These people are a mob.
the "or else" is my point. they should at some point consider taking the risk, sooner or later doesn't really matter, the outcome will imo be the same. or at least come up with a "what would happen if we took the "or else" path"

with applying some marketing i only meant that he could have bullshat his way out of it. or as you were implying, apply some pressure that everyone was doomed, were the banks not be saved.
sure if you have a lot of time to think about this or you are experienced in answering such direct questions you can bullshit your way away with it.

Though I'd really love to hear an answer to that question by any such person.

I'm not clever enough to think of a reasonable explanation other than we want your money.

surely you can say we need it to save our company so we can save the world but then again you need some credibility to your claim and remember that when you make a claim, its a promise.
a promise that will keep popping up until it has been fullfilled and people are going to demand answers and to see progress in other words action take place towards that direction.
sure, if you blatantly lie it has to withstand some investigation. though if you're just talking nonsense, propaganda or make believe stuff only a few are going to check. and only few are going to even care if they come up with something.(though this somewhat relates to the comment i made in the chain above)
but yes, if you take into account, that people might some day actually care about what you said, you'd have to somewhat stick to your word, true. but the avarge person these days doesn't remember a promise after a week has passed.

well i wondered why they'd even send someone to an interview whos not even able to give ANY answer, not even a shitty one to a question ;)
this man was requesting an answer, you cant just blabbermouth yourself out of it.
rather, demanding.
well true. but then again he could make everyone believe that he gave one, even if he didnt^^
well...and then just defy him so to say
one person does a huge pile of crap and the rest of the population has to clean it?
it's right there: i don't approve of it, though that's the logic they are applying (or at least the reasoning he could have used). well, someone HAS to clean it up (if we do not want to start at zero all over again, which would sooner or later lead to just the same situation we're in now. (except you want to start a trade system, instead of currency. you use cheques. one checkque worth a living cow equals 7.98 living chickens and so one, hf keeping a database up to date xD)
in the begining currency, was used to trade goods with actual value in gold ....but then somoene "smart" thouth "i will guard all ur gold and give u paper" and the dumber rest of world population said "ok but i want an interest so u can guard it" the guy "(trollol) sure i will give you more paper"

then someone discovered the dumbfuck system the "smart" guy invented and said "fuck this, we will not start again"
he invented economy

and here we are, apparently traped where we cannot come out of
Back to top