# America poised for world domination? Bush and Kerry cousins?

Grotesque Puppet
America poised for world domination? Bush and Kerry cousins??

Today my friend directed my attention toward this 90MB documentary:

It talks about how George W. Bush, his father and grandfather are proven initiates of a multi-generational lodge called Skull and Bones, and how it will end up just like when Hitler ruled Germany.

If anyone else has seen or chooses to watch the documentary, what do you think of it? Weird yes, but interesting, no?

Grotesque Puppet
And I'm sorry if this should have been in the skepticism and debunking forum

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Just PM one of the mentors and they'll move it for you. I think Taft was a member of Skull and Bones.

Jonny_trigonometry
ok, I'm spilling the beans.

Freemasonry is based on the goal of ruling the world. There are many different kinds of secret societies (such as skull and bones) and they are all kind of like parts to the engine that is freemasonry. The Illumaniti are to be viewed as the controler of the engine, but I'm pretty sure they aren't fully. I'm thinkin that that is not the highest level. Their main objective was really only concerned with controling the USA, but I'm sure there is much more to it than that now. It was started in 1776 in Engelstatd Germany (pardon my spelling throughout this) with this main goal. I think the Illumaniti was a more full specialized society than it's predecessor which had the very general goal of running the world, and a different name (I can't remember what it was). When this change occured in 1776, the other part of the "command" must've gone into some other wherabouts which have remained more secret than the illumaniti. Maybe the illuminati is kind of like a patsy and also used as a way to recruit and spread intrest in their grand schemes, but I digress.

Once the masons started letting in scholars into their society (around the 1600's or something like that), their goals started to grow more and more grand. Basically this whole thing (freemasonry) started in the dark ages or even before (around the 1400's). The Davincci code speaks about some of the early societies like the knights templar who aparently have the holy grail (bull ****). But the knights templar were a real group, and they were the first to start the idea of international banking. During thier fade out, the masons were fading in. This idea of secret societies caught on quite well over scores of years and became more and more refined, but was still really only there for men (no women allowed) of the mason trade, thus easy to keep secret. For example, suppose only carpenters started their own secret society (it's sort of like unionizing, but it's secret, so it's got that "extra special meaning" type vibe to it) and they called it "the carpenters", well then they just recognize each other by asking "are you a carpenter?" but also making some pre-arranged body movement or something, and others in your company who aren't "carpenters" would never know the wiser, even if their trade is pounding nails for a living. Things got a little shaky for the masons when the french caught on, and started a campaign to erradocate freemasonry, many of their head honchos were exposed and they lost a lot of thier structure. It was then when they were down on thier numbers and started letting other people in as long as they had money and high intelligence. This was during the 1500-1600's or something.

So they started getting more heads working together to make their organization more redundant. With all these different types of people, they started arranging more complex protocols for each other to follow if certain things happen (and of course ways to recognize each other). They started compartmentalizing and creating more ranks and more specialized positions. This way, they can't be cracked as easily, much like how a ship has many doors that seal rooms that fill with water to keep the ship from sinking. If one cell is exposed, then no big deal, it's just cut away. This also allows more security due to the fact that each mason knows and is responsable for less than before.

After thier big changes, cells started gaining more and more footing in almost all european countries. Many masons held positions in politics and big business. All types of systems started originating, but they all were organized somehow. Think of the movie fight club... In theory, there is a highest rank, and a leader that is running this whole system, but is completely unknown and more powerful than Bush. There are some main organizations such as the French-Scottish system with 33 "degrees" or levels. And the blankity-blank system (I forgot the name of it) which has 9 degrees. Some high degree defecters (I don't know how they are able to defect without being murdered to protect secrecy... which somewhat makes me think this is just a big myth) are certain that the 33 degree one controls the EU. Some famous high degree masons (32 and 33) include: FDR, Harry S Truman, Benjamin Franklin... I can't remember any more right now, but I know Thomas jefferson was a mason (of what degree I don't know) and so was Washington, but Washington left masonry for the last 30 or so years of his life. Oh yeah, Lenin was a level 32, and Marx I dont' know what level. Although I'm not too sure about Hitler, haven't read it from any credible sources. BTW, I regard credible sources as mainy videotaped footage of ex-masons spilling the beans, and all the architecture built around the world. seeing is believing. I have read a little, but I don't fully trust the internet with this stuff too much unless I see a picture (from many different sources) of these figures dressed up in masonry gear (yes they have plenty of traditional jewlery, necklaces, you name it... loincloths). There are all sorts of illustrations, paintings, emblems, statues, buildings... you name it, with masonic symbols on them too.

One guy, who's grave is in Washington DC, named Albert Pike, was a very highly respected 33 degree mason. He came up with a plan to take over the world with three world wars... hmm. He was a luciferian, and is a good representative of what the top levels of masonry are all about. They believe that they will rule the world with symbology rather than language (sort of like propoganda), so they leave their mark everywhere they are established. One of the big things they like to do is put up obilisks everywhere (transplanted from egypt), there is even one in central park. They like the scorpion, and spiders, and they put those everywhere. Thier biggest symbol is this: http://religion-cults.com/Secret/Freemasonry/mason-emblem12.gif
the big G in the middle represents humanity's ability to reproduce (I don't know what word it stands for). That symbol is designed into the layout of washington DC. They like the pentogram, and they like eagles.
here's some handy dandy masonic clip art, for all those newly inniciated masons:
http://www.daylightmasons.org/seattle_masonic_lodge_clipart.html [Broken] (a lot of varaitions of the main symbol of the square and compass)
they like the equilateral triangle too, it symbolizes brotherhood, equality, and... I forgot. hehe.:
http://www.kena.org/hirams/Images3/33RD.gif [Broken] (notice the 33 on the top)
this has more of thier stuff :
http://www.kena.org/hirams/Pictures/Masonic [Broken]
There is a lot more to it...

Each major religion has a specific type of masonry (BTW, beleiving in God is a requisite), and all of them (the specific types of masonry tailored to each religion) are tailored to make the believer swear oaths to God that completely cross the line. All the oaths they take are designed to directly contradict their beliefs, albeit unknowingly when they are performing the inniciation ceremony into the next level up. The things they are asked to swear to include their own murder if they choose to defect, and denial of their own beliefs wether or not they defect (in a way that doesn't really seem against their beliefs on the surface of things, and without thought about what they are asked to swear). I don't know the exact words they must say, this is just what I understand. I also know that a whole lot of memorzation work must be done in order to pass up into a higher level, so a lot of it is just listen and recite.

Ok, so they make oaths to their god and thier brothers (fellow masons), oh yeah, and they always burn three candles during this ceremony. One represents the sun (which lights the daytime), one the moon (which lights the night time), and one that represents the "enlightenment" of the grand master of their particular lodge. So In many masonic buildings all over the world, you will see a room with stained glass containing lots and more of the symbols above, with intricate detail everywhere, and there will probably be a small knee high platform and three candles on three of it's corners. The three candles, or three lights of any kind is another symbol of freemasonry.

Ok, now on to more fun stuff.
There are 33 sections in the emblem of the UN. count them:
http://www.un.org/english/
there are 33 feathers on one side of the eagle on the back of the dollar bill, and 32 on the other side (one side representing the French-Scottish system, and the other... I don't know, prolly some other system). There are 9 tail feathers which represent that other system that I forgot but mentioned earlier.
oh yeah, they also like the number 13, and I forgot what it means, but there are 13 levels in the pyramid on the dollar bill, and the eye on the top represents the illimaniti as it spreads it's "light" downward (aka shroud of confusion).

But anyway, there is a lot more to say, but I'm tired and I don't want to spend the time to find out what I'm forgetting...
one more thing... the illuminati loves that number 1776, and they put it everywhere, like on the bottom of the pyramid on the dollar bill (roman numerals) And in latin it's stated Anniut Coeptis (the year biggining) novus ordo seclorum (the order of the new world) which is confused by americans to be be inferred as the year marking the start of the USA... Well how could that mark the first year of the USA when the revolutionary war was still to be won, and the constitution or bill of rights wasn't even written yet? 1776 was the year the illumaniti was firmly established, it was the year that marked the beginning of their plan to control the USA. 1776 is also in roman numerals on book on the statue of liberty (which was a gift from masons in france to masons in the US), and even the new WTC is going to be 1776 feet tall...

So, it kinda makes a person wonder... When the stock market was booming in 1928, why did, all of the sudden, all of the major stock holders start massivly selling their stock one day, almost like they had agreed to do it that day, and in that way? Why did all those rich people (in a booming market) feel the need to start panic selling in the first place? Unless!!! they were masons, simply obeying their orders. Once they started selling, the stock prices started falling, and then many saw their stocks start to lose value, so they started selling, which further lowered the prices, and so on and so forth until the whole nation was panic selling and voiwalla! the great depression... then FDR (a 33 degree) switched us from the gold standard to a fiat system, and the rest is history... our money really doesn't have any value other than what the people give it because it truely doesn't represent anything, it's not a "share" of the US, it's just a promisary note. Economists define it as a promise, backed by a promise to repay a larger promise. Why didn't anybody listen to the message in the Wizzard of OZ? follow the yellow brick road, stay with gold!

eh, I'm gonna go to bed now.

Last edited by a moderator:
Smurf
How did I know you would show up here Johnny?

Grotesque Puppet
This is very interesting

Smurf
Get all your conspiracy outline stuff here: http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/

Mind you, I don't trust it. I don't trust any site that will publish crap like this. (They even used a pre-Kaufman translation)

Last edited:
Smurf
Thier biggest symbol is this: http://religion-cults.com/Secret/Freemasonry/mason-emblem12.gif
the big G in the middle represents humanity's ability to reproduce (I don't know what word it stands for). That symbol is designed into the layout of washington DC.
Looks like a ruler and compass to me. What does that have to do with DC?

Ok, now on to more fun stuff.
There are 33 sections in the emblem of the UN. count them:
http://www.un.org/english/
The UN emblem has 26, 28, or 30 leaves, depending on what you count.
there are 33 feathers on one side of the eagle on the back of the dollar bill, and 32 on the other side (one side representing the French-Scottish system, and the other... I don't know, prolly some other system). There are 9 tail feathers which represent that other system that I forgot but mentioned
oh yeah, they also like the number 13, and I forgot what it means, but there are 13 levels in the pyramid on the dollar bill, and the eye on the top represents the illimaniti as it spreads it's "light" downward (aka shroud of confusion).
The real meaning of the US 1 dollar bill
The only thing left to question is the Pyramid. What's your reason for the Pyramid?
one more thing... the illuminati loves that number 1776, and they put (snip)
masons in the US), and even the new WTC is going to be 1776 feet tall...
1776 was also the year the continental congress ratified the Declaration of Independance. (july 4th, you know?)
So, it kinda makes a person wonder... When the stock market was booming in 1928, why did, all of the sudden, all of the major stock holders start massivly selling their stock one day,
(snip)
eh, I'm gonna go to bed now.
It's simple economics, the market was being inflated artificially, it had to collapse sooner or later. It wasn't planned - it was inevitable.

Smurf
For the record, Skull and Bones is practically a frat house, there's nothing 'secret' about it if you know how to use google.

outsider
Jonny Trig - u are the man.... much respect for your explanado...

Purely intuitive speculation... but do you know if George Sorros / Warren Buffet fit in the mix somehow?

America is not poised... it is the Illumati aka the "first terrorist organization"

outsider
Smurf said:
It's simple economics, the market was being inflated artificially, it had to collapse sooner or later. It wasn't planned - it was inevitable.

What qualifies you to say this?

I can't believe that you lack the intuition to see how this scenerio is an obvious coordinated effort. Leaving outsiders holding the hot potato has always been the jack move... since I've known jack moves.

Why do you think it's so important to be aligned and belong to something in society today? This is nothing new. They know it's too late for people to make major moves so they don't care what kind of organizations we form. Someone has added all the world value and they have gone after all significant property within the reach of average people. .. anyway... too tired.. :zzz: u can think about it... what a disappointment

outsider
Smurf said:
The real meaning of the US 1 dollar bill
The only thing left to question is the Pyramid. What's your reason for the Pyramid?

the comic sans serif font makes this page especially official! Actually looks like something GWB would do. :rofl: This page was MADE for you... just like the public CIA website.

Smurf
Take out a one dollar bill, and look at it.

The one dollar bill you're looking at first came off the presses in 1957 in its present design.

This so-called paper money is in fact a cotton and linen blend, with red and blue minute silk fibers running through it. It is actually material. We've all washed it without it falling apart. A special blend of ink is used, the contents we will never know. It is overprinted with symbols and then it is starched to make it water resistant and pressed to give it that nice crisp look.

If you look on the front of the bill, you will see the United States Treasury Seal. On the top you will see the scales for a balanced budget. In the center you have a carpenter's square, a tool used for an even cut. Underneath is the Key to the United States Treasury. That's all pretty easy to figure out, but what is on the back of that dollar bill is something we should all know.

If you turn the bill over, you will see two circles. Both circles, together, comprise the Great Seal of the United States. The First Continental Congress requested that Benjamin Franklin and a group of men come up with a Seal. It took them four years to accomplish this task and another two years to get it approved.

If you look at the left-hand circle, you will see a Pyramid. Notice the face is lighted, and the western side is dark. This country was just beginning. We had not begun to explore the West or decided what we could do for Western Civilization. The Pyramid is uncapped, again signifying that we were not even close to being finished. Inside the capstone you have the all-seeing eye, an ancient symbol for divinity. It was Franklin's belief that one man couldn't do it alone, but a group of men, with the help of God, could do anything.

"IN GOD WE TRUST" is on this currency. The Latin above the pyramid, ANNUIT COEPTIS, means, "God has favored our undertaking." The Latin below the pyramid, NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM, means, "a new order has begun." At the base of the pyramid is the Roman Numeral for 1776.

If you look at the right-hand circle, and check it carefully, you will learn that it is on every National Cemetery in the United States. It is also on the Parade of Flags Walkway at the Bushnell, Florida National Cemetery, and is the centerpiece of most hero's monuments. Slightly modified, it is the seal of the President of the United States, and it is always visible whenever he speaks, yet very few people know what the symbols mean.

The Bald Eagle was selected as a symbol for victory for two reasons: First, he is not afraid of a storm; he is strong, and he is smart enough to soar above it. Secondly, he wears no material crown. We had just broken from the King of England. Also, notice the shield is unsupported. This country can now stand on its own. At the top of that shield you have a white bar signifying congress, a unifying factor. We were coming together as one nation. In the Eagle's beak you will read, "E PLURIBUS UNUM," meaning, "one nation from many people." Above the Eagle, you have thirteen stars, representing the thirteen original colonies, and any clouds of misunderstanding rolling away. Again, we were coming together as one. Notice what the Eagle holds in his talons. He holds an olive branch and arrows. This country wants peace, but we will never be afraid to fight to preserve peace. The Eagle always wants to face the olive branch, but in time of war, his gaze turns toward the arrows.

They say that the number 13 is an unlucky number. This is almost a worldwide belief. You will usually never see a room numbered 13, or any hotels or motels with a 13th floor.

13 original colonies,
13 signers of the Declaration of Independence,
13 stripes on our flag,
13 steps on the Pyramid,
13 letters in the Latin above,
13 letters in "E Pluribus Unum,"
13 stars above the Eagle,
13 bars on that shield,
13 leaves on the olive branch,
13 fruits, and if you look closely, 13 arrows.
And, for minorities: the 13th Amendment.
I ask people, "Why don't you know this?" Your children don't know this, and their history teachers don't know this. Too many veterans have given up too much to ever let the meaning fade. Many veterans remember coming home to an America that didn't care. Too many veterans never came home at all. Share this page with some of your e-mail friends, so they can learn what is on the back of the UNITED STATES ONE DOLLAR BILL, and what it stands for... Otherwise, they will probably never know.

--

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
outsider said:
What qualifies you to say this?

I can't believe that you lack the intuition to see how this scenerio is an obvious coordinated effort. Leaving outsiders holding the hot potato has always been the jack move... since I've known jack moves.

There is a very good reason that everybody sold all those shares that one day: margin buying. It was a rampant process in the late 20s. The way it works is simple: you put up, say, 10% of the cost of your shares, and some firm puts up the remaining 90%. As long as the stock goes up, you make far more money than you otherwise would have, because you can buy far more shares. The problem is, when the share prices start to go down, you cannot afford to hold on wait for a recovery. If the price goes down only 10%, you've lost your entire investment. If you paid for the shares yourself, the share would need to go all the way to $0 for this to happen. Nobody worried about this in the late 20s because stock prices were consistently doing nothing but going up. They simply assumed it would continue forever. But guess what? As soon as a downward fluctuation of at least 10% takes place, the owners of shares bought recently on margin have no choice but to sell, or risk not being able to pay back the creditor who put up funds for them and going into default (which would likely mean they are never able to buy on margin again). Once these people begin selling, the fluctuation increases, until all marginal buyers are forced to sell. At that point, the downward turn is so acute that a panic occurs; everyone starts to sell, until suddenly nobody is willing to buy any new shares and the stocks are virtually worthless. Think about the hypothesis you are putting forth, outsider. It's not like the crash was caused by a small group of people who owned thousands of shares each suddenly selling them all in a coordinated effort. The crash was caused by almost every single small investor out there selling all of their shares. A 'coordinated' effort to effect this kind of occurence would be a coordinated efforts of millions of people, most of whom have never even met each other. Exactly how is such a thing supposed to be carried out? The other thing to consider is that the few people who didn't lose everything that day, or the fewer still who actually profited, didn't really profit! They simply managed to make a few bucks or at least keep what they had. If the market had continued to rise the way it had been for years, they could have doubled their net worth in the span of another decade. What exactly is the motive for destroying a system that greatly increases the amount of the money you have each year simply to make a few bucks on a one-time gig that destroys the economy of the entire nation? When you've got a system like that set up, you don't intentionally destroy it. Burnsys What exactly is the motive for destroying a system that greatly increases the amount of the money you have each year simply to make a few bucks on a one-time gig that destroys the economy of the entire nation? When you've got a system like that set up, you don't intentionally destroy it. Let's suppose there are only 2 people in my country, me and my friend,, i have 10 bucks,, my friend has 5, i am twice whealty as my friend.. i take 4 of my friends dolars and burn them.. i have not won any money, but now i am 10 times whealtier that my friend Staff Emeritus Gold Member Fine then. If you consider pure mean-spiritedness a good enough reason to sink your own economy and destroy the near certainty you had of continuuing to increase your own absolute wealth, not to mention ruin your 'friend,' I suppose I have nothing to say. You've now addressed one of many points I made. Burnsys loseyourname said: Fine then. If you consider pure mean-spiritedness a good enough reason to sink your own economy and destroy the near certainty you had of continuuing to increase your own absolute wealth, not to mention ruin your 'friend,' I suppose I have nothing to say. You've now addressed one of many points I made. It's just about power, and there is no such thing as absolute wealth in terms of money, maybe a better way to increase your wealth is simply decreasing the wealth of everybody around you. BTW: replace "Friend" with "Unknown people" it wasn't the point. (I am not saying this was what actualy happened in the 30', i am just saying it isn't imposible) Jonny_trigonometry loseyourname said: There is a very good reason that everybody sold all those shares that one day: margin buying. It was a rampant process in the late 20s. The way it works is simple: you put up, say, 10% of the cost of your shares, and some firm puts up the remaining 90%. As long as the stock goes up, you make far more money than you otherwise would have, because you can buy far more shares. The problem is, when the share prices start to go down, you cannot afford to hold on wait for a recovery. If the price goes down only 10%, you've lost your entire investment. If you paid for the shares yourself, the share would need to go all the way to$0 for this to happen. Nobody worried about this in the late 20s because stock prices were consistently doing nothing but going up. They simply assumed it would continue forever. But guess what? As soon as a downward fluctuation of at least 10% takes place, the owners of shares bought recently on margin have no choice but to sell, or risk not being able to pay back the creditor who put up funds for them and going into default (which would likely mean they are never able to buy on margin again). Once these people begin selling, the fluctuation increases, until all marginal buyers are forced to sell. At that point, the downward turn is so acute that a panic occurs; everyone starts to sell, until suddenly nobody is willing to buy any new shares and the stocks are virtually worthless.

Think about the hypothesis you are putting forth, outsider. It's not like the crash was caused by a small group of people who owned thousands of shares each suddenly selling them all in a coordinated effort. The crash was caused by almost every single small investor out there selling all of their shares. A 'coordinated' effort to effect this kind of occurence would be a coordinated efforts of millions of people, most of whom have never even met each other. Exactly how is such a thing supposed to be carried out? The other thing to consider is that the few people who didn't lose everything that day, or the fewer still who actually profited, didn't really profit! They simply managed to make a few bucks or at least keep what they had. If the market had continued to rise the way it had been for years, they could have doubled their net worth in the span of another decade. What exactly is the motive for destroying a system that greatly increases the amount of the money you have each year simply to make a few bucks on a one-time gig that destroys the economy of the entire nation? When you've got a system like that set up, you don't intentionally destroy it.

This provides more reason why it was easy to control the stock market crash. If banks and businesses marketed buying on the margin so that many more people would invest, then it would only provide more control for them. They wanted to put more money into the market anyway, so why not get other people to add to your money? They also needed more people to be directly affected so that panic would spread. What if they wanted to make some sweeping changes in the country in a fast ammount of time? How could you do this without the people getting upset over the changes you want to make? You create a nationwide crisis that puts people in a state of panic and fear, then they can be controlled more easily. The society would've had many assets then anyway, many of them were gained in the inflation of stock prices but bost were already gained through the hundreds of years of swindling money through back scratching both here and in Europe (most of their assets are in Europe anyway), and they knew as long as everyone thought the market was booming, they could get away with selling almost all of their stocks and come out on top... at the expense of the people of course. This whole fiasco is also a ploy to broaden the gap between the upper and middle classes. Of course, it's all theory.

Jonny_trigonometry
Smurf said:
Looks like a ruler and compass to me. What does that have to do with DC?

The UN emblem has 26, 28, or 30 leaves, depending on what you count.

The real meaning of the US 1 dollar bill
The only thing left to question is the Pyramid. What's your reason for the Pyramid?
1776 was also the year the continental congress ratified the Declaration of Independance. (july 4th, you know?)

It's simple economics, the market was being inflated artificially, it had to collapse sooner or later. It wasn't planned - it was inevitable.

street layout of washington DC (designed by a masonic frenchman I think) http://www.freemasonrywatch.org/pics/wtau.gif

more on DC:
http://www.freemasonrywatch.org/washington.html
here is something I haven't seen before, the mall is layed out like the tree of life (i think thats what it's called)

look at the sections inside the circle in the UN emblem. there are eight slices of 4 sections each, and one section in the middle. on each side of the circle, htere are 13 leaves.

ya, and that doesn't mark the beginning of "the new world order" does it? what is a government without a bill of rights? what is a government without a constitution? I think the word order says it all, with only colonies and no bill of rights or constitution, there is really not much formal order. Anyway, I know it's kind of a weak argument, but alls I'm saying is that it COULD really stand for the beginning of the illumaniti's grand designs to create a new world order.

have you heard of the hindsight bias? looking back, it's easy to see that the market was inflated, but during those times, nobody knew where it would level off, or slow down, or what not, but surely not drastically collapse all in one day.

I know the stock market theory is kinda weak, but oh well. It's good conversation.

Last edited:
Mentor
outsider said:
What qualifies you to say this?

I can't believe that you lack the intuition to see how this scenerio is an obvious coordinated effort. Leaving outsiders holding the hot potato has always been the jack move... since I've known jack moves.

Why do you think it's so important to be aligned and belong to something in society today? This is nothing new. They know it's too late for people to make major moves so they don't care what kind of organizations we form. Someone has added all the world value and they have gone after all significant property within the reach of average people. .. anyway... too tired.. :zzz: u can think about it... what a disappointment

[previous post] So, it kinda makes a person wonder... When the stock market was booming in 1928, why did, all of the sudden, all of the major stock holders start massivly selling their stock one day,
Outsider, the one missing something here is you: the stock market did not go belly-up in a day, it took years. Heck, it didn't even start on Tuesday, it started the previous Thursday.

You need to brush up on the history a bit. What you propose is simply impossible.

Mentor
Jonny_trigonometry said:
This provides more reason why it was easy to control the stock market crash. If banks and businesses marketed buying on the margin so that many more people would invest, then it would only provide more control for them. They wanted to put more money into the market anyway, so why not get other people to add to your money? They also needed more people to be directly affected so that panic would spread.
Not really. The more people invest, the more stability there is because it takes more/bigger purchases to have an impact on the market. Its a type of inertia. So having more people invest reduces the control large entities had over the market.

outsider
loseyourname said:
There is a very good reason that everybody sold all those shares that one day: margin buying. It was a rampant process in the late 20s. The way it works is simple: you put up, say, 10% of the cost of your shares, and some firm puts up the remaining 90%. As long as the stock goes up, you make far more money than you otherwise would have, because you can buy far more shares. The problem is, when the share prices start to go down, you cannot afford to hold on wait for a recovery. If the price goes down only 10%, you've lost your entire investment. If you paid for the shares yourself, the share would need to go all the way to 0 for this to happen. Nobody worried about this in the late 20s because stock prices were consistently doing nothing but going up. They simply assumed it would continue forever. But guess what? As soon as a downward fluctuation of at least 10% takes place, the owners of shares bought recently on margin have no choice but to sell, or risk not being able to pay back the creditor who put up funds for them and going into default (which would likely mean they are never able to buy on margin again).... ETC... thanks for the Market Minute explanation... i realize that this is something worth pointing out to those who are unaware of how the market works and I appreciate the time it took you to type it all out... But as all games there are the hard fast rules and then there are technicalities. Nowadays it's all about the "loopholes". These loopholes were designed for certain individuals with certain qualifications to fit through. I'm sorry to say but most of us are intended to be square pegs for these rules. He who makes the rules wins the game... hence politics and getting aligned with the right people... or secret societies... but I digress. As far as I can tell you with my experience having been involved with a boiler room type shell company (after the tech melt down), the whole basis of the Stock Market is really the biggest jack move of all time(includes credit and promisary notes such as futures and options).... There are people (actuary types) who monitor stock and know the INSIDER positions. These are Market Makers. The companies generally know when they can make a cashing in on which individuals and will create some type of bad news to justify a sell off that they were already intending to make. You best believe they are telling their insiders what to do and when to do it (better yet, they all have the same stock broker who has the right to execute the trades on their behalf). This is a part of what market making is all about. Controlling the flow. Prior to recent years, I believe that fund managers were prepared to buy up a shares at a certain bottom-line price to prevent the fluctuations to be too severe... and for some companies this is still the case. However if you are an outsider, then you don't have these alliances in place, nor the deep pockets and the nerve. Also, we know that in any market there are buyers and sellers with differing opinions as to what they should do.... As a young hustler, it was always buy low - sell high (using forward looking statements: aka a lie of sorts)... Where high is relative to the price you bought at. Where did the idea of INSIDER TRADING come about? The whole idea of insider trading is based on a precalculated move. These bad ideas trickle down from the original pranksters... those who get burned will go burn others (cuz you are unlikely to burn your teacher)... Since around the time of globalization, the honor among theives has gone out the window. Hence much of the state of the world today with all the internet fraud, identity theft and what not... It's Every Man / Woman for themselves... doesn't this sound like investor mentality in a down market?... These ideas manifest in our relationships as women have taken it upon themselves for their own success... people are not as trusting (and rightly so)... We fill the country with immigrants and fill those immigrants with hopes and dreams and let them run straight into a new brick wall of reality... it is harder to get along today for the bulk of the population, while some (who work to stay relevant) are still doing ok simply because we were blessed with a brain and the support systems to continue nurturing growth. They are just unaware that they are walking up a downward elevator watching others fall below them as they get old and they don't have the forsight to see that eventually everyone gets old and tired... the strenght of an economy (or company) has to do with the motivations of the people to remain active and work hard for the country. We must remove ourselves from the beast... systematically separate from the system... but has all who are smart figured out that self preservation is more logical than the greater good? Armchair filospher at work here... it would be interesting to see where this all goes... outsider loseyourname said: Think about the hypothesis you are putting forth, outsider. It's not like the crash was caused by a small group of people who owned thousands of shares each suddenly selling them all in a coordinated effort. The crash was caused by almost every single small investor out there selling all of their shares. A 'coordinated' effort to effect this kind of occurence would be a coordinated efforts of millions of people, most of whom have never even met each other. Exactly how is such a thing supposed to be carried out? The other thing to consider is that the few people who didn't lose everything that day, or the fewer still who actually profited, didn't really profit! They simply managed to make a few bucks or at least keep what they had. If the market had continued to rise the way it had been for years, they could have doubled their net worth in the span of another decade. What exactly is the motive for destroying a system that greatly increases the amount of the money you have each year simply to make a few bucks on a one-time gig that destroys the economy of the entire nation? When you've got a system like that set up, you don't intentionally destroy it. I understand where you are coming from... why would you destroy such a beautiful machine? 1) to cover up and shift the blame to something outside of your control? 2) you destroy it so you can rebuild it... if you have revved the engine of to redline, you must shift gears so you can increase the capacity to rev it up once again... 3) shake out instability and regain control 4) place all your resources together and align powers to GAIN CONTROL outsider russ_watters said: Outsider, the one missing something here is you: the stock market did not go belly-up in a day, it took years. Heck, it didn't even start on Tuesday, it started the previous Thursday. You need to brush up on the history a bit. What you propose is simply impossible. Impossible is what they want us to think.... Truth is often stranger than fiction... impossible, not really... if you put me in their seat, I would surely organize it this way... I am simply an outsider not able to get in, and so my thoughts are of spite and taste like sour grapes... why was I born to my circumstances? If I were of the right race, religion and family background (or even if I were living in the right neighbourhood) I would be an insider... and I would be stealing all your money, russ. And come over next door and ask you how much you lost... and tell you that your losses are insignificant compared to the millions that I lost (of which none of it was my money to begin with, but i would leave that part out). No matter what you say about the minor details of Tuesday/ Thursday / Earthday... if it took a day / week / month / year... you cannot undo what i've lived through and bore witness to.... i cannot say specifically about anything, nor would i ever comment on certain things that i've seen, nor would i admit to being in certain places or shook hands with certain people... do you see the similarities with a secret society? yet, i am just an outsider. Locrian Who brought the crazy magnet? outsider Locrian said: Who brought the crazy magnet? hahaha... you're funny... i saw this comment coming :rofl: believe what you want... but don't write it off for other people... your comments are pointless and unecessary... you don't think i know how ridiculous this perspective really is to most people?... and yes, you are most people... so too bad... lol :rofl: Locrian Lol!@#!#$!@!!!!!@!! :rofl: :rofl: Burnsys Just a quote to backup outsider: The Bankers who control the money at the top are able to approve or disapprove large loans to large and successful corporations to the extent that refusal of a loan will bring about a reduction in the price that that Corporation's stock sells for on the market. After depressing the price, the Bankers' agents buy large blocks of the stock, after which the sometimes multi-million dollar loan is approved, the stock rises, and is then sold for a profit. In this manner billions of dollars are made with which to buy more stock. This practice is so refined today that the Federal Reserve Board need only announce to the newspapers an increase or decrease in their "rediscount rate" to send stocks up and down as they wish. Using this method since 1913, the Bankers and their agents have purchased secret or open control of almost every large corporation in America. Using that control, they then force the corporations to borrow huge sums from their banks so that corporation earnings are siphoned off in the form of interest to the banks. This leaves little as actual "profits" which can be paid as dividends and explains why stock prices are often depressed, while the banks reap billions in interest from corporate loans. In effect, the bankers get almost all of the profits, while individual stockholders are left holding the bag. loseyourname said: There is a very good reason that everybody sold all those shares that one day: margin buying. It was a rampant process in the late 20s. The way it works is simple: you put up, say, 10% of the cost of your shares, and some firm puts up the remaining 90%. As long as the stock goes up, you make far more money than you otherwise would have, because you can buy far more shares. True but also remember the amount of margin allowed is based on your assets. If the value of your assets fall close to the level of the amount of money borrowed, if you do not put up extra collateral, there will be a margin call and your stock will be sold out from under your feet by the broker to cover the margin. loseyourname said: The problem is, when the share prices start to go down, you cannot afford to hold on wait for a recovery. If the price goes down only 10%, you've lost your entire investment. If you paid for the shares yourself, the share would need to go all the way to$0 for this to happen. Nobody worried about this in the late 20s because stock prices were consistently doing nothing but going up. They simply assumed it would continue forever. But guess what? As soon as a downward fluctuation of at least 10% takes place, the owners of shares bought recently on margin have no choice but to sell, or risk not being able to pay back the creditor who put up funds for them and going into default (which would likely mean they are never able to buy on margin again). Once these people begin selling, the fluctuation increases, until all marginal buyers are forced to sell. At that point, the downward turn is so acute that a panic occurs; everyone starts to sell, until suddenly nobody is willing to buy any new shares and the stocks are virtually worthless.
If confidence was so high then why did stocks fall to a level that resulted in so many margin calls it instigated a crash? It is certainly not impossible that the crash was instigated deliberately.

loseyourname said:
Think about the hypothesis you are putting forth, outsider. It's not like the crash was caused by a small group of people who owned thousands of shares each suddenly selling them all in a coordinated effort. The crash was caused by almost every single small investor out there selling all of their shares. A 'coordinated' effort to effect this kind of occurence would be a coordinated efforts of millions of people, most of whom have never even met each other. Exactly how is such a thing supposed to be carried out?
You do not need to own any shares much less thousands to instigate a crash. In fact if you are looking to make money it is essential that you do not own any shares. All you have to do is 'short' the stock in the realization that investors have already borrowed to their limit. In other words sell shares you do not own in the belief that you will be able to honour the contract by buying the shares at a future time at a lower price than your selling price. This does not require millions of people and has indeed been done by one man in relatively recent times when in 1992 Britain was forced to drop out of the ERM (the precursor to the euro) by a single currency trader George Soros who made $2 billion profit at the expense of the British gov't in just a couple of days. He achieved this by shorting the British currency and causing a panic This despite the British gov't spending billions trying to support their currency. Last edited by a moderator: outsider Locrian said: Lol!@#$!#\$!@!!!!!@!! :rofl: :rofl:
indeed! :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: protector of the secret?

outsider
Burnsys said:
Just a quote to backup outsider:

The Bankers who control the money at the top are able to approve or disapprove large loans to large and successful corporations to the extent that refusal of a loan will bring about a reduction in the price that that Corporation's stock sells for on the market. After depressing the price, the Bankers' agents buy large blocks of the stock, after which the sometimes multi-million dollar loan is approved, the stock rises, and is then sold for a profit. In this manner billions of dollars are made with which to buy more stock. This practice is so refined today that the Federal Reserve Board need only announce to the newspapers an increase or decrease in their "rediscount rate" to send stocks up and down as they wish. Using this method since 1913, the Bankers and their agents have purchased secret or open control of almost every large corporation in America. Using that control, they then force the corporations to borrow huge sums from their banks so that corporation earnings are siphoned off in the form of interest to the banks. This leaves little as actual "profits" which can be paid as dividends and explains why stock prices are often depressed, while the banks reap billions in interest from corporate loans. In effect, the bankers get almost all of the profits, while individual stockholders are left holding the bag.

not to mention ENRON... chapter 11 protection baby!!! thats like the bulletproof vest... bad debt? write it off to the govt... tax payers will split the bill... gotta love that

Jonny_trigonometry
"During the Great Depression, President Franklin D. Roosevelt revalued the dollar to 35 per troy ounce (112.53 cents per gram) of gold. This represented a drop in the value of the U.S. dollar. It fell to only 890 mg (13.7 grains) of gold. The U.S. dollar had thus been devalued almost 41% by government decree." - Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_American_dollar

So, this can be used to gain more money of course. Suppose you have loads of money, then buy as much gold as you're worth, then the money's value decreases 41% (Including all the lower classes money) and then sell the gold back. That way, you haven't lost any value, while everyone who didn't do what you did did lose value. Of course, you'd have to know that FDR was gonna devalue the dollar, but if you're a mason, and he's a mason, then there's the answer.

how fast did the initial change in momentum occur?
http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1527.html
pretty darn fast.

As far as changing from the gold standard, that was a shot in the dark on my part and I didn't really look anything up (i was tired), but now that I looked it up, the USA switched from gold backing to fiat in around the 70's if I researched correctly.
ok, well I'll agree that this whole idea about the GD is pretty far fetched, but thats not the point I'm trying to make. I'm trying to consider the possibility of freemasonry existing or not. In any investigation, if you only have small tidbits of info and no real hard evidance, all you need is a theory to unite all the tidbits. When investigating, all the info isn't givin to you as if you're reading a book, you have to put it all together, and there is a lot more tidbits to consider than all the ones covered in this thread.

Last edited:
Smurf
Jonny_trigonometry said:
have you heard of the hindsight bias? looking back, it's easy to see that the market was inflated, but during those times, nobody knew where it would level off, or slow down, or what not, but surely not drastically collapse all in one day.
well YEAH! That's WHY. IT. HAPPENED. BECAUSE NO ONE PREDICTED IT WOULD! Otherwise they never would've gotten it to that level in the first place.

Jonny_trigonometry
Smurf said:
well YEAH! That's WHY. IT. HAPPENED. BECAUSE NO ONE PREDICTED IT WOULD! Otherwise they never would've gotten it to that level in the first place.

You're correct, but I think you're getting the hindsight bias and the ability to predict the future (clairyovance) confused. The hindsight bias is your bias of your ego being able to figure out problems that happened in the past. Everyone favors their ability to figure out problems that happened in the past.

If I gave you an anagram like "chamusat" and also said that the answer is "mustache", and I asked you how long you think it would take you to figure it out, you would probably give me an answer that would be less than the actual time that it wouldn've taken you.

Have you ever said "I could have thought of that! it's so simple!" ? thats the hindsight bias.

If I was able to organize a massive sell off by running a secret club with loyal followers (who possess most of the money in the stock market), I'd rely on people's inability to predict the future. If you're a regular non-mason stock broker who can only react to this, and you see your stocks start to fall extremely fast, what would you do? would you assume that the past dictates the future and let them fall further, and have to explain to all your clients that you lost thier money? or would you make the same assumption and cut your losses? or would you sit there like a bump on a log, and not make any assumptions? People do try to predict the future, thats what the market is all about, and although they aren't 100% correct, they are better than 50% correct, otherwise the market wouldn't increase at all.

You might be thinkin' that I think I've got everything figured out. Well, I thank you for your corrections that I've been misinterpreting (especially about the dollar bill, and the latin translations), hehe I even took 2 years of latin! I thought I had that one figured out, well I guess not. I assure you that I'm far from figuring this thing out. If it weren't for their pride (putting symbols everywhere) I would dismiss most of this conspiracy stuff, but it helps to expose them.

Oh yeah, when I first mentioned the hindsight bias, I was using it in referance to your explaination of how the market crashed. You said it was inflated (I agree), but the people of that time didn't know it was inflated. We are looking at a problem that happenend in the past and using our bias (based on our knowledge of what happened afterwards) to determine if the market was over-valued at that point in history.

Last edited: