alex jones

part 1

In any case, none of what you're written here provides any evidence for the claim that Obama is somehow linked to an evil plot by the Bilderberg Group, so what's your point?

do you know what the Bilderbergroup is? ok, i suppose you think its ok for all the major heads of government, business, monarchies to meet every year and set secret agendas... i suppose you think this is nothing to be concerned about?


But you haven't demonstrated that Obama has actually made any u-turns in policy. Now, I've tried to help you by posting a source which lists all of his campaign promises, and that source even states that he has broken three of those promises (see the link here). What you need to do is read that list, identify the promises which relate to the argument you're making, and show that those promises have not been kept. Until you do that, you don't actually have a case.

i had not seen this link from you, ill ignore the fact it doesnt state or at least i cant see some of the promises on their that he made for just now and take one point in which this website advises 'promise kept', but infact this website engages in some semantical shenanigans in which the promise changed from 'immediate removal of troops from Iraq' to 'order the commanders to end war in Iraq'
now then, lets take a look at the reality of the situation, In the Obama Deception it has the Fox News shot of his speech when he clearly says 'if i become president i will remove all troops immedieatly'

now lets check out what the reality is:

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/07/obamas-website-says-nothing-ab.php said:
Obama's website says nothing about speaking to commanders on the ground
July 3, 2008, 11:22PM

What does www.barackobama.com tell us about Obama's plan to withdraw our troops from Iraq?

Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months. Obama will make it clear that we will not build any permanent bases in Iraq. He will keep some troops in Iraq to protect our embassy and diplomats; if al Qaeda attempts to build a base within Iraq, he will keep troops in Iraq or elsewhere in the region to carry out targeted strikes on al Qaeda.


Do you see any reference to the importance of the opinion of generals on the ground? No, because this plan was written during the primaries, wherein the main target were liberals, as opposed to the General Elections, where moderates are seen as the most important block.

Obama is your typical politician.


I've told you what I want you to prove. I want you to provide evidence for every single one of the claims made by Alex Jones in his little movie. That's all I'm asking for.

you still havent said specifically what you want me to prove lol, im not going to create a complete general bibliography of Obama's life for you, i am going to prove to you any SPECIFIC point you may want to bring up and dispute.

I also want you to provide a list of campaign promises that Obama has broken (and please realise that I agree he has broken some of them) and cross-reference them to that online "campaign promise" checklist, so we can both be sure that you're actually talking about legitimate campaign promises which were actually made.

i am questioning the authority of that website, not to mention the missing promises but as noted before they are distorting what his promise was and the reality. i.e. they are saying promise kept for 'ordering the commanders to end the iraq war' - well thats funny because his promise was to remove all troops from iraq immeadilty and as noted before they plan to leave a 'residual force of up to 50,000' lol.. as i have said time and time again, the US did not build bases bigger than the Vatican to just give them to the native Iraqi's.

and just to clarify the situation, he has fudged on this prmoise over and over again, initially it was 'an immediate withdrawl', even his website said 'immediete' then it was 16 months and now its 24 months... the point i am continually making here is Obama says one thing, and then does another.

heres another random article i found documenting his 'promise' and use of 'not in 12 months not in 6 months but immediatley' quote.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...mediate-withdrawal-US-combat-troops-Iraq.html

Er, no. You broke the rules by repeatedly insulting me, and I complained to one of the moderators, who subsequently acted on my complaint. I didn't ask anyone to delete your posts or ban you. That was the moderator's decision; not mine.

oh yeah, you get to flame me by calling me names and slandering me and as soon as i raise to the bait and call you a ''muppet'' and consequently own you in a debate you dissapear from that thread, i get suspended for the weekend and my posts dissapear leaving all your ones.. i suppose that is one way to win your debates.

Well, I don't know about "filled". I haven't seen any evidence of that. But I am certain that there's plenty of lobbyists in his staff (or at least people connected to lobbyists). Every government does this, unfortunately. It doesn't prove that they're part of an international conspiracy.

lol, im not saying that this is proof of an international conspiracy, the proof of that is all around you every day... what i am saying is this is a promise he broke.



That's correct; he has not. These things take time; you can't withdraw troops overnight, and Obama didn't say that he would. He committed to a phased withdrawal over time, which is precisely what he is doing.

are you just begining to follow Obama? i have been following him before he threw his hat into the Primaries, and as stated above he originally said 'immediately' and then he said 16 months and now he says 24 months... i guess you could argue, that if i promised to bake you a cake for tommorow and then when tommorow came around i said i would do it for next week, and then half way trhough that week i then said i would do it next month, in my opinion changing a promise is breaking a promise.

He hasn't "forced through" any bailout packages.

ill admit my use of the wordsd 'forced through' was a bit strong, luckily the limp wristed congress still has some say, but my point was that the bailouts would have probably never of passed if it wasnt for his cheerleading and doom mongering (also known as Financial Terrorism).

http://uk.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUKTRE50C6UN20090113

What "dictatorial powers" are you referring to? Do you know what "dictatorial" means? And what campaign promises has Obama performed a "complete 180" on? I've given you a link to a comprehensive list, so it shouldn't be hard for you to specify them.

yes i know exactly what dictatorial means, do you?

do you know what Presidential Directive 51 means?

Presidential Directive 51 said:
National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive

NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/NSPD 51

HOMELAND SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/HSPD-20

Subject: National Continuity Policy

Purpose

(1) This directive establishes a comprehnsive national policy on the continuity of Federal Government structures and operations and a single National Continuity Coordinator responsible for coordinating the development and implementation of Federal continuity policies. This policy establishes "National Essential Functions," prescribes continuity requirements for all executive departments and agencies, and provides guidance for State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector organizations in order to ensure a comprehensive and integrated national continuity program that will enhance the credibility of our national security posture and enable a more rapid and effective response to and recovery from a national emergency.

Definitions

(2) In this directive:

(a) "Category" refers to the categories of executive departments and agencies listed in Annex A to this directive;

(b) "Catastrophic Emergency" means any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions;

(c) "Continuity of Government," or "COG," means a coordinated effort within the Federal Government's executive branch to ensure that National Essential Functions continue to be performed during a Catastrophic Emergency;

(d) "Continuity of Operations," or "COOP," means an effort within individual executive departments and agencies to ensure that Primary Mission-Essential Functions continue to be performed during a wide range of emergencies, including localized acts of nature, accidents, and technological or attack-related emergencies;

(e) "Enduring Constitutional Government," or "ECG," means a cooperative effort among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the Federal Government, coordinated by the President, as a matter of comity with respect to the legislative and judicial branches and with proper respect for the constitutional separation of powers among the branches, to preserve the constitutional framework under which the Nation is governed and the capability of all three branches of government to execute constitutional responsibilities and provide for orderly succession, appropriate transition of leadership, and interoperability and support of the National Essential Functions during a catastrophic emergency;

(f) "Executive Departments and Agencies" means the executive departments enumerated in 5 U.S.C. 101, independent establishments as defined by 5 U.S.C. 104(1), Government corporations as defined by 5 U.S.C. 103(1), and the United States Postal Service;

(g) "Government Functions" means the collective functions of the heads of executive departments and agencies as defined by statute, regulation, presidential direction, or other legal authority, and the functions of the legislative and judicial branches;

(h) "National Essential Functions," or "NEFs," means that subset of Government Functions that are necessary to lead and sustain the Nation during a catastrophic emergency and that, therefore, must be supported through COOP and COG capabilities; and

(i) "Primary Mission Essential Functions," or "PMEFs," means those Government Functions that must be performed in order to support or implement the performance of NEFs before, during, and in the aftermath of an emergency.

Policy

(3) It is the policy of the United States to maintain a comprehensive and effective continuity capability composed of Continuity of Operations and Continuity of Government programs in order to ensure the preservation of our form of government under the Constitution and the continuing performance of National Essential Functions under all conditions.

Implementation Actions

(4) Continuity requirements shall be incorporated into daily operations of all executive departments and agencies. As a result of the asymmetric threat environment, adequate warning of potential emergencies that could pose a significant risk to the homeland might not be available, and therefore all continuity planning shall be based on the assumption that no such warning will be received. Emphasis will be placed upon geographic dispersion of leadership, staff, and infrastructure in order to increase survivability and maintain uninterrupted Government Functions. Risk management principles shall be applied to ensure that appropriate operational readiness decisions are based on the probability of an attack or other incident and its consequences.

(5) The following NEFs are the foundation for all continuity programs and capabilities and represent the overarching responsibilities of the Federal Government to lead and sustain the Nation during a crisis, and therefore sustaining the following NEFs shall be the primary focus of

the Federal Government leadership during and in the aftermath of an emergency that adversely affects the performance of Government Functions:

(a) Ensuring the continued functioning of our form of government under the Constitution, including the functioning of the three separate branches of government;

(b) Providing leadership visible to the Nation and the world and maintaining the trust and confidence of the American people;

(c) Defending the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and preventing or interdicting attacks against the United States or its people, property, or interests;

(d) Maintaining and fostering effective relationships with foreign nations;

(e) Protecting against threats to the homeland and bringing to justice perpetrators of crimes or attacks against the United States or its people, property, or interests;

(f) Providing rapid and effective response to and recovery from the domestic consequences of an attack or other incident;

(g) Protecting and stabilizing the Nation's economy and ensuring public confidence in its financial systems; and

(h) Providing for critical Federal Government services that address the national health, safety, and welfare needs of the United States.

(6) The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government. In order to advise and assist the President in that function, the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism (APHS/CT) is hereby designated as the National Continuity Coordinator. The National Continuity Coordinator, in coordination with the Assistant to the President for National

Security Affairs (APNSA), without exercising directive authority, shall coordinate the development and implementation of continuity policy for executive departments and agencies. The Continuity Policy Coordination Committee (CPCC), chaired by a Senior Director from the Homeland Security Council staff, designated by the National Continuity Coordinator, shall be the main day-to-day forum for such policy coordination.

(7) For continuity purposes, each executive department and agency is assigned to a category in accordance with the nature and characteristics of its national security roles and

responsibilities in support of the Federal Government's ability to sustain the NEFs. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall serve as the President's lead agent for coordinating overall

continuity operations and activities of executive departments and agencies, and in such role shall perform the responsibilities set forth for the Secretary in sections 10 and 16 of this directive.

(8) The National Continuity Coordinator, in consultation with the heads of appropriate executive departments and agencies, will lead the development of a National Continuity Implementation Plan (Plan), which shall include prioritized goals and objectives, a concept of operations, performance metrics by which to measure continuity readiness, procedures for continuity and incident management activities, and clear direction to executive department and agency continuity coordinators, as well as guidance to promote interoperability of Federal Government continuity programs and procedures with State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure, as appropriate. The Plan shall be submitted to the President for approval not later than 90 days after the date of this directive.

(9) Recognizing that each branch of the Federal Government is responsible for its own continuity programs, an official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President shall ensure that the executive branch's COOP and COG policies in support of ECG efforts are appropriately coordinated with those of

the legislative and judicial branches in order to ensure interoperability and allocate national assets efficiently to maintain a functioning Federal Government.

(10) Federal Government COOP, COG, and ECG plans and operations shall be appropriately integrated with the emergency plans and capabilities of State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure, as appropriate, in order to promote interoperability and to prevent redundancies and conflicting lines of authority. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall coordinate the integration of Federal continuity plans and operations with State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure, as appropriate, in order to provide for the delivery of essential services during an emergency.

(11) Continuity requirements for the Executive Office of the President (EOP) and executive departments and agencies shall include the following:

(a) The continuation of the performance of PMEFs during any emergency must be for a period up to 30 days or until normal operations can be resumed, and the capability to be fully operational at alternate sites as soon as possible after the occurrence of an emergency, but not later than 12 hours after COOP activation;

(b) Succession orders and pre-planned devolution of authorities that ensure the emergency delegation of authority must be planned and documented in advance in accordance with applicable law;

(c) Vital resources, facilities, and records must be safeguarded, and official access to them must be provided;

(d) Provision must be made for the acquisition of the resources necessary for continuity operations on an emergency basis;

(e) Provision must be made for the availability and redundancy of critical communications capabilities at alternate sites in order to support connectivity between

and among key government leadership, internal elements, other executive departments and agencies, critical partners, and the public;

(f) Provision must be made for reconstitution capabilities that allow for recovery from a catastrophic emergency and resumption of normal operations; and

(g) Provision must be made for the identification, training, and preparedness of personnel capable of relocating to alternate facilities to support the continuation of the performance of PMEFs.

(12) In order to provide a coordinated response to escalating threat levels or actual emergencies, the Continuity of Government Readiness Conditions (COGCON) system establishes executive branch continuity program readiness levels, focusing

on possible threats to the National Capital Region. The President will determine and issue the COGCON Level. Executive departments and agencies shall comply with the requirements and

assigned responsibilities under the COGCON program. During COOP activation, executive departments and agencies shall report their readiness status to the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Secretary's designee.

(13) The Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall:

(a) Conduct an annual assessment of executive department and agency continuity funding requests and performance data that are submitted by executive departments and agencies as part of the annual budget request process, in order to monitor progress in the implementation of the Plan and the execution of continuity budgets;

(b) In coordination with the National Continuity Coordinator, issue annual continuity planning guidance for the development of continuity budget requests; and

(c) Ensure that heads of executive departments and agencies prioritize budget resources for continuity capabilities, consistent with this directive.

(14) The Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy shall:

(a) Define and issue minimum requirements for continuity communications for executive departments and agencies, in consultation with the APHS/CT, the APNSA, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and the Chief of Staff to the President;

(b) Establish requirements for, and monitor the development, implementation, and maintenance of, a comprehensive communications architecture to integrate continuity components, in consultation with the APHS/CT, the APNSA, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and the Chief of Staff to the President; and

(c) Review quarterly and annual assessments of continuity communications capabilities, as prepared pursuant to section 16(d) of this directive or otherwise, and report the results and recommended remedial actions to the National Continuity Coordinator.

(15) An official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President shall:

(a) Advise the President, the Chief of Staff to the President, the APHS/CT, and the APNSA on COGCON operational execution options; and

(b) Consult with the Secretary of Homeland Security in order to ensure synchronization and integration of continuity activities among the four categories of executive departments and agencies.

(16) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall:

(a) Coordinate the implementation, execution, and assessment of continuity operations and activities;

(b) Develop and promulgate Federal Continuity Directives in order to establish continuity planning requirements for executive departments and agencies;

(c) Conduct biennial assessments of individual department and agency continuity capabilities as prescribed by the Plan and report the results to the President through the APHS/CT;

(d) Conduct quarterly and annual assessments of continuity communications capabilities in consultation with an official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President;

(e) Develop, lead, and conduct a Federal continuity training and exercise program, which shall be incorporated into the National Exercise Program developed pursuant to Homeland Security Presidential Directive-8 of December 17, 2003 ("National Preparedness"), in consultation with an

official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President;

(f) Develop and promulgate continuity planning guidance to State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector critical infrastructure owners and operators;

(g) Make available continuity planning and exercise funding, in the form of grants as provided by law, to State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector critical infrastructure owners and operators; and

(h) As Executive Agent of the National Communications System, develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive continuity communications architecture.

(17) The Director of National Intelligence, in coordination with the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall produce a biennial assessment of the foreign and domestic threats to the Nation's continuity of government.

(18) The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall provide secure, integrated, Continuity of Government communications to the President, the Vice President, and, at a minimum, Category I executive departments and agencies.

(19) Heads of executive departments and agencies shall execute their respective department or agency COOP plans in response to a localized emergency and shall:

(a) Appoint a senior accountable official, at the Assistant Secretary level, as the Continuity Coordinator for the department or agency;

(b) Identify and submit to the National Continuity Coordinator the list of PMEFs for the department or agency and develop continuity plans in support of the NEFs and the continuation of essential functions under all conditions;

(c) Plan, program, and budget for continuity capabilities consistent with this directive;

(d) Plan, conduct, and support annual tests and training, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, in order to evaluate program readiness and ensure adequacy and viability of continuity plans and communications systems; and

(e) Support other continuity requirements, as assigned by category, in accordance with the nature and characteristics of its national security roles and responsibilities

........
 
part 2

Presidential Directive 51 said:
General Provisions

(20) This directive shall be implemented in a manner that is consistent with, and facilitates effective implementation of, provisions of the Constitution concerning succession to the Presidency or the exercise of its powers, and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 (3 U.S.C. 19), with consultation of the Vice President and, as appropriate, others involved. Heads of executive departments and agencies shall ensure that appropriate

support is available to the Vice President and others involved as necessary to be prepared at all times to implement those provisions.

(21) This directive:

(a) Shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and the authorities of agencies, or heads of agencies, vested by law, and subject to the availability of appropriations;

(b) Shall not be construed to impair or otherwise affect (i) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budget, administrative, and legislative proposals, or (ii) the authority of the Secretary of Defense over the Department of Defense, including the chain of command for military forces from the President, to the Secretary of Defense, to the commander of military forces, or military command and control procedures; and

(c) Is not intended to, and does not, create any rights or benefits, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by a party against the United States, its

agencies, instrumentalities, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

(22) Revocation. Presidential Decision Directive 67 of October 21, 1998 ("Enduring Constitutional Government and Continuity of Government Operations"), including all Annexes thereto, is hereby revoked.

(23) Annex A and the classified Continuity Annexes, attached hereto, are hereby incorporated into and made a part of this directive.

(24) Security. This directive and the information contained herein shall be protected from unauthorized disclosure, provided that, except for Annex A, the Annexes attached to this directive are classified and shall be accorded appropriate handling, consistent with applicable Executive Orders.

GEORGE W. BUSH

now i am 100% sure i remember Obama made a point of saying that he would remove the draconian PDs that gave Bush & Cheney extra-presidential powers - i need to go and eat my dinner but i shall come back with evidence of this.

He's been in power for less than three months; there's no way he can get everything done in that time. Do you not understand how government works?

i have quite a good working knowledge of how specifically the US & UK governments work - hence i am generally calling out Obama's lies in regards to things he said he wouldnt do, like hire lobbyists, or things he said he would do immediatly, like remove the troops.


Er, no. He dodged the press to meet Hillary Clinton. There was subsequent speculation that he had met with the Bilderberg Group, but nobody has provided any evidence that he actually did.

ok, so he dupes the press onto his plane, sends them to a different state whilst he stays in Virginia in the city just at the exact same time that all the banking/business, government elite heads aswell as head monarchs are meeting a couple of blocks down the street, his spokesperson makes it slip he has 'numerous secret meetings planned' and says no more. Then you have Hilary Clinton, who is also funnily enough in the same city as all the banking/business, government elite heads and some monarchs and co-incidentelly she is only a couple of blocks away too... then they all fall off the radar for a couple of hours and then next thing we know, Obama and Hilary are freinds and part of the same team again... yes of course they didnt go to a meeting of all the worlds elite where they secretly set international policy, the president elect and now foreign seccy would never go to such a meeting... well they shouldnt, because it violates the logan act but hey, that didnt stop people like Govenor Perry.

Or, to put it more accurately, Alex makes a huge illogical leap to a nonsensical conclusion based on nothing more than conjecture, fantasy and imagination.

just because you dont bother to look into his claims and refuse to even consider the possibility that you are wring does not put Alex's claims into the 'realms of fantasy and imagination', as i have just done, everything is documented, and as i am not going to create a bibliography of The Obama Deception all for you, i will show you the Bibliography that documents all of Alex Jones' claims in Endgame which is a lot more radical that the Obama deception, it documents it with a timestamp so if you go and watch Endgame and then pause it and reference this bibliography... maybe, just maybe you will break your conditioning and see the reality of the world.

http://www.endgamethemovie.com/biblio01.html





Your friend is obviously an idiot. During his campaign, Obama openly stated that he would maintain the attacks on targets in Pakistan:


Biden, in an interview with CBS news, defended the strikes, saying that [n]Obama had repeatedly said on the campaign trail he would not hesitate to strike against any high-level al-Qaida targets.[/n] He suggested cooperation between the US and Pakistani counter-terrorist agencies would increase, with more US training for Pakistani counterparts.

Over the last year, there have been at least 30 US missile attacks on Pakistan's tribal area, which is used as a haven for insurgents fighting international troops in neighbouring Afghanistan.

Source.

Does your friend not watch the news, perhaps? Didn't he listen to Obama when he was campaigning?

Im not defending the ignorance of my freind, infact this serves to illustrate how Obama-trons are all whipped up in his cult of personality, that they dont actually realise what this mans plans actually are. And if you buy the propaganda that 'Al-Qeda' are in the north of Pakistan then more fool you, again i know people over their and what you hear on the news here is not the reality on the ground... but thats another whole big debate.

Try not to watch so much Hollywood. You'll end up believing everything you see.

i dont watch TV apart from the occasional news, TV lowers your brains frequency and removes some of your capacity for logical thought - hence people fall asleep watching TV and why they put so many adverts in-between programs - so no, your assumption i watch too much 'hollywood' is incorrect, i just read a lot of History books - did you not hear about a time termed 'Medieval' - where the elite ruled over all, and i believe Serfs only had to hand over 1/3 of what they produced/earned to the King/Noblemen/Bankers, i know for a fact i give a lot more than 1/3 to those criminals out of my pay every year... go and have a look into the Medieval times in the UK or over in Germany, it may be a suprise to you but an elite ruled then.


ahh... right im done, thankyou and goodnight.
 
hohum, yes i must be deluded because i dont believe the covering story that the Bank of England is a 'nationalised' orginisation, whilst i admit it is labelled as such on the surface, just as the Federal Reserve on the surface is 'Federal' they are both neither.

The truth is you will believe what you want to believe.


you sir, are the deluded one, you sir are the one who just pasted the first thing he saw after googling 'bank of england'. Just because i actually spend some time to research how the world works and i go beyond the first page of a website to get a more informed picture of the situation does not make me deluded.

No you believe whatever you find to support your fantasies about how the world works.
 
The truth is you will believe what you want to believe.




No you believe whatever you find to support your fantasies about how the world works.

well taking the example you quoted, you are trying to tell me the Bank of Englands website doesnt say that they are no longer public owned? did you even read my entire post or check the Bank of England website i linked to with their history?

so let me get this straight, you are saying that its my fantasy and a delusion that the bank of england is no longer public?

and that the official bank of england website;

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/about...elopments5.htm

is just some random website i have cherry-picked to support what you think is a 'fantasy'?

i shall post the quote from the bank of england website once more, and i urge you to do some research before you start accusing me of fabricating fantasies, just because i know of something to which you are totally ignorant doesnt make me the delusional one.

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/about...elopments5.htm said:
Originally Posted by From The BankOfEngland.co.uk
1997: Bank now responsible for monetary policy
In 1997 the Government announced its intention to transfer full operational responsibility for monetary policy to the Bank of England. The Bank thus rejoined the ranks of the world's "independent" central banks. However, debt management on behalf of the Government was transferred to HM Treasury, and the Bank's regulatory functions passes to the new Financial Services Authority.

you guys really crack me up, you ask for evidence to back up my claims - i the spoon feed you the evidence straight from the horses mouth (the bank of englands own history) and then you say that i believe 'whatever i find' when infact its the people disagreeing with me who are the ones who are believing the very first thing they read! oh dear god, as i said before debating like this reminds me why the world is going down the pan - hardly anyone has a clue or cares how the world works anymore.
 
While it may have operational dependence, the Bank of England is still owned by the British government.


The Bank of England (formally the Governor and Company of the Bank of England) is the central bank of the United Kingdom and is the model on which most modern, large central banks have been based.

Since 1946 it has been a state-owned institution. It was established in 1694 to act as the English Government's banker, and to this day it still acts as the banker for the UK Government.

Source.
 
a lot of people are either scared, stupid or ignorant of the fact that the world they think is real absolutley isn't , and the world they live in is in fact a living nightmare , the nightmare isn't the events in it or the leaders in it , its the people who bury their head in the sand and claim everything just fine.


that's the nightmare, mass apathy.
 
a lot of people are either scared, stupid or ignorant of the fact that the world they think is real absolutley isn't , and the world they live in is in fact a living nightmare , the nightmare isn't the events in it or the leaders in it , its the people who bury their head in the sand and claim everything just fine.


that's the nightmare, mass apathy.

Speak for youself brosef, im living the dream, money hoes get crunk errrry day son
 
Last edited:
While it may have operational dependence, the Bank of England is still owned by the British government.


The Bank of England (formally the Governor and Company of the Bank of England) is the central bank of the United Kingdom and is the model on which most modern, large central banks have been based.

Since 1946 it has been a state-owned institution. It was established in 1694 to act as the English Government's banker, and to this day it still acts as the banker for the UK Government.

Source.

yes but just as the Federal Reserve which is no more Federal than Federal Experess, the National Bank of England is no more National than Nationwide, as the Bank of England admits:

Bank of England said:
In 1997 the Government announced its intention to transfer full operational responsibility for monetary policy to the Bank of England. The Bank thus rejoined the ranks of the world's "independent" central banks.

and never use Wiki as your sources please,even the founder of wiki said that no one should ever use Wiki as a source.

I'll give you another hand in the right direction, it seems according to the documents in 1997 their was a veritable 'trade' between the Bank of England and our Government, the Bank of England returned a number of departments to the Government in return for complete operational independence in 1997, its 'national' only in name (again, just like the FED).

check it out, its all in their history.
 
yes but just as the Federal Reserve which is no more Federal than Federal Experess, the National Bank of England is no more National than Nationwide, as the Bank of England admits:

...and it's still owned by the government.

and never use Wiki as your sources please,even the founder of wiki said that no one should ever use Wiki as a source.

LOL, and I bet you don't even have a source for that.

I'll give you another hand in the right direction, it seems according to the documents in 1997 their was a veritable 'trade' between the Bank of England and our Government, the Bank of England returned a number of departments to the Government in return for complete operational independence in 1997, its 'national' only in name (again, just like the FED).

check it out, its all in their history.

Relevance? It's still owned by the government.
 
.


LOL, and I bet you don't even have a source for that.

SOURCE: http://chronicle.com/wiredcampus/ar...nder-discourages-academic-use-of-his-creation

and i quote:

Even Wikipedia’s founder, Jimmy Wales, says he wants to get the message out to college students that they shouldn’t use it for class projects or serious research.

thats it, im done with Evangelicon, thats the last time for a while i shall prove you wrong in a debate and the last ill-informed post i shall read from you for a good while - i keep on telling you to google things before you reply to a thread, but you just dont listen.. and if you think that using a re-source that anyone in the world can edit whenever they please is a good source then it just goes to show your fuzzy logic.

so heres my final tip: if you were to ask me a question, that i may by some small chance read again, could you please google that question and do a bit of research into it... i.e. before you laughed at me regarding Jimmy Wales, Founder of Wiki advising that Wiki should not be used for acedemic purposes, you should have googled, or searched, under the term : "Founder of Wikipedia Advises Against Academic Use of Wiki", but as always, you just denied me completely until i spoon fed you with the information that you are obviously completely ignorant of.

have a good weekend.
 
Last edited:
SOURCE: http://chronicle.com/wiredcampus/ar...nder-discourages-academic-use-of-his-creation

thats it, im done with Evangelicon, thats the last time for a while i shall prove you wrong in a debate and the last ill-informed post i shall read from you for a good while - i keep on telling you to google things before you reply to a thread, but you just dont listen.. and if you think that using a re-source that anyone in the world can edit whenever they please is a good source then it just goes to show your fuzzy logic.

so heres my final tip: if you were to ask me a question, that i may by some small chance read again, could you please google that question and do a bit of research into it... i.e. before you laughed at me regarding Jimmy Wales, Founder of Wiki advising that Wiki should not be used for acedemic purposes, you should have googled, or searched, under the term : "Founder of Wikipedia Advises Against Academic Use of Wiki", but as always, you just denied me completely until i spoon fed you with the information that you are obviously completely ignorant of.

have a good weekend.

And that's your sign-off? That you got a wiki reference correct? You don't want to reply to any of the multitude of rebuffs many have given you but instead focus on a wiki "did he/didn't he say it" point?

That just sums your argument up, really :)
 

Rather than attempt to look smug and get one "over" on Evangelion why not actually contribute somthing worthwhile to this thread? You would make a great MP as would Keltic, they love to squirm there way round questions with long winded replies that dont actually have any substance.
 
[FnG]magnolia;13722885 said:
And that's your sign-off? That you got a wiki reference correct? You don't want to reply to any of the multitude of rebuffs many have given you but instead focus on a wiki "did he/didn't he say it" point?

That just sums your argument up, really :)

what?!?! i spent about an hour of my night posting that huge 5000 word response to everything Evangelicon said about the Obama Deception, and now i have just proven him wrong once again, but not by use of a wiki reference, by proving to him that his assumptions were wrong once again when he laughed at me when i advised him not to use Wiki as a source as even the Founder of Wiki has said no-one should use it as a tool for serious research, so Evangelicon laughed and said wheres the source? so i spoon fed him once more, and to me its the straw that broke the camels back - ive retorted to Evangelicons ill-informed posts most of tonight whilst ive been messing around online, i just simply wanted to end it their, but then you come on and say that i havent responded to anything apart from this final post i made, which is complete rubbish! go check out the two part, 5000 word response i posted about an hour or so ago.

now, surely thats it, im off to read my book.
 
Rather than attempt to look smug and get one "over" on Evangelion why not actually contribute somthing worthwhile to this thread? You would make a great MP as would Keltic, they love to squirm there way round questions with long winded replies that dont actually have any substance.

This isnt my discussion, i'm just here to show support.

Evangelion and his band of merry idiots are always quick to enter a thread and back him up with childish and completely pointless remarks, why are the "others" not allowed to do the same?

This is the part where someone says "well it would be more mature for you to have taken the other road"

Don't care :)
 

Oh dear, your source doesn't actually say what you'd claimed (surprise!)

You had said:

Keltik THC said:
and never use Wiki as your sources please,even the founder of wiki said that no one should ever use Wiki as a source.

But what he really said was:

“They say, ‘Please help me. I got an F on my paper because I cited Wikipedia’” and the information turned out to be wrong, he says. But he said he has no sympathy for their plight, noting that he thinks to himself: “For God sake, you’re in college; don’t cite the encyclopedia.”

There's an entire context to this quote that you didn't even bother to cite.

And the quote itself is three years old; Wikipedia has improved considerably since then.

thats it, im done with Evangelicon, thats the last time for a while i shall prove you wrong in a debate and the last ill-informed post i shall read from you for a good while - i keep on telling you to google things before you reply to a thread, but you just dont listen.. and if you think that using a re-source that anyone in the world can edit whenever they please is a good source then it just goes to show your fuzzy logic.

so heres my final tip: if you were to ask me a question, that i may by some small chance read again, could you please google that question and do a bit of research into it... i.e. before you laughed at me regarding Jimmy Wales, Founder of Wiki advising that Wiki should not be used for acedemic purposes, you should have googled, or searched, under the term : "Founder of Wikipedia Advises Against Academic Use of Wiki", but as always, you just denied me completely until i spoon fed you with the information that you are obviously completely ignorant of.

have a good weekend.

Well, you didn't quote me wrong because your source doesn't actually say what you'd claimed - and you didn't even provide the context. But hey, you were pretty close, and I think that counts for something.

I give you a C+ for effort.

:)
 

no one is saying it isn't a company. But guess who owns all of the shares? HM Treasury.

yes but just as the Federal Reserve which is no more Federal than Federal Experess, the National Bank of England is no more National than Nationwide, as the Bank of England admits:



and never use Wiki as your sources please,even the founder of wiki said that no one should ever use Wiki as a source.

I'll give you another hand in the right direction, it seems according to the documents in 1997 their was a veritable 'trade' between the Bank of England and our Government, the Bank of England returned a number of departments to the Government in return for complete operational independence in 1997, its 'national' only in name (again, just like the FED).

check it out, its all in their history.

How about a different source? How about the annual report of the bank itself?

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/annualreport/2008/financialstatements2008.pdf

On page 11 we have this section:

Bank of England said:
t Bank capital
The entire equity capital comprising £14,553,000 of Bank Stock is held by the Treasury Solicitor on behalf of HM Treasury.
Under Section 1 (4) of the Bank of England Act 1946, subsequent to the end of each year HM Treasury receives payments
of half the post-tax profits unless the Bank and HM Treasury agree otherwise. The payments are deductible for
corporation tax and charged to equity in the year to which they relate on the basis as agreed at the end of the
relevant year.

The Bank of England is owned by HM Treasury. It is a government owned company. It is not owned by a shadowy cabal of jewish bankers intend on world domination. Sorry.
 
Back
Top Bottom