Topic: Wake up people! Banks are not governments. They can't make things illegal! (Read 3104 times)

There is a difference between could and would

yeah, but im guessing politicians are not that far from banks, and all they care about is protecting their interests.
getting rid of this "problem" started to solve itself when political parties started to recieve donations in bitcoin.
we need them on our side , and this is the perfect way

Remember Viet Nam? Iraq, Afghanistan, and the whole Middle East are being facilitated into the thing that was behind Viet Nam. Here's what it is.

The banks didn't have clear strength in Viet Nam. There were too many powerful individuals there, who would not work with the banks. The war was about subduing those individuals by either removing them, or by incorporating them - more or less voluntarily under threat - into the world banking system.

Google "Viet Nam." Today that country has a higher standard of living than it has ever had before... with regard to the general public, that is. Of course, they have the same minor slavery that Europe and America have - the slavery of having to pay a portion of their funds to the banks through taxes.

The bankers have come to understand that if you want to enslave the people, you need to let the people think that they have freedom. And in order to do this, you have to give them some REAL freedom. In fact, almost all the wars of the 1900s were about the bankers taking over, so that they could give the nations of the world, say, 90% freedom, while enslaving them through taxes of one form of another to the tune of 10% that would be turned over to the bankers. That's what WWI, WWII, Korea, Viet Nam, Kroatia, etc., and now the Middle East, Yemen, Pakistan, and now, also, the Ukraine are all about. It's all about the bankers retaining control to keep the people free enough so that they unknowingly and unwittingly hand over a certain percentage of their labor to the banks.

Governments are secondary. Virtually all wars are bankers' wars. Banks rule.

What will bankers do when they have established themselves securely in power over the whole world? Who knows? But, they are aware that if they don't have the strength of direct force to use on the people, the people will rebel.

Bitcoin will have to be removed. Bitcoin has the potential strength to destroy the banking system, worldwide.

Not all banks dislike account holders to buy and sell bitcoin, mine does. I received a letter from my bank asking where the bitcoin are from and when I spoke to them, they "persuaded" me to send the money to another bank. The fact is, most banks fear the trouble of dealing with money from bitcoin. This is no exaggeration. I buy from ATMs now and wire fiat to another bank.

Capitalism wouldn't make oxygen illegal, but if they could they would surely put it into plastic bottles and sell it to us for two dollars a pop, just like they have done with water - despite it being available from every faucet.

Bottled water is the greatest marketing coup in the history of mankind. Here in NYC we have some of the best tap water in the nation - fresh from the Adirondacks. Yet the consumer-whore brainwashed population loves to buy bottled water anyway, because it's "fancier".

Despite the fact that bottled water actually has LESS regulatory restrictions than tap! Such insanity...

Perhaps global pollution is being done deliberately to create the future market for fresh clean oxygen, bottled up into plastic for a few cents and than sold to brainwashed masses for a few dollars. Suddenly another billion dollar industry is born.

most banks accept individuals/businesses that do bitcoins. but hate such entities that lie to banks. by pretending they offer advertising services or other stuff because they are scared that banks wont like the truth. also exchanges that want to handle FIAT for customers, but stupidly pretend they dont need FIAT money transmission licences, registering a business name with the state and IRS. thus banks treat the entity as being a financial risk as they are acting shady, not because they hold bitcoins.

so while you exaggerate the current state of banking, which is not objectionable to bitcoin, what are you doing to future proof yourself from any possible future changes..? or what are you doing to make things even easier.

or do you guys just want to sit on your asses and whine on forums saying "banks control governments, we cant do nothing" crying like babies?

LOL, banks are not governments.

Banks could probably make oxygen illegal if they wanted to.

Banks cannot make bitcoin illegal, but they can close our accounts if we use our accounts to send or receive funds from exchanges. If all local banks close or freeze accounts once they are used for bitcoin activities, it is the same as bitcoin being outlawed.

There are about 3.79 million square miles in the United States. That's something over 7.5 acres for every person in the country. But since most of the people live in the big cities, you could live off the land in some vacant area of the U.S. If you happen to be gregarious, you could live off what you find in dumpsters in the big cities.

Check out http://abundanthope.net/pages/True_US_History_108/US_Congress_House_Joint_Resolution_192_of_June_5_1_3312.shtml to see how you can use the bankruptcy to make the banks your slave.



EDIT: Incidentally, if the bankruptcy is declared a lie, and if the banks lose there control, and the treasury takes over the money, and the Constitution is found to be the controller of the U.S. again, Bitcoin might not be needed any longer.

What will happen to me if I refuse to pay my taxes as I do not want to support the central banks which our countries loan money from illegally and we pay back with interest?  We are slaves.

Actually, banks just might be the government. Probably the strongest nation in the world is the United States. And here's how the banks are the government for the United States. And since they are government for the U.S., they are the government for the world, since the U.S. is the strongest nation in the world at this time.

House Joint Resolution 192 in the U.S. (1933) declared the bankruptcy of the United States. See:
http://www.truthsetsusfree.com/HJR192.htm.

For more significant understandings about this, see:
http://abundanthope.net/pages/True_US_History_108/US_Congress_House_Joint_Resolution_192_of_June_5_1_3312.shtml.

The U.S. bankruptcy was a chapter 11-like bankruptcy, a reorganization bankruptcy. In a chapter 11, the business that has gone bankrupt - in this case, the United States - is placed into a trust with a trustee running the show. The idea is to let the business continue operations with a trustee overseer guiding it so that it starts to operate in profit rather than in loss.

So, who is the trustee for the United States? Well, bankruptcy has to do with money, which has to do with banking. So it is probably the Federal Reserve Bank, or the International Monetary Fund that is the trustee.

In a bankruptcy, business bylaws are suspended in favor of trustee directives. In the case of the United States, the Constitution has been suspended in favor of the "orders" set down by the trustee. That is why the Federal Reserve Bank prints the money, controls lending and inflation, regulates anything having to do with money, and thereby indirectly controls government.

Now, there is the possibility (probability?) that the bankruptcy was a lie, set in place to bring even the U.S. into the One World Government. If we can find the lie, we just might be able to use it to escape the whole bankruptcy idea from within. Until then, Bitcoin is one of the few things that just might be able to fly in the face of the U.S. bankruptcy and destroy it from the outside.

forgive me for being british, but i have never been a gun lover or someone that see's the point in them.

if someone breaks into your house why is the mindset to kill them. wouldnt stun guns, or tranquilizer guns do a better job. as most people know unless average joe public was a marksman and could guarantee a headshot. a gun wont kill instantly, it usually just stops them in their tracks, injures them and a few minutes later they die due to blood loss.

a stungun does a better job of dropping someone to the floor even if you shoot them in the arm.. and there is no blood to clean up after, meaning your nice white shagpile rug doesnt need to be thrown out.

secondly in a apocalyptic world of zombies and disaster (the other reason gun lovers say they need to arm up) killing a military soldier would get 20 soldiers killing you. but stunning them with a tranquilizer would be less risky to your life, as they would know their colleague was still alive, and concentrate on getting him out of the danger zone and conscious

I'm pushing the anti-gun agenda, and I hate the mainstream media. I don't think human beings need to be using violence to solve our problems in 2014. I think it's a fucking barbaric travesty that we still do.

Here are some facts to help deprogram your gun-loving brainwashing:



You like your guns because someone a whole lot smarter than you figured out that if they can program a nation of 300 million people to love guns, they could make a shitload of money selling guns to idiots who don't need them.

Gun culture = PROFIT, in exchange for your blood. Simpleton.

Amercian's do have guns, is it starting to make sense now that gun violence is dropping massively but the media is still pushing the anti gun agenda..  Do you see what is going on.... it's quite scary.
Hitler removed all the guns from his people... it was celebrated as a great victory.. a few years later people were rounded up and gased..

Power is more complex than you think, child. Public perception matters a great deal - now more than ever for the banks. They're on thin ice, and so is the US government. They're smart enough to know it, they won't be kicking any political hornets nests anytime soon.



This ain't China. Americans have guns and tempers. Imagine what could happen if the government managed to piss everyone off enough to unite Teaparty militiaman and Occupy Wall Street anarchists... It wouldn't be pretty, that's for damn sure.

Most big companies have lobbyists that can push for laws. That is different from saying that companies can write laws.

not from your sofa...

but i do love how these sofa surfing activists have alot to say on a forum but would never step foot into a government hearing to make their voice heard..

.. "because the government is illuminati".. i hear them cry

luckily im in the UK, and yes i do go to political events and other things that matter. so i have a better grasp of reality than the youtube viewing sofa surfing armchair activists that are posting apocalypse stories

You're a fool if you think the banking institutions are not closely tied to government officials. Banks have A LOT of power and lee-way in this world (at least in the US). They're going to lobby hard for whatever they want, and there's not much the average person can do.

get off the illuminati titled videos of youtube, come back to reality.. dont walk into the light..

banks cannot tell you that its illegal to pick your nose, to breathe, to swim in an ocean, to watch endless illuminati videos..

you are a human you have the choice to even ignore me asking you to stop sniffing the glue while watching the videos.

same goes for bitcoin. so please put into context banks control into real world, real reality scenarios. and not youtube fantasy.

summary
a bank tomorrow wont make a criminal law that outlaws bitcoins for consumer use between people. banks can lobby governments, and those governments can have there many months of meetings sending the request up the chain of command to the law makers, who then have thier own processes of evaluating the pro's and cons.

but a bank cannot click its own finger and thumb and outlaw bitcoins tomorrow.

alot of you activist mindsets try to make it appear that banks can directly ban bitcoins in an instant, with no processes, no chances of public hearings, petitions, overviews, decisions by anyone outside the banking system

Well to be more specific... Reserve Banks, are directly linked to government. They decide, how much currency will be "created" and then it's channelled to banks.

So your bank loans money from the reserve banks and then your bank loans the money to you.

So if your government decide not to back BTC they would "advise" the reserve bank, and the reserve bank, will "advice" their banks, and then your bank will freeze your accounts, dealing with bitcoins.

Well that is how, I was told, how it works. So if I am wrong, I beg your forgiveness. 

In short, governments pulls the strings, and we are the puppets. And when you deal only in BTC and do not convert to fiat, the strings are cut.