Didn’t Do It: The Rothschilds

JFK was killed for his policy on silver coinage, says “investigative reporter” Bruce Montalvo in this unconvincing portentous video that also locates “the Rothschilds, the Warburgs and the oligarchical psychopaths” on the grassy knoll. Perhaps the ancient banking empires of Europe and the Federal Reserve Bank deserve abusive criticism — but not of this sort.

It was JFK’s military and foreign policy — especially on Cuba — that provoked violent hostility from within his own government. Contrary to what some in the Ron Paul caucus say, JFK’s fiscal and banking policies did not have that sort of divisive effect and they did not — according to any credible evidence known to credible researchers — instigate his assassination. The “Fed Did It” theory doesn’t wash.

On the sane side, Montalvo calls attention to the important testimony of Bill Newman, a young plumber who was standing near JFK’s limousine when the gunfire erupted.

Here’s what Newman said about the origin of the gunfire.

 

2 comments

  1. anonymous says:

    “JFK’s fiscal and banking policies did not have that sort of divisive effect and they did not instigate his assassination.”

    I don’t pretend to know who called the shots. I suggest that it was much like organized crime – A scenario where bankers complain to the local don that this dirty unfit politician is violating a family member – & Something must be done. The don calls a meet, with dirty politicians and dirty cops. Do you know who ran the show? Major General Smedley Butler might have a had some ideas.

    I agree that JFK was unlikely killed for just his policy on silver coinage – But other presidents were killed for their monetary policies. Oil and the world’s largest aqueduct ( a man-made river ) brought this country out of dire poverty:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THlaMUq6MKU#t=3077

    In early 2008, a sovereign-wealth fund run by Goldman Sachs lost 98% of its value, internal Goldman documents show…Goldman offered to make it all up by selling it a huge stake in Goldman itself.
    The plan to quit selling oil in U.S. dollars was the last straw:
    http://whowhatwhy.com/2011/06/06/libya-connect-the-dots-you-get-a-giant-dollar-sign/

  2. Karl Golovin says:

    The admonition from “Watergate” was “follow the money.” Much as one progresses in the study of math from simple addition/subtraction to calculus over time, if one follows the money long enough, the nature of what “money” has become brings an investigator gradually closer to meeting “the man behind the curtain,” as it were. Further down the rabbit hole in “Matrix” terminology. So what now passes as the U.S. Dollar is irredeemable credit, borrowed into existence at usury, yet redeemable in a sense, because soon after 8/15/71, when Nixon ended the redemption in gold of U.S. dollars held by foreign governments (as required under the Bretton Woods accords), we reached agreements with the OPEC countries that they would only sell their oil in units of “the dollar,” something we now just print. So every country in the world that has needed to buy OPEC oil has had to do something, politically, economically or otherwise to gain dollars to buy their oil. We’ve enforced the deal militarily. Under Saddam Hussein, Iraq went off the deal and began selling their oil for Euros. Game over for Saddam. Kaddafi (Lybia) wanted to start denominating their oil transactions in gold. That idea didn’t go over well with obvious results. The global system of central banks and those who own/control them do take their monopoly power over credit (and precluding the use of gold/silver as money by artificially suppressing their perceived values in the commodity futures markets). Why would they do that? It’s more difficult to steal the value of gold/silver coin money in people’s possession, the value of which may be suppressed, but not easily inflated away while still in the pockets of those who work for a living). Andrew Jackson courageously shut down the Second Bank of the U.S. and it wasn’t easy. His assassination was attempted, probably “outsourced” by interests some degrees removed from the perpetrator. So the assertion can never be so simple as “Didn’t do it” without asking “But were they among those who voted to outsource it?” Andrew Jackson’s farewell address from 1837 reads as if written about today’s banking and corporate control issues. See: http://thedeliberateagrarian.blogspot.com/2012/11/andrew-jackson-hated-paper-money-and.html . A great book explaining the money issue, even identifying the Constitutionally provided, grass-roots means of correcting the problem: http://www.scribd.com/doc/155932886/The-Miracle-on-Main-Street-Saving-Yourself-and-America-from-Financial-Ruin . Underlying the money issue, the Biblical admonition against usury (once you get it, it won’t be boring – but perhaps startling!): http://www.scribd.com/doc/15962267/S-C-Mooney-Usury-Destroyer-Of-Nations and http://www.gutenberg.org/files/21623/21623-h/21623-h.htm . If you get through all that, you’ll want to vote Frederic Bastiat into office:) http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

In seeking to expand the range of informed debate about the events of 1963 and its aftermath, JFKFacts.org welcomes comments that are factual, engaging, and civil. more