The Obama effect continues...No 'special relationship' between Britain and US: MPs

Who ultimately controls the USA?

The FED and it's stockholding banks?

Who owns the FED?

Do the research and you will discover that the bank of England was the FEDs largest original stockholder (though machinations with JP Morgan, incidently)

Is it still?

As far as I know, yes...though its stockholdings of various "American" banks that are the stockholders of the FED.

So...do we have a "special relationship"

What do you think?

We do live in a world where the GOLDEN RULE is in effect, do we not?

that relationship works both ways, tec.

anyhow, china an japan are considerably more invested in the fed than england. are you talking about this end of wwII?!!

i think the abu dhabi's got a bigger stake than GB.

the bottom line is whether its a fund or a government, reserves put a lot of power in the issuer's hands, too. that the US has our issuance hedged all over the world is one of our trump cards, if anything.

Yeah, it does work both ways...much like the health of a parsite depends on the health of the host.

anyhow, china an japan are considerably more invested in the fed than england. are you talking about this end of wwII?!!
Are they?

I confess that I do not know which banks are now the primary stockholders of the twelve FEDERAL RESERVE BANKS, so you may be right.

I cannot attest to the accuracy of the following, and it is based on information that was written in 1996, so it is undoubtably no longer accurate (assuming it was to begin with), but consider....

[SIZE=-1][SIZE=-1]Who Owns the Federal Reserve Bank of New York?[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]Each of the twelve Federal Reserve Banks is organized into a corporation whose shares are sold to the commercial banks and thrifts operating within the Bank's district. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]Shareholders elect six of the nine the board of directors for their regional Federal Reserve Bank as well as its president. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]Mullins reported that the top eight stockholders of the New York Fed were, in order from largest to smallest as of 1983, Citibank, Chase Manhatten, Morgan Guaranty Trust, Chemical Bank, Manufacturers Hanover Trust, Bankers Trust Company, National Bank of North America, and the Bank of New York (Mullins, p. 179). [/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]Together, these banks owned about 63 percent of the New York Fed's outstanding stock. Mullins then showed that many of these banks are owned by about a dozen European banking organizations, mostly British, and most notably the Rothschild banking dynasty. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]Through their American agents they are able to select the board of directors for the New York Fed and to direct U.S. monetary policy.[/SIZE]
[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]

Now I am, NOT saying that this is in and of itself, a bad thing.

But clearly the fudiciary responsibility of the FED is to it's OWNERS, and not necessarily to the AMERICAN PEOPLE.

This is the nature of the GOLDEN RULE and regardless of how we are told that the FED works for US, that is patent nonsense when push comes to shove (as we so clearly saw thanks to this BAILOUT),

We work for the monied interests of this world and not the other way around.

And the FED is where that rubber really meets the road, folks.



[/SIZE]
 
Last edited:
Yea this Hopey Changey Foreign Policy is pretty Helter Skelter. He acts tough and insulting towards our allies while at the same time bowing and apologizing to our enemies. Pretty bizarre stuff. Oh well,who really knows what's going on in the mind of a Saul Alinsky trained "Community Organizer?" Yikes!
 
The great divider strikes again, as the Brits no longer think that something that was said for over 60 years is relivent anymore.

No 'special relationship' between Britain and US: MPs

President Barack Obama's administration was taking a "more pragmatic tone" towards Britain than had been the case for some previous US administrations.

I guess Gordo didn't like those DVDs Barry gave him.

He is making ENEMIES out of FRIENDS and is DILUSIONAL enough to beleive that he is turning ENEMIES into FREINDS.:cuckoo::cuckoo::cuckoo::cuckoo:
 
Well, what do you expect from a two-bit race hustler like Obama? Gee, he's got a thang for "whitey" and "Hymie". Who'd a thunk it.
 
Last edited:
Obama's foreign policy is pragmatic. He has to put the interests of the US first and any alliances that will be maintained or renewed or instigated will be alliances that benefit the US. There is no place for emotion or nostalgia.
 
Did all the cons posting in this thread forget to read the article?

The MPs in question specifically blame this decision on Bush and the Iraq war.

And yet, somehow it's Obama's fault.
 
From the article...

It also noted that President Barack Obama's administration was taking a "more pragmatic tone" towards Britain than had been the case for some previous US administrations.
 
I know liberals are slow, so I wanted to help educate them.
 
From the article...

It also noted that President Barack Obama's administration was taking a "more pragmatic tone" towards Britain than had been the case for some previous US administrations.

So you're choosing to ignore the entire article except for the one line, added as a postscript, that mentions Obama? Good job.
 
Let's see for 8 years under Pres. Bush they were very cooperative according to the article, now after Obama's first year, they no longer wish to be good friends anymore.

Here is a test. Do you see any correlation?
 
Let's see for 8 years under Pres. Bush they were very cooperative according to the article, now after Obama's first year, they no longer wish to be good friends anymore.

Here is a test. Do you see any correlation?

So, once again, you didn't read the article.

"The perception that the British government was a subservient 'poodle' to the US administration leading up to the period of the invasion of Iraq and its aftermath is widespread both among the British public and overseas," it said.

"This perception, whatever its relation to reality, is deeply damaging to the reputation and interests of the UK."

It's pretty clearly stated that the reason for this is how "cooperative" the UK was during the Iraq war.
 
From the article...

It also noted that President Barack Obama's administration was taking a "more pragmatic tone" towards Britain than had been the case for some previous US administrations.

So you're choosing to ignore the entire article except for the one line, added as a postscript, that mentions Obama? Good job.

its actually a pretty flattering quote, too. pragmatic. right on, obama.
 
Let's see for 8 years under Pres. Bush they were very cooperative according to the article, now after Obama's first year, they no longer wish to be good friends anymore.

Here is a test. Do you see any correlation?

Here's a test for you.

Define Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc.

You have 10 minutes, after that, your grade will be dropped one half letter for each minute.
 
Let's see for 8 years under Pres. Bush they were very cooperative according to the article, now after Obama's first year, they no longer wish to be good friends anymore.
:rofl:
available in your choice of ignorant and extra ignorant:
350__1_clown-shoes-red-yellow1.det.jpg
 

Forum List

Back
Top