Home› A Moving Train

* CNBC: Raymond James Analyst Blames Financial Crisis On US Illuminati *

DriftingByTheStormDriftingByTheStorm Posts: 8,684
edited October 2008 in A Moving Train
Hillarious.
Goddamn Illuminati!

What crack is he smoking?
Lol.

BTW,
I hear Obama is seriously considering Jamie Dimon for his Treasury Secretary.
Jamie Dimon is the CEO of JP Morgan Chase, damn near the head of that above named sect, if ever a was of a wiz there was.
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • RolandTD20KdrummerRolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    ahahahhahahhhaaa

    That was fucking great.
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • flywallyflyflywallyfly Posts: 1,453
    I cant believe he actually said it on mainstream media. Wow. He probably wont live to see the New Year for that gaff.
  • kenny olavkenny olav Posts: 3,319
    Ron Paul Promises To Return When Country Needs Him Most

    October 24, 2008

    WASHINGTON—After piling the last of his Campaign for Liberty signs in the back of a beat-up Ford truck Thursday, Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) once again abandoned his candidacy for president and rode on out toward the low western sun, but not before vowing to come back to Washington "when [the country] is ready." "When the river swirls and the wind blows, and when uncontrollable inflation forces us to revert to the gold standard, and the Federal Reserve bank is exposed as the unconstitutional, neofascist cabal it really is, you'll see me coming over that hill," said Paul, leaving a dusty cowboy hat and a stack of "no" votes on his seat in the House of Representatives. "But don't you fret, America. If you ever feel like your government is getting too big or too intrusive, just give a little whistle, and there I'll be. I'll be there quicker'n you can spit." Although no one has seen or heard from the Texas congressman since Thursday, sources report the Ron Paul for President campaign has gained an additional $2.3 million in contributions since his disappearance.


    (from The Onion, btw)
  • bootlegger10bootlegger10 Posts: 16,066
    DriftingByTheStorm wrote:
    Hillarious.
    Goddamn Illuminati!

    What crack is he smoking?
    Lol.

    BTW,
    I hear Obama is seriously considering Jamie Dimon for his Treasury Secretary.
    Jamie Dimon is the CEO of JP Morgan Chase, damn near the head of that above named sect, if ever a was of a wiz there was.

    The way he said it in that YouTube clip makes me think he just meant the financial elite of the country, not the actual Illuminati. You may already agree with this and are just having a laugh at his expense.
  • DriftingByTheStormDriftingByTheStorm Posts: 8,684
    bootlegger10 wrote:
    The way he said it in that YouTube clip makes me think he just meant the financial elite of the country, not the actual Illuminati.

    isn't the line between the two connotations rather disambiguous?
    i mean, the "actual" illuminati was an idea born out of the age of enlightenment and is now just a long lost cult obsessed with revolutionary thinking.

    Today, the term is simply used as a convenient misnomer to identify the closed ranks of the ultrapowerful, who organize to their own benefit, and whose ideas significantly influence not only the course of history, but also how that history is recorded, and taught to the public.

    The financial elite of this country, for all intents and purposes can be construed as much to be "the illuminati" as rightfully as any other group, if not more so.
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • bootlegger10bootlegger10 Posts: 16,066
    DriftingByTheStorm wrote:
    isn't the line between the two connotations rather disambiguous?
    i mean, the "actual" illuminati was an idea born out of the age of enlightenment and is now just a long lost cult obsessed with revolutionary thinking.

    Today, the term is simply used as a convenient misnomer to identify the closed ranks of the ultrapowerful, who organize to their own benefit, and whose ideas significantly influence not only the course of history, but also how that history is recorded, and taught to the public.

    The financial elite of this country, for all intents and purposes can be construed as much to be "the illuminati" as rightfully as any other group, if not more so.

    I'm not disagreeing with you.
  • LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSunLikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun Posts: 6,097
    what the fuck are you smoking? he was just talking about the people in charge, not the literal illuminati. he even tacked on "if you will" at the end. its a pretty common word by now.
  • blackredyellowblackredyellow Posts: 5,889
    MrSmith wrote:
    what the fuck are you smoking? he was just talking about the people in charge, not the literal illuminati. he even tacked on "if you will" at the end. its a pretty common word by now.

    Please, take your common sense and get out of this thread...
    My whole life
    was like a picture
    of a sunny day
    “We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
    ― Abraham Lincoln
  • DriftingByTheStormDriftingByTheStorm Posts: 8,684
    MrSmith wrote:
    what the fuck are you smoking? he was just talking about the people in charge, not the literal illuminati. he even tacked on "if you will" at the end. its a pretty common word by now.

    There is no "literal illuminati" anymore.
    They were an 18th century group.

    This man used the term to implicate the richest of the rich who pull the strings of our government and run our economy.

    The ones who own the stock of the Federal Reserve, the ones who influence the regulation of our financial system, the ones who elect our presidents, the ones who run the Presidents Working Group on Financial Markets, the ones who manipulate those markets repeatedly, and the ones who lie to you on television about nearly everything.

    It is not "a fairly common term by now", it is used only by people who intend it for a specific reason, as did this fellow.
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSunLikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun Posts: 6,097
    DriftingByTheStorm wrote:
    There is no "literal illuminati" anymore.
    They were an 18th century group.

    This man used the term to implicate the richest of the rich who pull the strings of our government and run our economy.

    The ones who own the stock of the Federal Reserve, the ones who influence the regulation of our financial system, the ones who elect our presidents, the ones who run the Presidents Working Group on Financial Markets, the ones who manipulate those markets repeatedly, and the ones who lie to you on television about nearly everything.

    It is not "a fairly common term by now", it is used only by people who intend it for a specific reason, as did this fellow.
    yeah, the rich and powerful rule the world, thats what being rich and powerful means. and when you get rid of them, the people who replace them will be the rich and powerful. this shouldnt be news to anyone. doesnt mean they have official badges and secret handshakes.
  • DriftingByTheStormDriftingByTheStorm Posts: 8,684
    MrSmith wrote:
    doesnt mean they have official badges and secret handshakes.

    hard to find out if its so secret you can't talk about it.
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • RolandTD20KdrummerRolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    MrSmith wrote:
    what the fuck are you smoking? he was just talking about the people in charge, not the literal illuminati. he even tacked on "if you will" at the end. its a pretty common word by now.

    not the "literal" illuminati....

    hahahahaha
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSunLikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun Posts: 6,097
    RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:
    not the "literal" illuminati....

    hahahahaha
    are you kidding? i've learned that no absurd conspiracy theory is too ridiculous for this board, especially from you. so the thread isnt about some guy accidentally exposing the super-double-secret world gov't. why even post this then? some guy on tv blabbed about the economy and used the word illuminati. who cares?
  • RolandTD20KdrummerRolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    MrSmith wrote:
    are you kidding? i've learned that no absurd conspiracy theory is too ridiculous for this board, especially from you. so the thread isnt about some guy accidentally exposing the super-double-secret world gov't. why even post this then? some guy on tv blabbed about the economy and used the word illuminati. who cares?

    you don't get the joke..that's ok. It's not a requirement.
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • RolandTD20KdrummerRolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    Oh the anger...
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
Sign In or Register to comment.