The Root of All Evil

11 Feb

The following video offers a compelling argument that all modern wars are initiated by and for the owners of the world’s central banks.  Michael Rivero (the video’s author) speaks a little too fast, but he makes good sense.  If you listen to this video often enough to learn and understand the argument and evidence, you’ll understand more about this world’s current reality than 99.9% of the American people.

The video implicitly points towards the spiritual basis for the bankers’ wars:  the love of money.  The Bible, of course, declares at 1 Timothy 6:10 (KJV) that the “love of money” (not money, itself) is the “root of all evil”.   And who loves money more than the private, central bankers?  In the name of central bankers’ love of money, we kill foreign nations and and they kill us.

video      00:43:44


Tags: , , , , , ,

19 responses to “The Root of All Evil

  1. Chris Cains

    February 11, 2013 at 1:54 PM


    And, YES, “The LOVE of ‘money’, [which, when checked for it’s Greek roots = “philarguria” [#5365 – Strong’s Concordance] from #5366, avarice — love of money; then #5366 = “philarguros”; from #5384 and 696; ‘fond of silver’ {money}, i.e. avaricious — covetess. (note #5384 = “philos”; fond…and #696 = “arguros”; shinning, (silver, the metal in the articles or coins), IS centrally located in the “powers that be”.

    Also, it might be added that Luke 4:5 – 8, describes the spiritual reasoning behind the avaricious apatite of the ultra rich…because $ = POWER!

    Thus, quite simply, (since this is the declaration, [confession], made right out of Helel’s mouth: “ALL this POWER, and the GLORY of them,{kingdoms}, is given me, & to whom I will, I give it” – (Lk. 4:6), we must realize that we are NOT merely dealing with humans that lust after gold & silver, but rather, humans who have given themselves over to a spiritual power broker that seeks to RULE ALL OF MANKIND!

    It will be quite advantageous for your health & longevity to take heed to these facts, and be a sure that you are NOT one of those to whom “power”, “glory” or “money” avarice is a weakness & deep desire. Or, that you’ve NOT “signed onto” a “Faustian deal” to gain ANY of those.

    • jaiseli

      February 11, 2013 at 2:36 PM

      From the gangster bankers’ point of view, is it the “Love of money” or love of DEBT.
      Can/has money also facilitate[d] real wealth via prosperity?
      Which is the mechanism to the maintenance of control and individual enslavement?
      Recall that very prescient remark in the movie, “The Internationalist”?

  2. jaiseli

    February 11, 2013 at 2:23 PM

    yo, Alfred

    1) happy to learn that you are accessing Rivero’s contribution
    2) other than his refusal to covenant with and acknowledge/accept “under standing” the supreme jurisdiction of the Creator, and his pedantic rag on Israel instead of the Zionist, his daily review of events relevant to exposing the truth Truth and his discipline to remain focused on relevant issues is applauded.
    3) sort of a libertarian version of Webster Tarpley, perhaps?

  3. Anthony Clifton

    February 11, 2013 at 4:05 PM

    The Almighty doesn’t mind Mikeys’ quirks,

    the Truth is bigger than his little mind can grasp anyway..

    at least he doesn’t promote baby killing and sodomite matrimony.


    eventually people will develope a pure language

    and Randy Travis will wear clothes when he goes to the store after dark

  4. brimp

    February 11, 2013 at 5:29 PM

    This site excels in defining how the servants have become the master. whatreallyhappened focuses on what is happening rather than how the owners of the machine get us to consent to being dominated. The video is well done.

  5. chef1776

    February 11, 2013 at 8:43 PM

    I beleive that Major General Smedley Butler, , nailed it when he wrote “War is a Racket” , , in 1935. Another fact of History relegated to the “Memory Hole”.

  6. NDT

    February 11, 2013 at 11:30 PM

    Never rely on a Pharisee for the truth about the nature of evil.

    I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I YHWH do all these [things].
    Isaiah 45:7

    • Chris Cains

      February 18, 2013 at 9:36 PM

      #1] Define your understanding of what “a Pharisee” is please…[significant to this conversation, so that I do not misunderstand, — or “ASS-U-ME – ing” your meaning], and then

      #2] Please give your reasoning & understanding of the reason for quoting Isa. 45:7.


      Because this verse is EXTREMELY SIGNIFICANT in understanding God’s relationship to humankind, AND, our relationship to HIM. It deals with the VERY profound reasoning of “WHY” the existence of evil was allowed…I look forward to your response.

      • NDT

        March 6, 2013 at 2:27 AM


        #1 A Pharisee is: egotistical, lawless (in the sense of the spirit of the law), and hypocritical.
        #2 Isaiah 45:7 illustrates the difference between a Pharisee’s description of evil and a prophet’s description. Evil is a fundamental aspect of reality: in the garden was the tree of life and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

        Humans are of Rome (Cicero’s homo humanus), and evil was not “allowed” to exist, it was created.

  7. Jane Doe

    February 11, 2013 at 11:40 PM

    “Or did you say it’s the LOVE of money that’s the root of all evil? To love a thing is to know and love its nature. To love money is to know and love the fact that money is the creation of the best power within you, and your passkey to trade your effort for the effort of the best among men. It’s the person who would sell his soul for a nickel, who is the loudest in proclaiming his hatred of money—and he has good reason to hate it. The lovers of money are willing to work for it. They know they are able to deserve it.”

    “Let me give you a tip on a clue to men’s characters: the man who damns money has obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it has earned it.

    “Run for your life from any man who tells you that money is evil. That sentence is the leper’s bell of an approaching looter. So long as men live together on earth and need means to deal with one another—their only substitute, if they abandon money, is the muzzle of a gun.

    “But money demands of you the highest virtues, if you wish to make it or to keep it. Men who have no courage, pride, or self-esteem, men who have no moral sense of their right to their money and are not willing to defend it as they defend their life, men who apologize for being rich—will not remain rich for long. They are the natural bait for the swarms of looters that stay under rocks for centuries, but come crawling out at the first smell of a man who begs to be forgiven for the guilt of owning wealth. They will hasten to relieve him of the guilt—and of his life, as he deserves.

    “Then you will see the rise of the double standard—the men who live by force, yet count on those who live by trade to create the value of their looted money—the men who are the hitchhikers of virtue. In a moral society, these are the criminals, and the statutes are written to protect you against them. But when a society establishes criminals-by-right and looters-by-law—men who use force to seize the wealth of DISARMED victims—then money becomes its creators’ avenger. Such looters believe it safe to rob defenseless men, once they’ve passed a law to disarm them. But their loot becomes the magnet for other looters, who get it from them as they got it. Then the race goes, not to the ablest at production, but to those most ruthless at brutality. When force is the standard, the murderer wins over the pickpocket. And then that society vanishes, in a spread of ruins and slaughter.

    “Do you wish to know whether that day is coming? Watch money. Money is the barometer of a society’s virtue. When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion—when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing—when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors—when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don’t protect you against them, but protect them against you—when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice—you may know that your society is doomed. Money is so noble a medium that it does not compete with guns and it does not make terms with brutality. It will not permit a country to survive as half-property, half-loot.

    “Whenever destroyers appear among men, they start by destroying money, for money is men’s protection and the base of a moral existence. Destroyers seize gold and leave to its owners a counterfeit pile of paper. This kills all objective standards and delivers men into the arbitrary power of an arbitrary setter of values. Gold was an objective value, an equivalent of wealth produced. Paper is a mortgage on wealth that does not exist, backed by a gun aimed at those who are expected to produce it. Paper is a check drawn by legal looters upon an account which is not theirs: upon the virtue of the victims. Watch for the day when it becomes, marked: ‘Account overdrawn.’

    “When you have made evil the means of survival, do not expect men to remain good. Do not expect them to stay moral and lose their lives for the purpose of becoming the fodder of the immoral. Do not expect them to produce, when production is punished and looting rewarded. Do not ask, ‘Who is destroying the world?’ You are.

    “You stand in the midst of the greatest achievements of the greatest productive civilization and you wonder why it’s crumbling around you, while your damning its life-blood—money. You look upon money as the savages did before you, and you wonder why the jungle is creeping back to the edge of your cities. Throughout men’s history, money was always seized by looters of one brand or another, but whose method remained the same: to seize wealth by force and to keep the producers bound, demeaned, defamed, deprived of honor. That phrase about the evil of money, which you mouth with such righteous recklessness, comes from a time when wealth was produced by the labor of slaves—slaves who repeated the motions once discovered by somebody’s mind and left unimproved for centuries. So long as production was ruled by force, and wealth was obtained by conquest, there was little to conquer. Yet through all the centuries of stagnation and starvation, men exalted the looters, as aristocrats of the sword, as aristocrats of birth, as aristocrats of the bureau, and despised the producers, as slaves, as traders, as shopkeepers—as industrialists.

    “To the glory of mankind, there was, for the first and only time in history, a COUNTRY OF MONEY—and I have no higher, more reverent tribute to pay to America, for this means: a country of reason, justice, freedom, production, achievement. For the first time, man’s mind and money were set free, and there were no fortunes-by-conquest, but only fortunes-by-work, and instead of swordsmen and slaves, there appeared the real maker of wealth, the greatest worker, the highest type of human being—the self-made man—the American industrialist.

    “If you ask me to name the proudest distinction of Americans, I would choose—because it contains all the others—the fact that they were the people who created the phrase ‘to MAKE money.’ No other language or nation had ever used these words before; men had always thought of wealth as a static quantity—to be seized, begged, inherited, shared, looted, or obtained as a favor. Americans were the first to understand that wealth has to be created. The words ‘to make money’ hold the essence of human morality.

    “Yet these were the words for which Americans were denounced by the rotted cultures of the looters’ continents. Now the looters’ credo has brought you to regard your proudest achievements as a hallmark of shame, your prosperity as guilt, your greatest men, the industrialists, as blackguards, and your magnificent factories as the product and property of muscular labor, the labor of whip-driven slaves, like the pyramids of Egypt. The rotter who simpers that he sees no difference between the power of the dollar and the power of the whip, ought to learn the difference on his own hide-as, I think, he will.

    “Until and unless you discover that money is the root of all good, you ask for your own destruction. When money ceases to be the tool by which men deal with one another, then men become the tools of men. Blood, whips and guns—or dollars. Take your choice—there is no other—and your time is running out.”

    —Ayn Rand

  8. freedomcaller9

    February 12, 2013 at 3:10 AM

    That was so much and so revealing … what can we do to overcome the mortage situation and how can I learn to be adaptable and strong in my convictions to overcome what I know the banks will try to do and that is to sustain legal rights to the property at hand. I want to know and understand all that is needed to overcome the foreclosure of the property since I wish to be of service to my children who has property in the area of Hawaii .. What can I do to be prepared with what I wish to do for these children of mine . I have looked and have found some answers and I believe a rebuttal against the bank is to be done verbally with proper formats and a conditional acceptance bringing to bay the conditions to show legal owership and having the format to show evidence turning the decision of the courts and placing the true owners, the Principals with evidence of such a loans done or not . I found through a lot of research on the internet that the wordings in the Deed of Trust will actually tell me that the loan was made to the principal and although untrue … evidence to the action either by a check given to the Principals or evidence of a statment from their checking account showing the loan and when it was done must be produced .. A need to format a statement or court order is to be done if a foreclosure does come about… I need assistance , if at all / Can you get back to me and guide me . I have known about you for about 9 years and have contacted CIC for help also although the cost is something I am not able to afford . If you can help me , what would the cost be. If I can afford this /// then I will put my best foot forward and my love for the freedom of mankind away from the money hungreys… I will start with my children Thank you and God blessings with you always Rosella Lampe


    • Adask

      February 12, 2013 at 3:18 AM

      I am able to speak in general terms on the “fraudclosure” problem, but I have never personally applied any of my general observations. I don’t know what to tell you to do. My fundamental strategy is not to have a “cookie cutter” approach to law, but rather to read each case with great diligence–and at a cost of much time–to see what flaws I can find in a particular case and then try to exploit those flaws. As a result, I’m not able to give you specific info on what you should or shouldn’t do. God bless you and yours.

      • SweaterCups40

        February 12, 2013 at 11:08 AM

        Hi Al,& others,
        How do you know when you are reading a case if it’s dicta or dictum? I have been told that if it’s dicta, it’s worthless to use to make a point. IF this is true, then it’s superfluous,isn’t it?

      • Adask

        February 12, 2013 at 11:29 AM

        I don’t know the difference between “dicta” and “dictum”.  Perhaps “dicta” comes from Tweedle-Dee and “dictum” comes from Tweedle-Dum.   [rimshot!]

        But seriously, folks, . . . I read much of what the court’s do to be decisions made in equity rather than at law.  In equity, the courts can rule any way they want based strictly on the judge’s alleged “conscience”.  The decisions often seem irrational, but they don’t make for precedent.   They apply only to the case at hand.  As I understand cases in equity, they may be referenced as a “guide” in future cases that future judges may or may not agree with–but decisions in equity are not controlling on future cases.  The judges can still rule any way they please.

        In the unlikely event that there’s no relationship between dicta/dictum and Tweedle Dee/Dum, you might try using a dictionary to discover whatever the difference in meanings might be.       

  9. SweaterCups40

    February 16, 2013 at 8:20 AM

    @ > In the unlikely event that there’s no relationship between dicta/dictum and Tweedle Dee/Dum, you might try using a dictionary to discover whatever the difference in meanings might be.

    When I am reading a case, I do not know IF what I am reading is dicta or dictum & no dictionary is going to tell me if what I am reading is dicta or dictum. The following is a case & a case in point.

    United States of America v. William M. Slater,545 F. Supp.179
    The gravamen of Slater’s argument in this regard is that he is not a “person” within the meaning of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended, and that he is therefore not liable to pay federal taxes

    Here is the key” Unless the defendant can establish that he is not a citizen of the United States, the IRS possesses authority to attempt to determine his federal tax liability.

    “A citizen of the United States is a citizen of the federal government …” Kitchens v. Steele, 112 F.Supp 383,386.

    “… he was not a citizen of the United States, he was a citizen and voter of the State…” “One may be a citizen of a State and yet not be a citizen of the United States.” McDonel v. The State, 90 Ind. 320

    Now when the court says: “Unless the defendant can establish that he is not a citizen of the United States, the IRS possesses authority to attempt to determine his federal tax liability.”

    IF the above statement is dictum,it reveals MUCH, but if dicta,it’s worthless.I think having a S.S.N. makes one a “citizen of the United States” just for one,of many examples.

    • Adask

      February 16, 2013 at 10:08 AM

      I haven’t looked up the definitions of “dicta” and “dictum” but, unless the terms are synonymous, their definitions should reveal how to distinguish one from the other. If you can identify that distinction and learn to watch for it, it will tell you whether you’re dealing with Tweedle Dee or Tweedle Dum.

      • SweaterCups40

        February 16, 2013 at 4:39 PM

        Thanks Alfred,
        I don’t believe I am going to be “an asset” for your blog, so, I will sign off. Thanks for trying to help & for your patience.No need to respond to this.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s