Head on over to the Portland IMC.

There, Alexander James will tell you all about the 'History of Money and Private Central Bank Ownership by Freemason/Zionist Mafia'.

"In this expose, we are presenting numerous quotes from past US Presidents and polictians and demonstrate how control and profits of the private Central Banks has been the catalyst behind many wars. Note that all four presidents who tried to end the banking monopolies were assassinated (Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, Kennedy) and anyone who tries to expose these Banking Dynasties is demonized like Rep. Congressman James Traficant in 1993 and many others."

But be careful. It is as long as any essay by the excellent Bill Whittle. But no where near the quality. There are a number of quotes, a few of which aren't the same as I remember them. But who really cares about accuracy when you're trying to get this important information out, right Alex.

Minor fisking below.

"Along comes an individual with a bit more of the accepted currency which he offers to lend to one who has less, so long as the poorer member agrees to pay back all plus a bit more� in a given time. Immediately the poorer member is now even poorer because has to pay back not only what he now holds, but also a percentage of what he holds which he has yet to find."

Oh, those evil rich people loaning others money.

"This transaction in itself will not have increased the overall produce of the community, yet now the lender owns a bit more of the overall wealth without having added anything to it. This action, far from having helped the poorer member has actually deprived everyone. One such transaction might not appear to make a huge difference, but multiply the effects and soon our lender will have a growing pile of currency which he has acquired while adding absolutely nothing to the community."

His kindness being rewarded, perish the thought.

"If the community we imagine once consisted of individuals trading fairly to survive, now everyone who owes is working for the lender."

Hmm, I've heard this somewhere before......

"The lender might seem like the good guy and the borrower might be grateful for the loan, but in fact, the contract entered into is no favour and the lender is really only preying on the poor and giving nothing."

Except taking the chance that the borrower won't pay him back. At which time he may not be able to recover his losses. But that is what the evil rich guy deserves, right Alex?

"Usury leaves a bad taste because it allows the rich to get richer while not actually producing anything new for the community while taking advantage of those less fortunate by making them even poorer."

Oh no! Not trading with interest! Hey Alex, are you sure your name isn't umm, say, Muhammed?

Alrighty then, Muhammed. What if the borrower is using this loan to start a business. Maybe a restaurant or a doctors office. Heck, he could be using the loan to go to medical school. Do you still think that that the borrower is going to be poorer? And do you still think the guy giving the loan is not contributing to society?

Ya fuckin' commie putz.