Interesting more stories of this are emerging, I always enjoy seeing things like this.
Relevant stuff would be Tales of an Economic Hitman, which is mostly about a person who worked alongside CIA/ in CIA to go to 3rd world countries and broker agreements to build power plants or utilities or what have you and charge the countries with a high-rate interest plan so they are indebted to US companies(which some are owned by members of congress and cabinet).

I am addicted to the truth that resides in science and historical facts.

I found this documentary when I was searching for the science behind climate change. It dives deep into the science of climate change and the birth of it in our political agendas.

If anyone else has a well documented source that interviews respected scientists and specialist in their field, please share.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52Mx0_8YEtg

It should really mix up the comp scene

http://libertyalliance.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/tin-foil-hat.jpg

oh dear

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0C4_88ub_M

here are some sources that can help u understand the greenhouse effect. they are well written but easy to understand, so there shouldnt be any debating over wording or semantics. there is also a short rebuttal to the "its just the sun" myth in the first source. its short because the myth is retarded.
http://climate.nasa.gov/causes/
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/what.html

people like u are making this happen by letting us continue on that path. not all science has an agenda.

http://i.amz.mshcdn.com/Xn_pS52N9TZhAg8YMaIO8POoNOI=/fit-in/1200x9600/https%3A%2F%2Fblueprint-api-production.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fuploads%2Fcard%2Fimage%2F257747%2FCO2_wearehere.jpg

National banks, such as they are, are the *primary* economic tool for most "capitalist" nations - particularly the US - since the later 70's and early 80's - although the 1920's also saw pretty heavy use of national banks for monetary policy manipulation - because they've become squeamish about direct investment - although almost every modern state does *some* direct investment or at least pays wages to employees.

It doesn't really matter *who* it is that owns the money (bonds) coming in and out of the national bank - the whole point is that the people who own the bonds just expect some kind of repayment once the term comes up and the bank doesn't really have to care what they think - especially in the case of the US - because *somebody* will always buy the bonds. It would be different for countries with very poor credit ratings, because nobody may want those bonds *and then* I could buy that moneyed interests have direct control over national banks - since nobody wants stinker bonds.

They only have 3 things they can do:

1. Increase or decrease cash-flow by raising or lowering interest rates. Lower interest rates = more people taking out loans so more money in the economy - in fact a lot more because of the money multiplier effect. That is to say, I take out of a loan for 20k to buy a car, I give that 20k to the car guy, who then sticks it in a bank, the bank then loans some portion of that 20k out again, and so we've spontaneously created money because the 20k I'm liable for has already been given to somebody else. If you raise interest rates you dry out the economy because fewer people will want loans at higher interest rates.

2. Direct currency manipulation. Buy up government bonds to increase the amount of liquid currency in the economy (thus causing inflation, but there's more liquid money floating around so hopefully it'll be spent) or sell bonds to tie up excess money (used for fighting inflationary pressure).

3. Raise or lower the retention rate - that is how much money banks have to have in the actual bank at any given time - as a percentage of all the money they hold. This is the least used option - it's almost *never* modified because it's somewhat risky to fiddle with this.

So being that those are the only 3 things a national bank can do - or typically does anyways - what vested, moneyed interests want, is ultimately what *tends* to be the best for typical notions of economic growth. Economy sluggish? Put more money into it. Inflation too high? Suck money out of the economy. The only problem is when your interest rates hit 0% - like Japan has been for 10 years, and the US did for quite a while - because then you have to rely on the other 2 tools - which have less predictable effects than simply raising and lowering interest rates (the preferred option in most cases) so-called quantitative easing and so on.

The falsehood that national banks are owned by a few powerful families, who are primarily Jewish mind you, was started by Joseph Goebells, and along with the myth that the Poles tried to fight German tanks on horseback, it's one of his lies that continues to live on despite being totally false :/