By Anna Von Reitz
Recent reports have described Nathan Rothschild as being one of "the good Rothschilds" and certain sources exude sheer happiness that "Nate is back!".
I myself know some Rothschilds that I would describe as sane and "good" people. They appear erratically, like Throwbacks to some illustrious unknown ancestor. They are always a little different in their appearance and mannerisms, too. And, most notably--- they have all suffered for their goodness, played with since birth like mice born into a family of cats.
They are seldom killed, but they are always terribly abused.
And certainly no member of that Family ever arose to the pinnacle of power in either Britain (Nathan) or France (Jacob) without being severely and absolutely vetted and approved by the rest of the clan, because that is what it takes to attain such a position. He must basically agree to the self-interest, motives, and modus operandi of the other family members in all respects or they won't accept his leadership and there will be constant internal struggles and in-fighting that detracts from profits.
And we can't have that, can we?