1000% Inflation?

UBS’s Larry Hatheway — who once issued some fairly sane advice when he recommended the purchase of tinned goods and small calibre firearms in the case of a Euro collapse — thinks 1000% inflation could be beneficial:

When 1000% inflation can be desirable

In fact, the costs associated with inflation (price change) are less than commonly supposed. There is the famous “sticker price cost” – the cost of constantly changing price labels – but in a world of electronic displays and web based ordering this is not a serious economic cost (in fact, it never was). To take an extreme position, one can make the economic argument that there are only limited costs in having inflation running at 1000% per year, with one caveat. 1000% inflation is perfectly acceptable, as long as the 1000% inflation rate is stable at 1000%, and it is anticipated. Of course, one can argue that high inflation tends to be associated with high inflation volatility and uncertainty (and that is true empirically), but economically it is the volatility and uncertainty that does most of the damage.

The maximum damage from inflation comes if it is unexpected or if it is unpredictable.Unexpected inflation causes damage, because the investor who holds bonds yielding 1% for a decade is going to feel cheated if inflation turns out to be 1000%. Of course, no one would voluntarily buy 1% yielding bonds if 1000% inflation was expected. Thaler’s Law comes into operation here; people dislike losing money more than they like making money. As a result episodes of unexpected inflation will lead to a significant adverse reaction on the part of consumers.

Unpredictable inflation is damaging because it causes uncertainty over an investment time horizon – and that uncertainty is a risk that will demand a compensating premium. What the inflation uncertainty risk does is raise the real cost of capital. If I think inflation will be 3% but I am not sure whether it will be 3%, 0%, or 6%, I am likely to demand compensation for the 3% inflation risk but then additional compensation for the possibility that the inflation risk is as high as 6%. The additional compensation is an addition to the real cost of capital.

Nope.

This is a fairly typical mistake for an economist. In an imaginary economic model, it is possible to assume that inflation is stable, and that it is predictable, and to draw conclusions based on those (absurd) assumptions. In the real world, inflation and the effects of inflation are never predictable, because human behaviour — the micro-level phenomena on which macro-level phenomena like “inflation” are founded — is never fully predictable or stable. This means that future rates of inflation will always be uncertain, and renders Hatheway’s point meaningless.

As Hatheway readily admits, high inflation is associated in the real world with inflation volatility and uncertainty. It is not relevant to say that the real issue is not the high rate of inflation, because there has not been a single case in history where such a high rate of inflation has resulted in stability or predictability. Getting to a 1000% inflation rate is an inherently volatile path, historically one which has resulted in panics, crashes and breakdowns.

And beyond that, such a path would completely undermine the currency and instruments denominated in the currency as a store of value. There are no empirical examples of such high rates of inflation being tolerated, because at every stage in history such effects have been intolerable; when such rates of inflation set in, nations just end up ditching the currency, as happened most recently in Zimbabwe.

That is why 1000% (or 100%, or 50%, or probably even 10%) inflation will never be “perfectly acceptable”.

About these ads

44 thoughts on “1000% Inflation?

  1. Our morning breakfast TV show just awarded 250,000 QANTAS frequent flyer points to a lucky winner.

    I can’t find the AUD/QANTAS cross rate????

    Corporates issuing their own points/tokens!!!!

  2. Economists must work cheap!

    With an inflation rate that high, I’d refuse to be remunerated in currency for any services or goods rendered. I think my upper inflation limit would be 20% before I’d demand to be paid in, say, gold or silver rather than currency.

  3. Has there ever been an example of stable high inflation? The idea that everyone in the economy might ‘know’ that stable inflation rate and could adjust their prices to compensate for that rate of inflation is ludicrous. There would be massive detriment to everyone on fixed incomes of any kind. Can anyone seriously imagine a government employee advising a social security recipient ‘ We have honestly calculated last month’s inflation at 50%, so we’ve increased your payment by 50% so you are no worse off.’ And if in some twisted scenario that actually happened, how long would the rate be stable?

    • Employer suffering Biflation “Good morning boss. I am wondering if you can consider a raise of 20% in my next annual review, you see I calculated my cost of living at 40% and I am prepared to go 50/50/ Fair?”

      Boss: “Actually we need to talk. Your job is being outsourced to India. We can make an appointment with your local Job Welfare agent to help you transition. You have been an exemplary worker, and we thought it would be able to assist you. Thanks for your work. Now if you can leave I am about to take a teleconference call with Bangalore. They are having some teething problems”.

  4. Ah, the classic “Everything will be fine as long as (thing that could never possibly happen).” I love that one. Revel at all the fringe benefits in my imaginary world! Who needs savings anyway? And this way, the issuer of currency could pick ALL the winners, rather than just most of them!

  5. Pingback: 1000% Inflation? | My Blog

    • Impressive — snake plans and drills! “Be prepared!” “Better safe than sorry”. My congratulations to all, and my envy of the frontier spirit! There is a related fairly recent real-life MACRO story — no, two stories — Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy.

      Since and probably long before the 1930s days of Huey Long, Louisiana was a one-party totally corrupt good ole boy state, with enough oil and gas production and Mississippi River commerce to keep it well oiled. The city of New Orleans wasn’t as bad — it was worse! Neither city nor state had paid any attention to the obvious risk that hurricanes can flood a city that is mostly below sea level. After many near misses, in 2005 (?) Hurricane Katrina had what it takes to breach levees. Nothing was done during MANY days of advance warning. When it hit, people waited on porches and roofs for rescue while school and municipal bus fleets and private truck fleets sat in flooded parking lots. Looting was rampant, including some policemen. The Superdome was belatedly opened as a shelter, but never had adequate personnel or supplies. The requisite request from Governor Blanco for federal assistance was delayed by 2+ days while (as proved by telephone recordings) she and New Orleans Mayor Nagin (both Democrats, of course) plotted how they could shift the blame to Republican Pres. Bush. OTHER states’ National Guards were the first troops on the scene. Blanco did not run for reelection! Republican Congressman Jindal, who lost the previous gubernatorial election to Blanco, easily won the next election on a platform which included comprehensive bottom-up disaster plans, public education, and drills. Two years later, when two hurricanes (though lesser than Katrina) hit, evacuation, shelters, medical assistance, emergency supplies, etc. all worked perfectly. In another year or two, Republicans had majorities in both legislative houses and still do!.

      Hurricane Sandy brought two tragedies when it hit the east coast just before election — it helped Obama and other Democrats win, and it caught state and local governments unprepared in NJ, NY and elsewhere. Unnecessary loss of life and human misery resulted as the Katrina drama replayed. On TV, Jindal was shown as saying rhetorically to Obama and Gov. Christie, “Stop congratulating yourselves and start getting the people what they need!” [If Texas can pull off secession, you can be sure that Louisiana (and my home state of Oklahoma) will be included].

  6. Where’s Paul Volcker when you need him! O thats right! No need to panic, fed funds rate is at unprecedented historical lows…..wheeeww. O WAIT , wheres Paul Volcker when you need him

  7. When you live in a world where the people who control the money [central banks] have convinced the rest that counterfeiting [2% inflation target] is OK, then you must considerably lower your expectations.

    Banking is theft, always has been, always will be.

  8. The debt based system is designed to take the fiat currency away, as in inflating it to infinity, to zero value! Why is anyone shocked at devalued currency when it’s debt from its birth or beginning! Debt paid off is depression, shrinking the money supply simply put! So, inflating it to hyperinflation rates is the only logical end conclusion! It’s going to be a SHTF moment and it’ll be literally overnight as Congressman John Fleming stated to a group of dead from the neck ups in a town hall meeting in Louisiana within his district in 2011; she said to prepare for it and all the onlookers/listeners did was grin very big and make their pictures with him! One lady in attendance said of the mayor and council, “you could’ve hit her in the head with a two by four 10 times and you couldn’t ‘ve made her blink.” Asleep at the wheel headed for the rocks!

    • Well I no longer hold USD and I am accumulating Yuan. How many others are doing likewise?

      Great article on how China is maturing as an economy. I recall the Japanese doing this with a similar appreciation of the Yuan over the Dollar.

      http://www.theage.com.au/business/china/robots-in-demand-as-chinas-labour-costs-mount-20121114-29bva.html

      Latin America had rampant inflation and I recall they had pretty strong economies before it all collapsed.

      If the Fiscal Cliff is not resolved, I think many people will lose patience and head to China for stability. Once the leadership transition is bedded down (Next month) watch the policy stability, and full convertability of the Yuan attract capital, away from the US.

      Wall Mart prices will triple overnight.

  9. Seriously, John, while you have clearly and correctly (this macroeconomics amateur believes) shown that high inflation can be neither stable nor predictable, here’s an intriguing hypothetical: if ALL (significant) currencies are inflating(ed) at the SAME RATE, will the cost of living and costs of doing business be affected? After the farmers and grocers eat their own food and the oil companies hoard their own fuel, will they barter, sell for currency, or go out of business?

    If your answer is that I have merely recast your introductory conjecture by Larry Hatheway, I would ask for YOUR best guess as to the possibility that this theoretically impossible outcome could be arranged.

    A related but less important question: has this universal matching inflation ever occurred, or been approximated, in the real world?

    • I wouldn’t say it’s possible for all currencies to inflate at the same rate in the real world. Even if the monetary base is inflated by proportionately the same amount, each country will react differently, because each country is composed of different people, different circumstances.

      In order for such a thing to be attempted, central banks around the world would have to co-ordinate together and agree to inflate uniformly. Because each economy is different, inflating at a uniform rate is likely to have different effects in each country. This means that there will be pressure from the start for different central banks to do different things. Such an effect is on display today in Europe. Germany’s economy is not depressed, so it is resisting inflating the currency, whereas Spain, Portugal, Greece are deeply depressed and so they are desperate for some juice.

      • What this guy seems to miss is that money is simply transcended labor-value. Labor-value gives all things their true value, and this quantity is constantly changing [like all things].

        All commodity and asset values are also expressing the labor-value contained within. The markets exploring value is simply the attempt to find the difference between the actual labor-value contained and all the non-sense costs added [taxes, fees, outrageous salaries and bonuses, theft, etc].

        It is this distortion through a mechanism to have legitimate discovery in the Western economy that has brought the economy to its knees [using debt to make up the difference between what's affordable and false (inflated) pricing].

        Inflating the money supply has nothing to do with any of this.

        • All value is really labor-value. Capital is simply stored labor-value. If a human being is not involved, what would give it value?

          The problem is that we have strayed so far from true value of commodities because of all the distortions present in the economy. Just think of all the things that drive-up costs that have nothing what-so-ever to do with the relationship between producer and consumer.

          The process of returning to a workable economy is going to be getting rid of as many of these distortions as is possible, the two biggest being government and debt.

        • Is oil labour value? How about sunlight? Or water?

          I think you are right to conflate labour and capital, however I think you are wrong to conflate them as labour. Everything is capital, including labour.

        • Although sunlight and water are freely available have no inherent economic value [that is, they are free for the taking], the value of oil is that amount of labor necessary to get it out of the ground, refine, transport, distribute, etc.

          Capital is simply an asset [its value] placed into economic service.

        • Whilst capital is the accumulation of labour value (seizing the day and winning a war and acquiring lands with resources included) my point I was trying to make is that without the ability to earn value, humans are redundant, and a drain on the resources of capital.

          I feel that once robots take over a lot of the processes, the wealthy will get quite testy and impatient, having to curtail their Gross National Happiness with 7+ Billion people.

          In the past, we were useful to them, now we may be a burden. Their very survival and their descendants survival is at stake.

        • Perhaps there will come a time when human beings will no longer do physical labor [although I doubt it], but even if this was the case, there is no end to the stupid shit that human beings can come up with.

          Technology preforms two economic functions; first, it increases productivity, second, it creates new products/markets. Look at the idiots that believe that Apple, Inc. is some kind of religion.

          There will be thousands more Apples in the future. People love stuff, especially new stuff. If this economic set-up does not function properly in the future, it will be replaced by a system that works better.

          The difficulties in the present economy have little to do with technology, but everything to do with fraud, theft, over-taxation, mis-pricing, counterfeiting, massive corruption, and many other niceties.

  10. Pingback: News Wire | Guest Post: 1000% Inflation?

  11. “The process you describe — the obsolescence of labour — has already progressed a long way.”

    John, how do you figure?

  12. Pingback: 1000% Inflation? | TrueNewsBulletin.com

  13. The History of the “Money Changers”
    The Rothschild timeline. Here is an illustrated version of this timeline.

    Economists continually try and sell the public the idea that recessions or depressions are a natural part of what they call the “business cycle”.

    This timeline below will prove that is simply not the case. Recessions and depressions only occur because the Central Bankers manipulate the money supply, to ensure more and more is in their hands and less and less is in the hands of the people.

    Central Bankers developed out of money changers and it is with these people we pick the story up in 48 B.C. below.

    48 B.C. Julius Caesar took back from the money changers the power to coin money and then minted coins for the benefit of all. With this new, plentiful supply of money, he established many massive construction projects and built great public works. By making money plentiful, Caesar won the love of the common people.
    But the money changers hated him for it and this is why Caesar was assassinated. Immediately after his assassination came the demise of plentiful money in Rome, taxes increased, as did corruption.

    Eventually the Roman money supply was reduced by 90 per cent, which resulted in the common people losing their lands and homes.

    30 A.D. Jesus Christ in the last year of his life uses physical force to throw the money changers out of the temple. This was the only time during the the life of his ministry in which he used physical force against anyone.
    When Jews came to Jerusalem to pay their Temple tax, they could only pay it with a special coin, the half-shekel. This was a half-ounce of pure silver, about the size of a quarter. It was the only coin at that time which was pure silver and of assured weight, without the image of a pagan Emperor, and therefore to the Jews it was the only coin acceptable to God.

    Unfortunately these coins were not plentiful, the money changers had cornered the market on them, and so they raised the price of them to whatever the market could bear. They used their monopoly they had on these coins to make exorbitant profits, forcing the Jews to pay whatever these money changers demanded.

    Jesus threw the money changers out as their monopoly on these coins totally violated the sanctity of God’s house. These money changers called for his death days later.

    1024 The money changers had control of Medieval England’s money supply and at this time were generally known as goldsmiths. Paper money started out and this was simply a receipt you would get after depositing gold with a goldsmith, in their safe rooms or vaults. This paper started being traded as it was far more convenient than carrying round a lot of heavy gold and silver coins.
    Over time, to simplify the process, the receipts were made to the bearer, rather than to the individual depositor, making it readily transferable without the need for a signature. This, also, broke the tie to any identifiable deposit of gold.

    Eventually the goldsmiths recognized that only a fraction of depositors ever came in and demanded their gold at any one time, so they found out how they could cheat on the system. They started to issue more receipts than they had gold to back those receipts and no one would be any the wiser. They would loan out these receipts which were not backed by the gold they had in their depositories and collect interest on them.

    This was the birth of the system we know today as Fractional Reserve Banking, and like this system of today this meant the goldsmiths were able to make astronomical amounts of money by loaning out, what was essentially fraudulent receipts, as they were for gold the goldsmiths didn’t even possess. As they gradually got more confident they would loan out up to 10 times the amount they had in their deposits.

    To simplify how they made money on this, let’s give an example in which a goldsmith charges the same rate of interest to creditors and debtors. In this example a goldsmith would pay interest of 6% on gold you had deposited with them, and then charge 6% interest on money, I mean fraudulent receipts, you borrowed from them. As they would lend out ten times what you had deposited with them, whilst they’re paying you 6% interest, they are making 60% interest. This is on your gold.

    The goldsmiths also discovered that their control of this fraudulent money supply gave them control over the economy and the assets of the people. They exacted their control by rowing the economy between easy money and tight money.

    The way they did this was to make money easy to borrow and therefore increase the amount of money in circulation, then suddenly tighten the money supply, taking it out of circulation by making loans more difficult to get or stopping offering them altogether.

    Why did they do this? Simple, because the result would be a certain percentage of the people being unable to repay their previous loans, and not having the facility to take out new ones, so they would go bankrupt and be forced to sell their assets to the goldsmiths for literally pennies on the dollar.

    This is exactly what happens in the world economy of today, but is referred to with words like, “the business cycle,” “boom and bust,” “recession,” and “depression,” in order to confuse the population of the money changers scam.

    1100 King Henry I succeeds King William II to the throne of England. During his reign he decided to take the power the money changers had over the people, and he did this by creating a completely new form of money that took the form of a stick! This stick was called, a “talley stick,” and ended up being the longest lasting form of currency, lasting 726 years until 1826 (even though other currencies came and went in that same period and ran alongside the talley sticks).

    The talley stick was a stick of polished wood into which notches were cut along one side, to indicate the denomination of money the stick represented. The stick was then split lengthwise through the notches, so that both pieces had a record of the notches. The King kept one half to protect against counterfeiting and the other half was spent into the economy and circulated as money.

    It was also one of the most successful money systems in history, as the King demanded that all the King’s taxes had to be paid in, “talley sticks,” so this increased their circulation and acceptance as a legitimate form of money. This system would work well in keeping the power away from the money changers in England.

    1225 St. Thomas Aquinas is born, the leading theologian of the Catholic Church who argued that the charging of interest is wrong because it applies to “double charging,” charging for both the money and the use of the money.

    This concept followed the teachings of Aristotle that taught the purpose of money was to serve the members of society and to facilitate the exchange of goods needed to lead a virtuous life. Interest was contrary to reason and justice because it put an unnecessary burden on the use of money.

    Thus, Church law in Middle Ages Europe forbade the charging of interest on loans and even made it a crime called, “usury.”

    1509 King Henry VIII succeeds King Henry VII to the throne in England. During his reign he relaxed the laws regarding usury, and and the money changers did not waste any time in re-asserting themselves over the population. They quickly made their gold and silver coin system plentiful again. It is interesting to note that under King Henry VIII the Church of England separated from Roman Catholicism, whose Church law prevented the charging of interest on money.
    1553 Queen Mary I succeeds Lady Jane Grey’s nine day reign to the throne in England. During her reign, Queen Mary I, a staunch Catholic, tightened the usury laws again. The money changers were not amused and in revenge they tightened the money supply by hoarding gold and silver coins and causing the economy to plummet.
    1558 Queen Elizabeth I succeeds Queen Mary I, her half sister, to the throne in England. During her reign, Queen Elizabeth I decided that in order to wrest control of the money supply she would have to issue her own gold and silver coins. She did this through the public treasury and successfully took control of the money supply from the money changers.
    1609 The money changers in the Netherlands establish the the first central bank in history, in Amsterdam.
    1642 Oliver Cromwell is financed by the money changers for the purposes of fomenting a revolution in England, and allowing them to take control of the money system again. After much bloodshed, Cromwell finally purges the parliament, overthrows King Charles I and puts him to death in 1649.
    The money changers immediately consolidate their power and for the next few decades plunge Great Britain into a costly series of wars. They also take over a square mile of property in the center of London which becomes known as the City of London.

    1688 The money changers in England following a series of squabbles with the Stuart Kings, Charles II (1660 – 1685) and James II (1685 – 1688), conspire with their far more successful money changing counterparts in the Netherlands, who had already set up a central bank there.
    They decide to finance an invasion by William of Orange of Netherlands who they sound out and establish will be more favorable to them. The invasion is successful and William of Orange ascends to the throne in England as King William III in 1689.

    1694 Following a costly series of wars over the last 50 years, English Government officials go, cap in hand, to the money changers for loans necessary to pursue their political purposes. The money changers agree to solve this problem in exchange for a government sanctioned privately owned bank which could issue money created out of nothing.
    This was deceptively named the, “Bank of England,” for the sole purpose of duping the general public into believing it was part of the government, which it was not.

    Like any other private corporation the Bank of England sold shares to get started. The private investors, whose names were never revealed, were supposed to put up £1,250,000 in gold coins to buy their shares in the bank, but only £750,000 was ever received. Despite that the bank was duly chartered and began loaning out several times the money it supposedly had in reserves, all at interest.

    Although the Bank of England’s private investors were never revealed, one of the Directors, William Paterson, stated,

    “The Bank hath benefit of interest on all monies which it creates out of nothing.”

    Furthermore the Bank of England would loan government officials as much of the new currency as they wanted, as long as they secured the debt by direct taxation of the British people. The Bank of England amounted to nothing less than the legal counterfeiting of a national currency for private gain, and thus any country that would fall under the control of a private bank would amount to nothing more than a plutocracy.

    Soon after the Bank of England was formed it attacked the talley stick system, as it was money outside of the power of the money changers, just as King Henry I had intended it to be.

    1698 Following four years of the Bank of England, their plan to control the money supply had come on in leaps and bounds. They had flooded the country with so much money that the Government debt to the Bank had grown from the initial £1,250,000, to £16,000,000, in only four years. That’s an increase of 1,280%.
    Why do they do it? Simple, if the money in circulation in a country is £5,000,000, and a central bank is set up and prints another £15,000,000, stage one of the plan, sends it out into the economy through loans etc, than this will reduce the value of the initial £5,000,000 in circulation before the bank was formed. This is because the initial £5,000,000 is now only 25% of the economy. It will also give the bank control of 75% of the money in circulation with the £15,000,000 they sent out into the economy.

    This also causes inflation which is the reduction in worth of money borne by the common person, due to the economy being flooded with too much money, an economy which the Central Bank are responsible for. As the common person’s money is worth less, he has to go to the bank to get a loan to help run his business etc, and when the Central Bank are satisfied there are enough people with debt out there, the bank will tighten the supply of money by not offering loans. This is stage two of the plan.

    Stage three, is sitting back and waiting for the debtors to them to go bankrupt, allowing the bank to then seize from them real wealth, businesses and property etc, for pennies on the dollar. Inflation never effects a central bank in fact they are the only group who can benefit from it, as if they are ever short of money they can simply print more.

    1757 Benjamin Franklin travels to England and would spend the next 18 years of his life there until just before the start of the American Revolution.
    1760 Mayer Amschel Bauer changes him name to Mayer Amschel Rothschild and sets up the, House Of Rothschild, and soon learns that if he loans out money to Governments and Royalty then this is far more profitable than loaning to individuals. This is because the loans made are bigger and backed by their nations’ taxes. He trains his five sons in the art of money creation.
    1764 Benjamin Franklin is asked by officials of the Bank of England to explain the prosperity of the colonies in America. He replies,

    “That is simple. In the Colonies we issue our own money. It is called Colonial Scrip. We issue it in proper proportion to the demands of trade and industry to make the products pass easily from the producers to the consumers. In this manner creating for ourselves our own paper money, we control its purchasing power, and we have no interest to pay no one.”

    As a result of Franklin’s statement, the British Parliament hurriedly passed the Currency Act of 1764. This prohibited colonial officials from issuing their own money and ordered them to pay all future taxes in gold or silver coins. Referring to after this act was passed, Franklin would state the following in his autobiography,

    “In one year, the conditions were so reversed that the era of prosperity ended, and a depression set in, to such an extent that the streets of the colonies were filled with the unemployed…The colonies would gladly have borne the little tax on tea and other matters had it not been that England took away from the colonies their money which created unemployment and dissatisfaction.

    The viability of the colonists to get power to issue their own money permanently out of the hands of King George III and the international bankers was the prime reason for the revolutionary war.”

    Control of America’s money system will change hands 8 times since 1764.

    1775 April 19th, start of the revolutionary war in Lexington, Massachusetts. By this time the colonies had been drained of silver and gold coins as a result of British taxation. As a result of this, the continental government had no choice but to print money to finance the war.
    At the start of the revolution the American money supply stood at $12,000,000. By the end of the war it was nearly $500,000,000 and as a result the currency was virtually worthless. An example of this is that a pair of shoes now sold for $5,000 dollars. This also shows the danger of printing too much money. The reason Colonial Scrip had worked was because just enough was used to facilitate trade.

    1781 Towards the end of the American Revolution the Continental Congress were desperate for money, so they allowed Robert Morris, their Financial Superintendent, to open a privately owned central bank, in the hope this would sort out the money problem.
    Morris was a wealthy man who had grown wealthier during the revolution by trading in war materials. This first central bank in America was called the Bank of North America, which was set up with a four year charter, and was closely modeled after the Bank of England. It was allowed to practice the fraudulent system of fractional reserve banking, so it could create money it didn’t have, then charge interest on it.

    The bank’s charter called for private investors to put up $400,000 of initial capital, which Morris found himself unable to raise. Nevertheless he unashamedly used his political influence to have gold deposited in the bank, which had been loaned to America by France. Morris then loaned the money he needed to buy this bank from this deposit of gold that belonged to the government, or rather the American people.

    This Bank of North America, again deceptively named so the common people would believe it was under the control of the government, was given a monopoly over the national currency.

    1785 Despite the promises of Robert Morris that his privately owned Bank of North America would solve the problem with the money supply, of course the economy continued to plummet, forcing the Continental Congress not to renew the bank’s charter. The leader of the effort to kill this bank was William Findlay of Pennsylvania, who stated,

    “This institution, having no principle but that of avarice, will never be varied in its objective…to engross all the wealth, power and influence of the state.”

    Mayer Amschel Rothschild moves his family home to a five storey home in Frankfurt, Germany, which he shares with the Schiff family, (a descendant of both Rothschild and Schiff, Jacob Schiff, who would be born in this house, would, some 128 years later, be instrumental in the setting up of the Federal Reserve).

    1787 Colonial leaders assemble in Philadelphia to replace the Articles of Confederation with the Constitution. Governor Morris headed the final draft of the Constitution and he knew the motivation of the bankers well as he had once worked for them. Governor Morris along with his former boss Robert Morris, and Alexander Hamilton had presented the original plan for the Bank of North America to the Continental Congress, in the final year of the Revolution.
    Fortunately Governor Morris by this time had discovered his conscience, defected from Robert Morris, and in a letter to James Madison dated July 2nd of this year he stated,

    “The rich will strive to establish their dominion and enslave the rest. They always did. They always will…They will have the same effect here as elsewhere, if we do not, by the power of government, keep them in their proper spheres.”

    James Madison was opposed to a privately owned central bank after seeing the exploitation of the people by the Bank of England. Thomas Jefferson was also against it, and Jefferson later made the following statement,

    “If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and the corporations which grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.”

    Sadly the words of wisdom of Governor Morris and Thomas Jefferson fell on deaf ears. Alexander Hamilton, Robert Morris and Thomas Wyling, convinced the the bulk of the delegates to this Constitutional convention, not to give Congress the power to issue paper money.

    They were aware that most of these delegates were still reeling from the wild inflation of the paper money during the revolution. These delegates also had short memories and didn’t remember how well Colonial Scrip had worked before the war, or Benjamin Franklin’s words of wisdom in 1764.

    As a result the Constitution was silent on the issue of paper money by the Government for the citizens, leaving a wide open door for money changers in the future.

    1790 Less than 3 years after the Constitution had been signed, the newly appointed First Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton, proposed a bill to the Congress calling for a new privately owned central bank. Interestingly, Alexander Hamilton’s first job after graduating from law school in 1782 was as an aide to Robert Morris, a man who he had written to in 1781 stating, “a national debt if it is not excessive will be to us a national blessing.”
    1791 The three main players behind the Bank Of North America were: Robert Morris; Alexander Hamilton; and the Bank’s President, Thomas Willing. These men did not give up and Alexander Hamilton, now Secretary of the Treasury, a man who described Robert Morris as his, “mentor,” managed to get a new privately owned central bank through the new Congress.
    This new bank was called the, “First Bank of the United States,” and was exactly the same as the Bank of North America. Robert Morris controlled it, Thomas Willing was the Bank’s President, only the name had changed.

    This bank came into being after a year of intense debate and was given a 20 year charter. It was given a monopoly on printing United States currency even though 80% of it’s stock was held by private investors. The other 20% was purchased by the United States government, but this was not to give it a piece if the action, but to provide the capital for the private investors to purchase the other 80%.

    As with the Bank of England and the old Bank of North America, these private investors never paid the full agreed amount for their shares. What happened was through the fraudulent system of fractional reserve banking, the government’s 20% stake which was $2,000,000 in cash, was used to make loans to its private investors to purchase the other 80% stake, £8,000,000, for this risk free investment.

    Again like the Bank of England and the old Bank of North America, the name, “First Bank of the United States,” was deliberately chosen to hide from the common people the fact that it was privately owned. The names of the investors in this bank were never revealed, although it is now widely believed that the Rothschilds were behind it.

    Interestingly in 1790 when Alexander Hamilton proposed this bank in Congress, Mayer Amschel Rothschild made the following statement from his bank in Frankfurt, Germany, “Let me issue and control a nation’s money and I care not who writes the laws.”

    1796 The First Bank of the United States has been controlling the American money supply for 5 years. During this time the American Government has borrowed $8,200,000 from this Central Bank, and prices in the country have increased by 72%. In relation to this, Thomas Jefferson, then Secretary of State stated,

    “I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our constitution taking from the Federal Government their power of borrowing.”

    1798 Mayer Amschel Rothschild sends his son, Nathan, at the age of 21, to England with a sum of money equivalent to £20,000, to set up a money changers there.
    1800 In France, the Bank of France was set up. However Napoleon decided France had to break free of the debt and he therefore never trusted this bank. He declared that when a government is dependent on bankers for money, it is the bankers and not the government leaders that are in control. He stated,
    “The hand that gives is among the hand that takes. Money has no motherland, financiers are without patriotism and without decency, their sole object is gain.”

    1803 Now President Thomas Jefferson, President Jefferson struck a deal with Napoleon in France. The United States would give Napoleon $3,000,000 of gold in exchange for a huge chunk of territory west of the Mississippi River. This was called the Louisiana purchase.
    Napoleon used this gold to put together an army. He then used this army to set off across Europe where he began to conquer everything in his path. The Bank of England quickly rose to oppose Napoleon and financed every nation in his path, as usual profiteering from war. Prussia, Austria, and then finally Russia all went heavily into debt in a futile attempt to stop Napoleon.

    1807 30 year old Nathan Rothschild, head of the English branch of the family in London, personally takes charge of a plan to smuggle a much needed shipment of gold through France to Spain to finance an attack by the Duke Of Wellington on Napoleon, from there.
    1811 A bill was put before Congress to renew the charter of the First Bank of the United States. The legislatures of both Pennsylvania and Virginia pass resolutions asking Congress to kill the bank. The national press openly attack the bank calling it: a great swindle; a vulture; a viper; and a cobra.
    Nathan Rothschild gets in on the act and makes the following revealing statement as to who was really behind the First Bank of the United States,

    “Either the application for renewal of the charter is granted, or the United States will find itself involved in a most disastrous war.”

    When the smoke had cleared the renewal bill was cleared by a single vote in the house and was deadlocked in the Senate. At this point America’s fourth President, President James Madison was in the White House. He was a staunch opponent of the bank and he sent his Vice-President, George Clinton, to break a tie in the Senate which killed the bank.

    1812 As promised by Nathan Rothschild, because the charter for the First Bank of the United States is not renewed, thousands have to die and the British attack America. However, as the British are still busy fighting Napoleon, they are unable to mount much of an assault and the war ends in 1814 with America undefeated.
    1814 Wellington’s attacks from the South and other defeats eventually forced Napoleon to abdicate and Louis XVIII is crowned King. Napoleon is exiled to the tiny island of Elba, off the coast of Italy.
    1815 Napoleon escapes his exile and returns to Paris. French troops were sent to capture him, but he uses his charisma to convince these soldiers to rally round him, and they subsequently hail him as their emperor once again. In March, Napoleon assembles an army which England’s Duke of Wellington defeated less than 90 days later at Waterloo.
    Even though the outcome is predetermined, these bankers don’t like to take any sort of risk, they’re too used to a monopoly. Therefore Nathan Rothschild sent a trusted courier named Rothworth to Waterloo where he stayed on the edge of the battlefield. Once the battle was decided, Rothworth took off for the Channel, and delivered the news of Wellington’s victory to Nathan Rothschild a full 24 hours before Wellington’s own courier.

    Nathan Rothschild hurried to the London Stock market and stood in his usual position. All eyes were on him as Rothschild had a legendary communications network. Rothschild stood there looking forlorn and suddenly started selling. The other traders believed that this meant he had heard that Napoleon had won so they all started selling frantically.

    The market subsequently plummeted, soon everyone was selling their consuls (British Government Bonds), but then Rothschild secretly started buying them all up through his agents on the floor, for a fraction of what they were worth only hours before. A lot of these consuls were able to be converted to Bank of England stock, which is how Rothschild took over the control of the Bank of England and therefore the British money supply.

    Interestingly, 100 years later, the New York Times ran a story stating that Nathan Rothschild’s grandson had attempted to secure a court order to suppress a book with this, what we would call today, “insider trading,” story in it. The Rothschild family claimed the story was untrue and libelous, but the court denied the Rothschilds request and ordered the family to pay all court costs.

    Nathan Rothschild openly brags that in his 17 years in England he had increased his initial £20,000 stake given to him by his father, 2500 times to £50,000,000.

    Some people ask, why do bankers want war? Simple, bankers finance both sides in a war. They do this because war is the biggest debt generator of them all. A nation will borrow any amount for victory, even though the banks have already predetermined the outcome. The ultimate loser is loaned just enough money to hold out a vain hope of victory and the ultimate winner is given enough to ensure that he does win.

    How do the banks ensure they will get all their money back? Easy, such loans are given on the guarantee that the victor will honor the debts of the vanquished. Never mind the thousands of troops that give their lives on the pretext it is for the honor of their respective nations, when it is actually for the profits of bankers.

    In fact, during the period between the founding of the Bank of England in 1694 and Napoleon’s defeat at Waterloo this year, England had been at war for 56 years, with much of the remaining time spent preparing for war. If it’s a good business for bankers’ profits, then why change it.

    1816 The American Congress passes a bill permitting yet another privately owned central bank. This bank was called the, “Second Bank of the United States,” and it’s charter was a carbon copy of that of its predecessor, the First Bank of the United States. The United States government would once again supposedly own 20% of the shares of the bank.
    Their share was again paid up front into the bank and thanks to fraudulent fractional reserve lending, this was transformed into loans to the private investors who once again purchased the remaining 80% of the shares. Just as before the names of these investors was kept a secret.

    1826 The talley stick is taken out of circulation in England.
    1828 After 12 years during which the Second Bank of the United States, ruthlessly manipulated the American economy to the detriment of the people but to the benefit of their own money grabbing ends, the American people had unsurprisingly had enough. Opponents of this bank nominated Senator Andrew Jackson of Tennessee to run for President.
    To the dismay of the money changers, Jackson won the Presidency and made it quite clear he intended to kill this bank at his first opportunity. He started out during his first term in office, to root out the banks many minions from government service. To illustrate how deep this cancer was rooted in government, he fired 2,000 of the 11,000 employees of the Federal Government.

    1832 The Second Bank of the United States, ask Congress to pass a renewal of the bank’s charter, four years early. Congress complied and sent the bill to President Jackson for signing. President Jackson vetoed this bill and in his veto message he stated the following,

    “It is not our own citizens only who are to receive the bounty of our Government. More than eight millions of the stock of the Bank are held by foreigners…Is there no danger to out liberty and independence in a bank that in its nature has so little to bind it to our country?

    Controlling our currency, receiving our public moneys, and holding thousands of our citizens in dependence …would be more formidable and dangerous than a military power of the enemy. If government would confine itself to equal protection, and, as Heaven does its rains, shower the favor alike on the high and the low, the rich and the poor, it would be an unqualified blessing.

    In the act before me there seems to be wide and unnecessary departure from these just principles.”

    In July, Congress was unable to override President Jackson’s veto. President Jackson then stood for re-election and for the first time in American history he took his argument directly to the people by taking his re-election campaign on the road. His campaign slogan was, “Jackson And No Bank!”

    Even though the bankers poured over $3,000,000 into President Jackson’s opponent, the Republican, Senator Henry Clays’ campaign, President Jackson was re-elected by a landslide in November. President Jackson knew the battle was only beginning however, and following his victory he stated,

    “The hydra of corruption is only scotched, not dead!”

    1833 President Jackson appoints Roger B. Taney as Secretary of State for the Treasury, with instructions to start removing the government’s deposits from the Second Bank of the United States. President Jackson’s previous two Secretaries of State for the Treasury, William J. Duane and Louis McLane had both refused to comply with President Jackson’s request and were fired as a result.
    However the head of the, Second Bank of the United States, Nicholas Biddle, used his influence to get the Senate to reject Roger B. Taney’s nomination and even threatened to cause a depression if the Bank was not re-chartered. Biddle stated,

    “This worthy President thinks that because he has scalped Indians and imprisoned judges, he is to have his way with the Bank. He is mistaken.”

    Biddle then went on to brazenly admit that the bank was intending to make money scarce in order to force the hand of Congress into re-chartering the bank. He stated,

    “Nothing but widespread suffering will produce any effect on Congress…Our only safety is pursuing a steady course of firm restriction – and I have no doubt that such a course will ultimately lead to restoration of the currency and re-charter of the Bank.”

    What Biddle has done with that statement is prove to the world what central banks were really about. He made good on his word, and the Second Bank of the United States, sharply contracted the money supply by calling in old loans and refusing to issue new ones. Naturally a financial panic ensued, followed by America being plunged into a deep depression.

    Biddle then unashamedly blamed President Jackson for the crash, claiming that it was Jackson’s withdrawal of federal funds that had caused it. This crash plunged wages and prices, unemployment soared along with business bankruptcies. The United States was in uproar and newspaper editors blasted the President in editorials.

    1835 Congress assembled what was called the, “Panic Session,” and on 27 March President Jackson was officially censured by Congress for withdrawing funds from the Second Bank of the United States, in a vote which passed the Senate by 26 to 20. It was the first time a President had ever been censured by Congress and Jackson stated of the Bank,

    “You are a den of thieves vipers, and I intend to rout you out, and by the Eternal God, I will rout you out.”

    However, Pennsylvania Governor, George Wolf, came out in support of President Jackson and strongly criticized the Bank. This, coupled with the fact that Nicholas Biddle had been caught boasting in public about the bank’s plan to crash the American economy, caused a shift in opinion of President Jackson’s action.

    In a complete about turn on April 4, the House of Representatives voted 134 to 82 against re-chartering the bank. This was followed by another strong vote which established a special committee to investigate whether the Bank had caused the crash.

    However, when the investigating committee arrived at the bank’s door in Philadelphia with a subpoena authorizing them to inspect the books, Nicholas Biddle refused to give them up, or allow inspection of correspondence with Congressmen relating to their personal loans and advancements he had made to them. He also refused to testify before the committee back in Washington.

    1836 The Charter for the Second Bank of the United States expires, and the Bank ceases functioning as America’s central bank. Nicholas Biddle was later arrested and charged with fraud. He was tried and acquitted but died in 1844 still battling civil suits.
    1838 On January 8th President Jackson pays off the final installment of the national debt, which had been necessitated by allowing the banks to issue currency for government bonds, rather than simply issuing treasury notes without such debt. He was the only President to ever pay off the debt.
    On January 30th an assassin called Richard Lawrence tried to shoot President Jackson, but both pistols misfired. Lawrence was later found not guilty by reason of insanity. However, after his release he openly bragged that powerful people in Europe had put him up to the task and promised to protect him if he were caught.

    When asked what his most important accomplishment had been in life, President Jackson stated without hesitation,

    “I killed the Bank!”

    It would take the money changers 75 years to establish the next central bank, the Federal Reserve. This time they would take no chances and use one of their own, Jacob Schiff, from the Rothschild bloodline, to undertake this.

    1850 Jacob (James) Rothschild in France is said to be worth 600 million francs, which at the time was 150 million francs more than all the other bankers in France put together.
    1852 Future British Prime Minister, William Gladstone, stated the following about when he became Chancellor of the Exchequer this year,

    “From the time I took office as Chancellor of the Exchequer, I began to learn that the State held, in the face of the Bank and the City, an essentially false position as to finance. The Government itself was not to be a substantive power, but was to leave the Money Power supreme and unquestioned.”

    1861 One month after the inauguration of President Abraham Lincoln, the American Civil War got underway at Fort Sumter, South Carolina, after South Carolina left the Union. Slavery has always been cited as the cause of the war but this was simply not the case, as President Lincoln himself stated,

    “I have no purpose directly or indirectly to interfere with the institution of slavery in the state where it now exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so…My paramount objective is to save the Union and it is not either to save or destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it.”

    The real reason for the war is that the Southern States were in an a dire economic situation due to the actions of the Northern States. Northern industrialists had used trade tariffs to prevent the Southern States from buying cheaper European goods. Europe subsequently retaliated by stopping cotton imports from the South. Thus the South were being forced to pay more for goods whilst having their income slashed.

    This is when the money changers saw the opportunity to divide and conquer America by plunging it into Civil War. This is confirmed by Otto Von Bismarck when he was Chancellor of Germany (1871 – 1890), who stated,

    “The division of the United States into federations of equal force was decided long before the Civil War by the high financial powers of Europe, these bankers were afraid that the United States if they remained as one block and as one nation, would attain economic and financial independence which would upset their financial domination over the world.”

    Only months after these first shots in South Carolina, the Central bankers loaned, Napoleon III of France (the Napoleon of the battle of Waterloo’s nephew), 210 million francs to seize Mexico and then station troops along the Southern border of the United States, by taking advantage of the American Civil War to return Mexico to colonial rule.

    This was in violation of the, “Monroe Doctrine,” which was issued by President James Monroe during his seventh annual State of the Union address to Congress, in 1823. This doctrine proclaimed the United States’ opinion that European powers should no longer colonize the Americas or interfere with the affairs of sovereign nations located in the Americas, such as the United States, Mexico, and others.

    In return, the United States planned to stay neutral in wars between European powers and in wars between a European power and its colonies. However, if these latter type of wars were to occur in the Americas, the U.S. would view such action as hostile toward itself.

    Whilst the French were breaching the, Monroe Doctrine in Mexico, the British followed suit by moving 11,000 troops into Canada and positioning them along America’s Northern border. President Lincoln knew he was in trouble, so he went with his Secretary To The Treasury, Salomon P. Chase, to New York to apply for the loans necessary to fund America’s defense.

    The money changers had engineered the war to make the Union fail, and were not about to save it now, so they offered loans at 24% to 36% interest. President Lincoln declined this as they knew he would and returned to Washington, where he sent for Colonel Dick Taylor of Chicago, who he put in charge of the problem of how he should finance the war.

    During one meeting President Lincoln asked Colonel Taylor what proposals he had come up with to finance the war. Colonel Taylor stated,

    “Why Lincoln, that is easy, just get Congress to pass a bill authorizing the printing of full legal tender treasury notes…and pay your soldiers with them and go ahead and win your war with them also.”

    President Lincoln asked Colonel Taylor if the people of the United States would accept the notes, Colonel Taylor said,

    “The people or anyone else will not have any choice in the matter, if you make them full legal tender. They will have the full sanction of the government and be just as good as any money, as Congress is given that express right by the Constitution.”

    1862 President Lincoln began the printing of $450,000,000 worth of new bills. These bills were printed in green ink on the reverse side, in order to distinguish them from other bills in circulation, and were called, “Greenbacks.” These were printed at no interest to the Federal Government and were used to pay the troops and purchase their supplies. President Lincoln would be the last President to issue debt free United States notes, and on this subject he stated,

    “The Government should create, issue and circulate all the currency and credit needed to satisfy the spending power of the Government and the buying power of consumers. The privilege of creating and issuing money is not only the supreme prerogative of Government, but it is in the Government’s greatest creative opportunity. By the adoption of these principles…the taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest. Money will cease to be master and become the servant of humanity.”

    In response to this statement, The Times of London publishes a propaganda piece obviously put out by the bankers, containing the following statement,

    “If that mischievous financial policy, which had its origin in the North American Republic, should become indurated down to a fixture, then that government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off debts and be without a debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its commerce.

    It will become prosperous beyond precedent in the history of civilized governments of the world. The brains and the wealth of all countries will go to North America. That government must be destroyed or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe.”

    1863 The bankers struck back. With President Lincoln needing further congressional authority to issue more Greenbacks, Lincoln was forced into allowing the bankers to push their, “National Banking Act,” through Congress.
    The most important part of this Act was that from now on, the entire United States money supply would be created out of debt by the National Banks buying United States Government Bonds and issuing them for reserves for banknotes. On top of this monopoly, the National Banks were allowed to operate under a virtual tax free status. This banking scam is best explained by historian, John Kenneth Galbraith, who stated,

    “In numerous years following the war, the Federal Government ran a heavy surplus. It could not however pay off its debt, retire its securities, because to do so meant there would be no bonds to back the national bank notes. To pay off the debt was to destroy the money supply.”

    Later this year, Tsar Alexander II gave President Lincoln some unexpected help. The Tsar issued orders that if either England or France actively intervened in the American Civil War, and help the South, Russia would consider such action a declaration of war. To show that he wasn’t messing about, he sent part of his Pacific Fleet to port in San Francisco.

    This wasn’t because the Tsar was benevolent towards America, instead he was very clever. He, like Otto Von Bismarck in Germany, could clearly see what the money changers were up to, indeed he had already refused to let them set up a Central Bank in Russia. He understood if America was to come under the control of Britain or France, then America would be under the control of Central Bankers once again, and such an expansion of the bankers empire, would mean they would eventually threaten Russia.

    1864 President Lincoln is re-elected on November 8th and on November 21 he wrote a friend the following,

    “The money power preys upon the nations in times of peace and conspires against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy.”

    Salomon P Chase, now President Lincoln’s Former Secretary To The Treasury, stated,

    “My agency in promoting the passage of the National Banking Act was the greatest financial mistake in my life. It has built up a monopoly which affects every interest in the country.”

    1865 On April 14th, 41 days after his second inauguration, and just 5 days after General Lee surrendered to General Grant at Appomattox, President Lincoln is shot by John Wilkes Booth, at Ford’s Theater. He would later die of his injuries. Subsequent allegations that international bankers were responsible for President Lincoln’s assassination, would be made in the Canadian House of Commons, nearly 70 years later in 1934.
    The person who revealed this was a Canadian Attorney, Gerald G. McGeer. He had obtained evidence deleted from the public record provided to him by Secret Service Agents at the trial of John Wilkes Booth, after Booth’s death. McGeer stated that it showed that John Wilkes Booth was a mercenary working for the international bankers. His speech would be reported in an article in the Vancouver Sun, dated, 2nd May 1934, which stated,

    “Abraham Lincoln, the murdered emancipator of the slaves, was assassinated through the machinations of a group representative of the International Bankers, who feared the United States President’s National Credit ambitions. There was only one group in the world at that time who had any reason to desire the death of Lincoln. They were the men opposed to his national currency program and who had fought him throughout the whole Civil War on his policy of Greenback currency.”

    Gerald G. McGeer also stated that Lincoln’s assassination was not purely because the International Bankers wanted to re-establish a central bank in America, but also because they wanted to base America’s currency on gold, which they of course controlled. They wanted to put America on a Gold Standard. This was in direct opposition to President Lincoln’s policy of issuing Greenbacks, based solely on the good faith and credit of the United States.

    The Vancouver Sun article also quoted Gerald G. McGeer with the following statement,

    “They were the men interested in the establishment of the Gold Standard and the right of the bankers to manage the currency and credit of every nation in the world. With Lincoln out of the way they were able to proceed with that plan and did proceed with it in the United States. Within 8 years after Lincoln’s assassination, silver was demonetized and the Gold Standard system set up in the United States.”

    1866 The European central bankers wanted the re-institution of a central bank under their control and an American currency backed by gold. They chose gold as gold has always been relatively scarce and therefore a lot easier to monopolize, than, for example, silver, which was plentiful in the United States, and had been found in huge quantities with the opening of the American West.
    So, on April 12th, Congress went back to work at the bidding of the European central bankers. It passed the, “Contraction Act,” which authorized the Secretary of the Treasury to contract the money supply by retiring some of the Greenbacks in circulation.

    This money contraction and it’s disastrous results is explained by Theodore R. Thoren and Richard F. Walker, in their book, “The Truth In Money Book,” in which they state the following,

    “The hard times which occurred after the Civil War could have been avoided if the Greenback legislation had continued as President Lincoln had intended. Instead there were a series of money panics, what we call recessions, which put pressure on Congress to enact legislation to place the banking system under centralized control. Eventually the Federal Reserve Act was passed on December 23rd 1913.”

    This is how the, “Contraction Act,” passed by Congress affected America (the money supply goes down purely because currency in circulation is being withdrawn):

    Year In circulation Approximately per capita
    1866 $1,800,000,000 $50.46
    1867 $1,300,000,000 $44.00
    1876 $600,000,000 $14.60
    1886 $400,000,000 $6.67

    Therefore in the twenty years since 1866 two thirds of the American money supply had been called in by the bankers, representing a 760% loss in buying power over this twenty years. The money became scarce simply because bank loans were called in and no new ones were given.

    1872 Ernest Seyd is sent to America on a mission from the Rothschild owned Bank of England. He is given $100,000 which he is to use to bribe as many Congressmen as necessary, for the purposes of getting silver demonetized, as it had been found in huge quantities in the American West, which would eat into Rothschild’s profits.
    1873 Ernest Seyd obviously spent his money wisely, as Congress pass the, “Coinage Act,” which results in the minting of silver dollars being abruptly stopped. Furthermore, Representative Samuel Hooper, who introduced the bill in the house, even admitted that Ernest Seyd had actually drafted the legislation.
    1874 Ernest Seyd himself admitted who was behind the demonetizing of silver in America, when he makes the following statement,

    “I went to America in the winter of 1872 – 1873, authorized to secure, if I could, the passage of a bill demonetizing silver. It was in the interests of those I represented, the governors of the Bank Of England, to have it done. By 1873, gold coins were the only form of coin money.”

    1876 Due to the manipulation of the money supply in America, one third of the workforce is unemployed and unrest is growing. There are even calls for a return to Greenback money or silver money. As a result, Congress creates the, “United States Silver Commission,” to investigate the problem.
    This commission clearly understood that the national bankers were the cause of the problem, with their deliberate contraction of the money supply. An excerpt of their report reads as follows,

    “The disaster of the Dark Ages was caused by decreasing money and falling prices …Without money, civilization could not have had a beginning, and with a diminishing supply, it must languish, and unless relieved, finally perish. At the Christian era the metallic money of the Roman Empire amounted to $1,800,000,000. By the end of the 15th century it had shrunk to less than $200,000,000…History records no other such disastrous transition as that from the Roman Empire to the Dark Ages…”

    Despite this damning report from the commission, Congress took no action.

    1877 Rioting breaks out from Pittsburgh to Chicago. The bankers get together to decide what to do and they decided to hang on, as they knew that despite the violence, they were now firmly back in control. At the meeting of the American Bankers Association, they urged their membership to do everything in their power, to put down any notion of a return to Greenbacks.
    The American Bankers Association secretary, James Buel, even wrote a letter to the members in which he blatantly called on the banks to subvert both Congress and the press. In this letter he stated,

    “It is advisable to do all in your power to sustain such prominent daily and weekly newspapers, especially the Agricultural and Religious Press, as well as oppose the Greenback issue of paper money and that you will also withhold patronage from all applicants who are not willing to oppose the government issue of money….

    …To repeal the Act creating bank notes, or to restore to circulation issue of money will be to provide the people with money and will therefore seriously affect our individual profits as bankers and lenders. See your Congressman at once and engage him to support our interests that we may control legislation.”

    1878 James Buel’s letter clearly had some effect, as although pressure mounted in Congress for change, the press tried to turn the general public away from the truth. An example of this is from the New York Tribune in their 10th January edition in which is stated in a bankers propaganda piece,

    “The capital of the country is organized at last and we will see whether Congress will dare to fly in its face.”

    This early control of the media didn’t work entirely nevertheless, as on February 28th Congress passed the, “Sherman Law.” This law allowed the minting of a limited number of silver dollars, ending the 5 year hiatus. However this did not mean that anyone who brought silver to the United States Mint could have it struck into silver dollars, free of charge, as in the period prior to Ernest Seyd’s Coinage Act, in 1873. Gold backing of the American currency also remained.

    However, this Sherman Law did ensure that some money began to flow into the economy again, and coupled with the fact that the bankers now realized that they were still firmly in control, they started issuing loans again and the post Civil War depression was finally over.

    1881 The American people elect the Republican, James Garfield as the 20th President of the United States. This was a worry to the money changers, because as a Congressman, he had been Chairman of the Appropriations Committee, and was a member of Banking and Currency. The money changers were therefore aware that President Garfield was in full knowledge of their scam on the American people. Indeed following his inauguration, President Garfield stated,

    “Whosoever controls the volume of money in any country is absolute master of all industry and commerce…And when you realize that the entire system is very easily controlled, one way or another, by a few powerful men at the top, you will not have to be told how periods of inflation and depression originate.”

    Strangely enough within a few weeks of making that statement, President Garfield was assassinated on 2nd July.

    1891 The money changers spent the last decade creating economic booms followed by depressions, so that they could buy up thousands of homes and farms for pennies on the dollar. They were preparing to take the economy down again in the near future, and in a shocking memo sent out by the American Bankers Association, which would come out in the Congressional Record more than twenty years later, the following is stated,

    “On September 1st 1894 we will not renew our loans under any consideration. On September 1st we will demand our money.

    We will foreclose and become mortgages in possession. We can take two-thirds of the farms west of the Mississippi, and thousands of them east of the Mississippi as well, at our own price…Then the farmers will become tenants as in England…,”

    1891 American Bankers Association, as printed in the Congressional Record of April 29, 1913.

    1896 The central issue in the Presidential campaign is the issue of more silver money. Senator William Jennings Bryan from Nebraska, a Democrat aged only 36, makes an emotional speech at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago, entitled, “Crown Of Thorns And Cross Of Gold.” Senator Bryan stated,

    “We will answer their demand for a gold standard by saying to them, you shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns, you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold.”

    The bankers naturally supported the Republican candidate, William McKinley who in return favored the gold standard. Furthermore those in the McKinley campaign, got manufacturers and industrialists to inform their employees that if Bryan were elected, all factories and plants would close and there would be no work.

    This tactic succeeded, McKinley beat Bryan, albeit by a small margin.

    1898 Pope Leo XIII stated the following on the subject of usury,

    “On the one hand there is the party which holds the power because it holds the wealth, which has in its grasp all labor and all trade, which manipulates for its own benefit and its own purposes all the sources of supply, and which is powerfully represented in the councils of State itself. On the other side there is the needy and powerless multitude, sore and suffering.

    Rapacious usury, which, although more than once condemned by the Church, is nevertheless under a different form but with the same guilt, still practiced by avaricious and grasping men…so that a small number of very rich men have been able to lay upon the masses of the poor a yoke little better than slavery itself.”

    1907 During the early 1900’s, the money changers were anxious to advance their business of setting up another private Central Bank for America. Rothschild, Jacob Schiff, the head of Kuhn, Loeb and Co., in a speech to the New York Chamber of Commerce, stated, or rather threatened,

    “Unless we have a Central Bank with adequate control of credit resources, this country is going to undergo the most severe and far reaching money panic in its history.”

    They put Rothschild agent, J. P. Morgan at the forefront of their charge. Interestingly J. P. Morgan’s father, Julius Morgan, had been America’s financial agent to the British, and after Julius’ death, J. P. Morgan took on a British partner, Edward Grenville, who was a long time director of the Bank Of England.

    This year was the year of the money changers attack. J. P. Morgan and his cohorts secretly crashed the stock market. They were aware that thousands of small banks were so vastly over extended, some only had reserves of 1% under the fraudulent fractional reserve principle. Within only a few days, bank runs became commonplace across the nation.

    Morgan then stepped up and publicly announced that he would support these failing banks. What he failed to mention is that he would do this by manufacturing money out of nothing. And then what happened, surprise, surprise, Congress let him do it! So, Morgan manufactured $200,000,000 of this completely reserveless private money, purchased goods and services with it, and sent some of it to his branch banks to lend out at interest.

    As a result, the general public regained confidence in money, but most importantly it meant the banking power was now further consolidated into the hands of a few large banks.

    1908 With the widespread financial panic over, J. P. Morgan was hailed as a hero by the then President of Princeton University, Woodrow Wilson, who even crassly or arrogantly stated,

    “All this trouble could be averted if we appointed a committee of six or seven public spirited men like J. P. Morgan, to handle the affairs of our country.”

    President Theodore Roosevelt had also signed into law, following the financial panic, a bill creating the, “National Monetary Commission.”

    This commission was supposed to study the banking problem and make recommendations to Congress. Naturally, the commission was packed with J. P. Morgan’s friends and cronies.

    The chairman was Senator Nelson Aldrich from Rhode Island, and he represented the Newport Rhode Island homes of America’s richest banking families. His daughter married John D. Rockefeller Jr., and together they had five sons (including Nelson who would become Vice President in 1974 and David who would become Head of the Council on Foreign Relations).

    Following the setting up of this National Monetary Commission, Senator Aldrich immediately embarked on a 2 year fact finding tour of Europe, where he consulted at length with the private central bankers in England, France, and Germany, or rather Rothschild, Rothschild, and Rothschild.

    The total cost of this 2 year trip to the American taxpayer? $300,000. Yes, three hundred thousand dollars, that is not a misprint!

    1910 Senator Aldrich returns from his two year European fact finding mission on 22nd November. Shortly afterwards some of America’s most wealthy and powerful men boarded Senator Aldrich’s private railcar in the strictest secrecy. They journeyed to Jekyll Island off the coast of Georgia.
    In this group were Paul Warburg, who was earning a $500,000 a year salary from Rothschild owned firm, Kuhn, Loeb & Company. This salary was for him to lobby for a privately owned central bank in America. Also present was Jacob Schiff, a Rothschild who had purchased Kuhn, Loeb and Company shortly after he arrived in America from England.

    The Rothschilds, Warburgs and Schiffs, interconnected by marriage, were essentially the same family.

    Secrecy at this meeting was so tight that all the participants were cautioned to use only first names, to prevent servants from learning their identities. Years later, one participant, Frank Vanderlip, President of National Citibank and a representative of the Rockefeller family, confirmed the Jekyll Island trip in a 9th February 1935 edition of the Saturday Evening Post in which he stated,

    “I was as secretive indeed, as furtive as any conspirator …Discovery we knew, simply must not happen, or else all our time and effort would be wasted. If it were to be exposed that our particular group had got together and written a banking bill, that bill would have no chance whatever of passage by Congress.”

    It was not just the setting up of a Central Bank that was on the agenda. Other problems for these bankers were that the market share of these big national banks was shrinking fast. In the first ten years of the century the number of United States banks had more than doubled to over 20,000. By 1913 only 29% of all banks were national banks and they held only 57% of all deposits. As John D. Rockefeller put it,

    “Competition is Sin!”

    Senator Aldrich later admitted in a magazine article,

    “Before passage of this Act, the New York Bankers could only dominate the reserves of New York. Now we are able to dominate bank reserves of the entire country.”

    So one of the aims of these conspirators was to bring these new banks under their control. Secondly the nations economy was so strong that corporations were starting to finance their own expansions out of profits instead of taking out huge loans from large banks. Indeed, in the first ten years of the century, 70% of corporate funding came from profits.

    Basically, American Industry was becoming independent of the money changers, and the money changers were not about to let that happen.

    There was also much discussion regarding the name of the new bank, which took place in a conference room in the Jekyll Island Club Hotel. Aldrich believed the word, “bank,” should not even appear in the name. Warburg wanted to call the legislation, the, “National Reserve Bill,” or the, “Federal Reserve Bill.” The idea was not only to give the impression that the purpose of the new central bank was to stop bank runs, but also to conceal its monopoly character.

    However it was Senator Aldrich, the egomaniac, who insisted it be called the, “Aldrich Bill.” So, after nine days at Jekyll Island, the group dispersed. This group of conspirators immediately set up an educational fund of $5,000,000 to finance Professors at top universities to endorse the new bank.

    The new central bank would be very similar to the old Bank Of The United States, in that it would be given a monopoly over United States currency and create that money out of nothing. Also in order to make the public think it was under control of the Government, the plan called for the central bank to be run by a board of governors appointed by the President and approved by the Senate.

    This would not cause any undue problems for the bankers, as they knew they could use their money to buy influence over the politicians, in order to ensure the men they wanted got appointed to the board of governors.

    1912 The Aldrich bill is presented to Congress for debate. This was very quickly identified as a bill to benefit the bankers, or an expression for them which was coined at the time, “The Money Trust.” During the debate, the Republican, Charles A. Lindbergh stated,

    “The Aldrich plan is the Wall Street Plan. It means another panic, if necessary, to intimidate the people. Aldrich, paid by the government to represent the people, proposes a plan f

  14. “History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means

    possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and it’s issuance.”
    -James Madison

    PUBLIC CENTRAL BANK
    – On Reclaiming Our Central Bank And Monetary Policy –
    ————————————————————————-
    “Whoever controls the volume of money in any country is
    the master of all its legislation and commerce.”
    President James A. Garfield
    ————————————————————————-
    The “Federal Reserve” is not a government institution but a private central bank owned by a handful of major banks and bond dealers. As such, it is a cartel owned, controlled, and essentially for-profit driven, not by the people of the United States but, instead, by the banking industry’s ruling elite. This oligarchic setup generates the most costly, debt-based, money system and greatest conflicts of interest in the history of the world. It is a system clearly at odds with the intent of the founders of the United States of America.

    ————————————————————————-
    Public Central Bank – Fire The Fed

    “If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks…will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered… The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.”

    Thomas Jefferson

    The current banking and Wall Street crisis is a direct result of a private central bank system. We are cursed with the deliberately mis-named “Federal” Reserve which is no more than a privatized and exclusive debt-money creation system devoid of public ownership. In this so-called “independent” institution there is no public interest or power within its privately-owned, profit-seeking, system.

    When the power to create our money and credit is in private hands, and based on an exclusive franchise for debt-money creation and sale of bonds at interest – as opposed to direct Treasury financing – then the entire economic and social system is set up for private profit, and debt ruin, at public expense. As history has proven, this structure is virtually guaranteed to result in endless predation, corruption, and eventual collapse at immense public expense.

    The founders of this country well understood this very problem and so, in their wisdom, put the “purse powers” in the hands of the most democratic body – i.e., Congress – exactly so the people would have the right and power to vote on their monetary policy every two years, course correct their own society and economy, and escape the predictable ruin of a private debt-money system under which we have no alternative or escape.

    Today, however, under a private central bank system we have no such public privilege or power. We are powerless at the hands of the real owners of the “Federal’ Reserve – i.e., the major investment banks and historic banking families both here and abroad. These are the very people and institutions who have profited, geared the structure to their endless, debt-money, advantage and proceeded to rape the system until it collapses and the public is forced to rescue and bailout the very predators and criminals at the helm. In any case, this is a society-controlling power no private entity should ever attain.

    Despite the overwhelming and recurrent failures of this privatized system bailout plans are being devised by these very same bankers in order to give the “Fed” even more global powers – all to foster a pretense of regulation and eliminate any vestiges of public money powers around the world. In the midst of this crisis, our pathetic Congress – fed by corporate money and cowed by a corporate press – may well succumb to giving these expanded powers to the same group of international bankers responsible for this and every other monetary crisis.

    Clearly, however, the time is ripe to fire the Fed. We must take its stock under public ownership, if for no other reason then for their ruination of the dollar, aggravating boom and bust cycles, bailout thievery, and to prevent exactly these occurrences again in the future – all of which stem from a lightly or completely unregulated, private, banking system acting to privatize profits and socialize losses. Moral hazard is endless and systemic under this oligarchic structure.

    “The bank was saved but the money was ruined.”

    William Gouge (1796-1863)

    “You gotta start executin’ a few of those white fuckin’ bankers”

    George Carlin

    The immense costs of banker bailouts today mean more bonds have to be sold, more deficit financing incurred, more commissions earned by the big bank Fed owners, more currency value ruin, and more interest payable to foreigners on our “public” debt. Interest on interest, and debt on top of debt until collapse occurs is exactly where a private central bank system always takes us – particularly within a political system driven by corporate power and money.

    Nevertheless, the fact we have a private central bank called the Federal Reserve that is still taken by many economists (and those attached to their ruling-elite sponsored positions) as a virtual given is clearly perplexing at best, and devious at worst. Despite the fact the founders of this nation had seen the predations worked upon England and other countries by private central bankers today’s crop of ruling-elite sycophants continue to ignore the issue and our own Constitution’s clear mandate for public “purse powers.”

    “The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, and more selfish than bureaucracy. It denounces as public enemies all who question its methods or throw light upon its crimes. I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest foe.”

    Abraham Lincoln

    Clearly, a public central bank is a subject many go to great lengths to avoid today. In fear for their status and position they quickly poo-poo the idea – and this, as if the founders were idiots!

    Yet, in this crisis, for the first time in my memory we have more people now realizing the real nature of the problem – and so considering the very idea of a public central bank and returning to a Constitutional setup. Despite the massive debt and interest set upon the public the very malady-causing institution remains private and without audits of either institution or its mega-rich and powerful owners. To complete the coup, members of its own fed-owning institutions (Goldman-Sachs, et.al.) serve as “our” Treasury Secretaries in what is a massive conflict of interest and ongoing effort to forestall any public interest or power in their system.

    As with any real reform, it takes outsiders to first broach the issue and then courageous legislators, journalists and media types to discuss the possibility and reach the people. But have you ever seen a debate or read a thorough discussion of a public central bank in your newspaper or in the major media?

    Today the time is ripe and this seminal issue is emerging. Like Holocaust deniers, however, there are those who pretend a public central bank is somehow not possible or advisable, and so they run from the topic and even seek to punish those who pursue the issue. Yet their arguments fly in the face of those who wrote our Constitution and purposely gave the money creation powers to Congress, the people’s body – so we, the people, would not be buried in interest-bearing debt, bailout costs, and enslaved to bankers for the nation’s livelihood and advancement.

    Centuries of planned “panics,” depressions, and recessions – all of which have caused immense enrichment for the few and immense loss to the nation and costs to future generations – have resulted in mind-boggling levels of interest bearing debt, inflation, and currency value destruction now bringing the nation to a financial armageddon.

    It is time we extricate ourselves from this costly, self-defeating, and utterly oligarchic system. Demand that your representative act, not to give greater powers to the banking elite, but to audit the owners and seek to return the “Federal” Reserve stock and powers to We, The People.

    ————————————————————————-
    – Zero Per Cent Home Loans –

    “Capital must protect itself in every possible way, both by combination and legislation. Debts must be collected, mortgages foreclosed as rapidly as possible. When, through the process of law, the common people lose their homes, they will become more docile and more easily governed through the strong arm of government applied by a central power of wealth under leading financiers. These truths are well known among our principal men who are now engaged in forming an imperialism to govern the world. By dividing the voter through the political party system, we can get them to expend their energies in fighting for questions of no importance. It is thus by discreet action we can secure for ourselves that which has been so well planned and so successfully accomplished.”

    American’s Banker Association, 1924

    Ask yourself why the people of the United States would agree to charge interest on one another’s home loans – the very building blocks of society? The answer is we did not, have not, and likely would not. Most importantly, we cannot implement any such salutary “barnraising” monetary policy because we no longer have ownership or control over our money creation process and this most vital of state institutions. In short, we have lost control over money creation and purse powers as bequeathed to us by the founding fathers in the Constitution of the United States.

    Instead, with a private central bank, we are required to pay for our homes, as well as all our infrastructure and defense, three or four times over due to the interest costs imposed by private central bankers and their affiliated bond dealers. Interest costs alone represent the greatest of taxes paid, and the greatest of burdens passed to future generations.

    Imagine, in an economy nearly seventy per-cent driven by consumers, what this tax cut, in home interest savings alone, could do to stimulate the “ownership” economy – not to mention freeing the vast majority from nearly endless house debt? In addition, to avoid early foreclosures, family breakups, and financial devastation due to job loss and “free trade” job export new, more democratically-oriented, policies might allow for longer emergency mortgage relief periods to avoid exactly such no-fault crisis and debilitating chaos.

    At the same time, penalties for loan and appraisal fraud could be greatly strengthened. Otherwise home loan programs could very well continue thru existing mortgage, banking, and escrow institutions with the only difference being direct treasury funding as opposed to debt-based bonds serving the interests of the few.

    For the great majority of people there is no greater tax cut possible than eliminating interest on our home loans. If we truly controlled our own government and economy such a change, and related offsetting tax code changes regarding interest deductions, would be simple and easy. First, however, to accomplish this salutary objective, and other necessary monetary system reforms, we have to end, or radically re-control, an oligarchic and undemocratic banking institution misleadingly known as the “Fed.”

    – Hurricanes, Disasters & Infrastructure –

    Aside from the loss of life, the sickest thing about the recent Katrina-Rita-Wilma hurricane events – as well as virtually every other natural disaster, war or infrastructure need – is that we are forced to borrow from a private central bank to pay for all the destruction, reconstruction and related interest costs. A private central bank profiting from Mother Nature’s wrath (due to global warming induced climate change) and the wipe out of entire cities and families is surely the mother of all scandals, the crime of the ages, and the epitomy of financial sociopathy.

    The private cabal “Fed” central bank setup we labor under means the cartel profits from every natural disaster via our borrowing requirements. Clearly, nothing could be more brutal, immoral or just plain wrong. As a result we can be driven into bankruptcy by Mother Nature and the Fed alone, as government insurance program premiums cover only a fraction of the costs, and any and all deficits require debt-money borrowing.

    In short, we must regain control of our monetary powers or we will be bankrupted by Mother Nature alone, courtesy of the “Federal” Reserve.

    – The “Independent” Scam-

    “If government becomes ‘independent of politics’ it can only mean that that sphere of government becomes an absolute self-perpetuating oligarchy.”

    Murray Rothbard, The Case Against The Fed

    Oligarchy and neo-fascism are what we, the people, are fighting today. A top-down, undemocratic, globalization process is effectively removing all local controls and cultural freedoms… and in the process installing private central banks everywhere. Corporate power and rule by the few (via control of our central bank, media, trade policy, and a corrupted Congress) has now reduced much of mankind to neo-slavery upon a global plantation – all within a “free market” from which, for most, there is neither escape nor dissent.

    The primary instrument of this modern neo-slavery and rule by the few is interest-bearing debt, and control of our money creation process by a ruling elite. As a result of this regime, Nations, states, and families around the world are virtual prisoners of a monopoly private central bank system, and its debt money instruments and policies.

    The original Constitution of the United States stated that Congress, the most representative body, was to have the sole power to mint our money and set the value of currency in the United States. However, in 1913, the Federal Reserve Act was passed, in a secretive and deceptive legislative process similar to the coup d’etat accomplished with the corporate-controlled GATT-NAFTA regime. This constitution-crushing “Fed” act passed the authority to create money from the people, via Congress, over to a private consortium of big banks now collectively known as the Federal Reserve Bank – in an historic theft of societal right and power.

    In short, before the passage of the Federal Reserve Act in 1913 congress could print it’s own treasury notes and use the money to pay for the cost of government. After the passage of this act Congress was forced to borrow money from a privately owned Federal Reserve Bank at interest – obviously, an immense sea-change in the nature of government finance and the structure of society.

    Clearly, the “independent” central bank scam is one of history’s great ruses and a device used to pry the most vital of society’s institutions from the hands of the people and their elected representatives – over whom we have some control. As Murray Rothbard, the Libertarian economist, noted in his last book the Fed is simply an oligarchic institution which does not belong in any Democracy or Republic ostensibly shaped and ruled by a majority of its people.

    In order to both accomplish and maintain such a ruling-elite feat, first, you inform the people and their elected representatives they are not capable of handling their own affairs – despite the provision in our Constitution placing the “purse power” squarely in the hands of the Congress. Yet the very reason for the people’s purse power clause is simply that, by 1776, the founders were well aware of what private central banks, and the “Bank of England” had done to the people of the European continent.

    Second, you must denigrate “democracy” in every way possible, and attempt to make a convincing case that a slave society, like the Roman Empire, could possibly give us some lessons in the running of a democracy. In this “mobocracy” strategy no attention is ever paid to the on-going idiocy and historic criminality of Monarchy, Oligarchy and Fascism thru the years. Clearly, the ruling elite’s basic plan of “independent” institutions is to place them out of the control of the very people who must bear, as in the case of our central bank, the extremely taxing and unnecessary debt and interest burdens which last for generations.

    Given their distorted educations and fears for their own job security, the public (maybe not private) opinion of many economists and bankers today remains that the “independence” of a central bank is a kind of given, an institution necessary to achieve stability and progress. Obviously, the question here is independent of whom? The simple answer is independent of you and I, the vast wage-laboring majority, our elected representatives, and the Constitution itself. For decades, exactly this anti-democratic, anti-labor, mindset has been a given for any who value their continued employment in banking and consulting industries, and for media moguls whose pro-business, anti-labor, propaganda must continue on a daily basis.

    Regardless, the very opposite of monetary stability and unburdened progress is the historic case given private central banks and fractional-reserve, debt-money, systems. Therein, the very incentive for stockholders of private central banks is to generate as much money, debt, and borrowing as possible. This secures the greatest interest and bond market profits and commissions, controls access to money and credit, escapes restrictions on the “masters of the universe” powers, and keeps the vast majority from having any influence over their own central banks and monetary policies.

    “A private central bank issuing the public currency is a greater menace to the liberties of the people than a standing army…We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt.”

    Thomas Jefferson

    “Central banks were supposedly the guardians of money. Yet, they have created the biggest liquidity bubble in history.”

    The Economist

    “Regarding the Great Depression, you’re right, we did it.”

    Ben Bernanke, Federal Reserve Chairman

    In practice, a private, profit-seeking, ownership of the “Fed” means the real owners are interested in creating as much private and government debt, with interest due, as possible. If this were not the case then why seek ownership of the central bank stock, if not to exploit its incredible potential for profit and power over governments and leaders the world over?

    Further, it is all debt money created, with interest attached, and for which money is not simultaneously created to pay the interest over time. Instead, money to pay interest comes out of created capital and savings. In effect, this means that, over time, all assets head toward ownership by big bankers – an elite group with the incredible power to create busts and booms at will, and who grow ever richer amidst the impoverishment of the people.

    The process therein involves The Federal Reserve Bank ordering the U.S. Treasury to print a certain amount of Federal Reserve Notes and then have the U.S. Mint deliver them for the mere cost of printing – i.e., money for nothing! These Federal Reserve Notes are then lent into circulation by lending them either to congress or to the Federal Reserve Member banks. As some economists have noted, money lent into existence would be impossible to totally repay because only the principal was lent into circulation but the principal plus interest has to be paid back.

    Essentially, this privatized money creation system is what is meant by debt slavery, and is the very reason why endless wars, and both cultural and religious strife, have been manufactured over the centuries due to this debt-money creation process and its inevitable implosions and ruin. Time and again, it has proved to be the bane of our existence.

    As for prudence and responsibility, at one time, it was believed that bank reserve requirements would put a lid on lending, debt creation, and inflation. However, with the advent of “securitization” – i.e., the packaging and reselling of debt to pension funds, etc – the money-debt-interest creation process has effectively become limitless. Today’s dangerous mountain of personal and governmental debt, and both actual and incipient inflation, is testimony to that fact. As ex-fed chairman, Paul Volker, once admitted: “it is a sobering fact the prominence of central banks in this century has coincided with a general tendency toward more inflation, not less.” Is it any wonder why?

    – The Creature From Jekyll Island –

    “When the Federal Reserve Act was passed, the people of these United States did not perceive that a world banking system was being set up here. A super state controlled by international bankers and international industrialists acting together to enslave the world for their own pleasure. Every effort has been made to conceal its power but the truth is the Fed has usurped the government.”

    Rep. Louis Mcfadden

    “To cover the fact that a central bank is merely a cartel which has been legalized, its proponents had to lay down a thick smoke screen of technical jargon focusing always on how it would supposedly benefit commerce, the public, and the nation… there was not the slightest glimmer that underneath it all, was a master plan which was designed from top to bottom to serve private interests at the expense of the public… the system is merely a cartel with a government facade.”

    G. Edward Griffin

    In practice, a private central bank cartel means the self-interest of the few pitted against the vast majority. The “independent ” ruse is simply one of the oldest imperialist tricks and one necessary to disarm and distract the populace. If this oligarchic setup is so benign an arrangement, however, why then have an elected Congress? Why any democracy? More to the point, if there is no advantage or profit why then do not the owners of the “Fed” simply relinquish their central bank stock to the people?

    Indeed, as Thomas Jefferson noted centuries ago, a private central bank is akin to a standing foreign army on your soil. In practice, any such central bank “insulated” from the people means a largely private ability to expand money supplies without any ties to production levels – as suggested by economist Milton Freidman. Thus, this for-profit money-creation process generates inflation as well as privatizing loan choice and distribution, while eliminating any significant public imput on lending policies, and promoting central bank largesse in the form of bail-outs for member banks at taxpayer expense – often after they have wreaked currency havoc and reaped usurious interest rates.

    Yesterday and today, “purse” powers in private hands means that money-center banks (owners of central banks) prefer guaranteed lending to governments in large amounts – i.e., to the very governments and people prevented from any non-interest-bearing money creation and municipal credit due to the loss of their rightful central banking ownership and money and credit powers.

    At the same time, central bank stockholders may be speculating against these same borrowers in currency markets – undermining their own client governments, generating instability, currency chaos, and need for evermore interest-bearing debt, not to mention financing both sides in costly wars and arms races. Exactly this grossest of conflicts of interest, maximizing of debt-indenture, and insider exploitation of money and credit powers arises due to the usurpation of the people’s powers. In the case of the U.S., it was a result of the successful coup represented by the “Federal Reserve” act of 1913.

    Inflation, corruption, and IMF-generated ruin emerge where the banking powers rest in the hands of the unelected few, and public oversight is either missing, perfunctory, or reduced to a “Humphrey-Hawkins” dog and pony show. In the American case, this private money creation system scourge comes complete with taxpayer guarantees and liabilities for all Fed insider, member-bank, mischief benefiting the few while taxing the many.

    In short, instability, usury, and insider loan thievery occur because the people are no longer in control of their central banks and are now prisoners of banking oligarchies both domestic and foreign.

    “The power of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less that to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conference.”

    Carroll Quigley, 1966

    “Government debt paves the way for government control. Consider: Debt leads to taxation to pay interest. Taxation leads to more economic control over the people by the same government that ran up the debt in the first place. It’s hardly extreme to conclude that escalating debt is part of a plan, such as a plan to establish a new world order.”

    John F. McManus

    “Ruling elites are deadly serious about seeing that any renovation of the international system is in their interest. They use a variety of carrot and stick tactics to maintain political and economic control – domestically and internationally. Control techniques will be more vicious or less, depending on a combination of factors involving the state of the economy and, more importantly, the state of popular opposition. The more threatening and persistent the moves to counter their plans and build alternative models, the more violent will be their tactics of repression.”

    Holly Sklar, Trilateralism

    It is the mega-merchant banks and their “bond market” cartel which owns our central banks and gains private powers to rule mere governments via control of money and credit. As both history and contemporary affairs reveal, the greatest threat to the peace and stability of the world is a banking system, and central banks, removed from the people’s ownership, control, and vigilant oversight. Inflation and currency ruin are the ultimate prices paid and, today, these twin taxes are gathering steam.

    A long history of predation, panics, planned booms and busts – all precipitated by bankers gorging on the people’s money and credit powers – is exactly why the founders vested “purse” powers in the people and their elected representatives. Indeed, they were well aware of what had transpired on the European continent and how American colonies had been at the mercy of an “independent” Bank of England.

    – The Owners Of The “Fed” –

    “Here are the card-carrying shareholders in the `Federal’ Reserve Corporation: Rothschild Banks of London and Berlin, Lazard Brothers Bank of Paris, Isreal, Moses Sieff Banks Of Italy, Warburg Bank of Hamburg and Amsterdam, Lehman Brothers Bank of new York, Kuhn Loeb Bank Of New York, Chase Manhattan Bank Of New York, Goldman Sachs Bank Of New York.”

    Miles Franklin Newsletter

    “It must not be felt that these heads of the world’s chief central banks were substantive powers in world finance. They were not. Rather, they were technicians and agents of the dominant investment bankers of their own countries, who had raised them up and were perfectly capable of throwing them down.”

    Carroll Quigley, Tragedy And Hope

    “The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes.”

    Disraeli

    “There is no reason why the banks should be in control of the Federal Reserve system.”

    Sen. Robert Owen, 1913

    If the people do not own their central bank either federally or via stock held by the several states, the so-called “Federal” Reserve system is simply a sham. Indeed, the real nature of this beast is revealed in the Federal Reserve Act – i.e., a law dictated by a robber-baron “community of interest” stipulating the privately-held stock of the Federal Reserve cannot be bought or sold on any stock exchange, or ever purchased by the public.

    As Eustace Mullins revealed, the “fed” stock is passed by inheritance amongst a few, mega-wealthy, banking families via powerful banking firms which, in 1913, made a private “Federal” system the law of the land. Today, without good cause or reason, an exemption from the Freedom of Information Act prevents Americans from knowing who the real personages are behind their central bank and corporate fronts.

    For his opening up an arcane and purposely obscured world to greater public understanding, and shedding new light upon the Bank of England and Federal Reserve, Eustace Mullin’s Secrets of The Federal Reserve remains a classic. Aside from revealing the forces behind central banks, the saga of Mullin’s attempt to publish his book validates his thesis of a corrupt “money power” system. In 1952, Mullins was told by eighteen major publishers his material was too hot to handle and that no one in New York (where banking interests reign) would dare put it to print. They candidly told him it would never be printed anywhere. Later, Mullins was abruptly fired from his Library of Congress post after he self-published his expose of the Fed’s history and ownership in 1952 – and became the only person ever discharged from the Library of Congress for political reasons.

    As if this were not enough, in 1954, the entire German edition of his book was seized and burned by government agents. As Mullins relates, “the burning of the book was upheld April 21, 1961 by judge Israel Katz of the Bavarian Supreme Court. The U.S. Government refused to intervene, because U.S. High Commissioner to Germany James B. Conant (president of Harvard) had approved the initial book burning order. This is the only book which has been burned in Germany since World War II.”

    Alarming as any book-burning may be, it is surely not the only case of the suppression of the truth about the secretive oligarchies ruling our lives. A pattern of interference with literary freedom appears whenever the subject of ownership of the “Fed” emerges. For example, congressman Charles Lindbergh Sr.’s “Why is your country at war,” was published in 1917 and dealt with the money power and origins of war. According to Mullins, “Woodrow Wilson ordered government agents to seize and destroy the printing plates and copies of this book in the spring of 1918.” Also, William Carr’s study of the Rothschild dynasty had to be privately printed and, in 1915, Baron Nathan Mayer De Rothschild went to court to keep Ignatius Balla’s “The Romance of the Rothschild’s” from being printed on the grounds portions were untrue and libelous. The court, however, ruled in favor of Balla’s truths.

    Historically, a series of similar incidents reveals the nature of the problem. The closer one gets to revealing the essence of enclosure, factor-imbalance, and identities of a ruling class, the more obscurity and worse is brought upon offending writers or reformers. In a society where capital owns the media, major publishing houses, and controls appointments in government, major universities, and foundations then unemployment, defamation, and worse is easily brought upon dissidents and any set of facts some wish buried. The experience of writers like Ezra Pound, and circumstances surrounding the assassinations of President’s Lincoln, Garfield, and Kennedy (all of whom were no friends of banking powers) are enough to give anyone pause… nevertheless, information must be free and truthful.

    Invariably, the critics of oligarchy, globalization, GATT-NAFTA, and a banking elite’s “independent” interests are characterized as “irrational”, “deranged”, “nationalistic”, “racist”, “anti-semitic” and bent on seeing conspiracy. This occurs in spite of both Adam Smith’s and Karl Marx’s trenchant and timeless observations, the sordid history of the “Federal” Reserve, and the complete lack of effective democracy in our monetary policy.

    Obviously, ruling oligarchies have no reason for being nor any argument for suppressing democracy. To survive they must rely on propaganda, repression, defamation, state terrorism, and assassination in hopes of avoiding their fate.

    To better understand this on-going tyranny of capital we also need to know how, from near-absolute power over the people’s finances, the House of Rothschild and others moved on to control, and enclose, our media and information supply. As Kent Cooper, a former head of Associated Press, noted “international bankers under the House of Rothschild acquired an interest in the three leading European [news] agencies.” The Rothschild group purchased Reuters in London, Havas in France, and Wolf in Germany to monopolize the news creation nexus and information-dissemination business in Europe and around the world. Today’s global corporate media empire is simply an extension of this trend to control information and assure capital’s propaganda remains both dominant and ubiquitous.

    Thus, in addition to land enclosures, factor imbalance, private central banks, and corruption of political systems the power of capital was immensely amplified with its ownership and control of media, and news and information sources. A privatized media realm includes the power to control the public mind, distract and direct debate, demonize dissidents, bring a halt to reform, and disappear the entire question of a public central bank.

    – Private Central Banks, Kondratieff Waves
    & Anti-Semitism –

    “The bankers’ Satanic Conspiracy is the source of anti Semitism. The sooner Jews rise up to oppose it; the sooner anti-Semitism will end.. Obviously, many Christians are involved. When I criticize Rockefeller, no one says anything about ‘anti-Christianism.'”

    Henry Makow

    “Due to the hard times… the ugly side of human nature becomes apparent. Religious fundamentalism and political extremism (both right and left) resurge in a clamber for radical solutions. Racism increases as scapegoats are sought to vent frustrations (Previous waves: anti Semitism in Europe during the 1870’s/80’s & 1930’s/40’s. Current wave: Ethnic cleansing of the 1990’s) There is less tolerance of unconventional sexuality (Previous waves: Victorian morality of the 1870’s/90’s and Hitler sent homosexuals to the gas chambers in the 1930’s/40’s). The current down wave has seen the rise of the religious right in US politics, with moves against abortion and less tolerance towards racial minorities and homosexuals. Lastly, socialism becomes more popular with the masses as there is a reaction against free market economics, which is widely blamed for the adverse conditions.”

    David McMinn

    It is this writer’s contention that Kondratieff’s business-cycle wave theory may well be little more than a private central bank, debt-interest, bubble phenomena – in other words, a long cycle wave of debt build-up and interest accrued which eventually collapses business and society, and brings in its wake either new ruling-elite fascisms of one variety or another, or a re-capture of monetary powers by the public.

    Thus, while this revolution of Kondratieff cycles may well represent simple and normal business cycle waves, in fact, they may also be generated and driven by private central bank debt bubbles and the eventual repudiations which follow. Such traumatic cycles might well not exist nor be as wrenching were it not for the private central bank institutions feeding member bank mischief. We are not then speaking of ordinary and more benign, supply-demand, commodity price inflations and deflations.

    Again, with securitization making reserve requirement’s relation to loans nearly meaningless today, fiat money creation has become effectively limitless, and this amidst no gold or commodity backing for the “Fed” currency. In this for-profit debt creation business the sky is the limit. Adding insult to injury, the taxpayers (via the income tax) are also the hapless guarantors of the bankster’s, ruling-class, machinations…. at interest, of course.

    As things stand, few mega-banks have any public interest seats or participation on their boards, and so no non-profit or public-interest oriented impacts emerge on who gets loans and on what terms. In short, “our” money is created in their interests… and until such time as the interest bubble leads to implosion, new debt replaces old, and devastation results for families and nations alike. Despite this dismal dynamic, nations that attempt to buck the oligarchic system will likely face reprisals from powerful “free market” forces at odds with the interests of the vast majority. So much for democracy… that is until ruin or revolution emerge.

    After usury, predation, and ruin arise from oligarchic, undemocratic, economies controlled by ruling-elite bankers, when the inevitable crisis or depression hits then some group or other must be blamed. Enter the Jews, Chinese, or Indians – depending on the country and continent. Regardless of locale, due precisely to a lack of public ownership of central banks, and due to all the dismal effects flowing from oligarchic banking and economy, it is these ethnic groups which historically, emerge as targets… and eventually pay the price of undemocratic banking structures.

    In other words, short of reform, what has happened in the past will most certainly happen in the future given that anti-semitism and worse is born and bred by “independent” central banks and their captive institutions – i.e., the International Monetary Fund, World Bank, and any government controlled by the few in order to make possible the exploitation of the many.

    For example, few remain aware today that after World War I, the infamous Dawes Plan for war reparations was drawn and dictated by international bankers – i.e., the owners of central banks. Aside from funding both sides of the conflict, it was their post-war, counterproductive, “shock therapy” which produced a Hitler and a virulent anti-semitism on the European continent… with devastating consequences.

    “Terrorism, War & Bankruptcy are caused by the privatization of money, issued as a debt and compounded by interest” [he cancelled debt and interest in France - hence the Battle of Waterloo.]

    Napoleon Bonaparte

    “Congress… gave the power to regulate money to a handful of unelected private bankers. America has been paying the price ever since… As the Federal Reserve is a private banking institution, every time Congress requisitions money it creates a debt obligation… a transfer of cash [created out of thin air] from the Fed in exchange for U.S. bonds, resulting in taxpayers paying untold billions of dollars in interest every year with no hope of ever being able to reduce the principal. By controlling our money, private Federal Reserve bankers have indebted us all, forever… By eliminating the middleman we would be able to create a debt free, productive, government at all levels.”

    Edward F. Mrkvicka, Jr.

    “Government bonds are taxpayer’s promises to pay, secured by a first lien on all physical property within the nation and a first lien on national income, because Congress has the power to tax. These fully-secured, interest-bearing, taxpayers’ promises-to-pay are created by the government and exchanged for privately owned bank’s promises-to-pay of private individuals which are unsecured. These unsecured promises-to-pay of private individuals are borrowed by the United States Government. These private individuals’ promises to pay are called money. Imagine a banking system which permits taxpayers promises-to-pay to be exchanged for private individuals’ promises-to-pay.”

    Gertrude Coogan, Money Creators

    Given the oligarchic structure, it is not that any one particular elite or ethnic group happens to own or control a central bank, or predominate in the banking field. Instead, it is the institution of private central banks per se which proves a scourge upon mankind with its invitation to misfeasance, inflation, and powers of the few to dissemble democracy, social justice, and progressive economy in general. In short, it is the structure, stupid.

    Despite capital’s media propaganda, many more people around the world today are awakening to the nature of banking tyranny, to a reality of oligarchy everywhere, and the pervasive lack of effective democratic structure in “free market” institutions and “free trade” regimes which control our lives. We do not elect our trade representatives, our Federal Reserve board members, our United Nations representative, and we have no National Initiative with which to defeat the many corruptions of the ruling class.

    In this sick milieu, as surely as night follows day, oligarchy and the predation which follows from imperialism breed backlash and movements of the people to regain their rightful powers and interests.

    Today, many more “money trust” victims from around the world seek to overthrow both local and international oligarchies in order to come out from under the tyranny of latter-day Dawes plans and undemocratic, GATT-NAFTA, trade schemes. The latter being an uncompensated, effectively forced, trade regime fast-tracked by capital past wage-laboring majorities. Unsuited for a still disparate and largely undemocratic world, this sorry regime not only rewards the greater-slave and induces global oligopoly but, due to a lack of compensating and incentivizing tariffs, induces a race to the bottom in standards, and generates costly environmental ruin by greatly increasing the fossil-fuel transport of “goods” around the globe.

    With the ruling elite’s program of “interdependency and “harmonization” not approved by the people via National Initiatives, they lack any real democratic impetus or approval of their terms. Yet these schemes abide due to our increasing impotence and the capture of “our” representatives by capital’s money machine and global media empire.

    Despite the people’s rights, wants, and needs reform still remains problematic today due to the fact that oligarchy, enclosure, and capital’s political corruption have proceeded to the point where government itself has been disarmed by money-dependent politicians who have become captives of capital. As a result of this sick setup, legislatures filled with capital-dependent, re-electable, politicians, and capital’s “free press” all fail to represent the vast, wage-earning, majority.

    Wherever society is so corrupt it can only fail as vital, balancing, reform and economic democracy cannot emerge… without getting to the endgame point of maximum ruin and exploitation. Thus, as in the past, ruling elite predation and oligarchy will likely proceed to the point where debt bubbles and currency ruin mean that new pogroms of Jews, Chinese, or Indians become inevitable – all due to gross factor imbalance in society and ruling oligarchies fed and bred by private central banks.

    Having seen this sorry dynamic emerge many times throughout history, one would think the very people in the forefront of movements to re-establish constitutional purse powers and democratic banking would be those of Jewish, Chinese, and Indian extraction. Count one such figure in Murray Rothbard, the libertarian economist, who noted that “if government becomes `independent of politics’ it can only mean that that sphere of government becomes an absolute self-perpetuating oligarchy.”

    Indeed, exactly this is what the “Federal” Reserve, Euro-Land, and all capital-controlled institutions have become – self-perpetuating oligarchies. Wherever such “factor” imbalance prevails, real reform must emerge or turmoil, terror, and revolution are assured.

    “5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.”

    Communist Manifesto #5,
    Karl Marx & Fred. Engels

    “Lenin is said to have declared that the best way to destroy the Capitalist system was to debauch the currency. By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens… while the process impoverishes many, it actually enriches some… who are (then) the object of hatred.”

    John Maynard Keynes

    “[There must be] some dilution of sovereignty, to the immediate disadvantage of those nations which now possess the preponderance of power… the establishment of a common money, might be invested in a body created by and responsible to the principal trading and investing peoples. This would deprive our government of exclusive control over a national money…”

    John Foster Dulles,
    CFR Founder

    “The Fed is exactly what Karl Marx called for in the fifth plank of his Communist Manifesto… The founders of the United States certainly had no intention of allowing the federal or state governments to issue paper money. Never in their wildest dreams did they envisage creating a privately run central bank with vast powers to inflate and manipulate our nation’s currency and credit… Inflation sets the stage for the rise of a tyrant…

    Older Americans have seen our nation’s currency deteriorate from the most honest fiduciary money the world has ever known to fiat money redeemable in nothing… its value is being continually eroded by the monetary policies set by the privately run Federal Reserve… It is not by chance that our nation’s money degenerated from the most honest paper money in history to completely irredeemable paper money. Nor was it by chance that the Federal Reserve replaced the U.S. Treasury as the issuer of our money.

    Determined individuals planned and accomplished this change as a major step in their conspiratorial plan to steer our nation into totalitarian control and world government… The Fed is an unconstitutionally established entity that is independent of government. But its leaders do not operate independently of the conspiratorial force that brought it into existence. That force, working over several generations to bring about the tyrannical `new world order’ can be found in the membership of the Council On Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, the Rhodes Scholar program, the Bilderberg movement, and numerous other organs of the `Establishment.’ It is a force that dominates government as well as the Fed.”

    John F. McManus,
    Financial Terrorism Review

    – THE FED, IMF, BIS, WORLD BANK & WTO –

    “The BIS (Bank for International Settlements) is the central bank’s central bank… its members are the central banks of the industrial world… It is certainly the most powerful financial institution in the world.”

    Dennis Birch

    “The powers of financial capital had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank, in the hands of men like Montagu Norman of the Bank of England, Benjamin Strong of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, Charles Rist of the Bank of France, and Hjalmar Schacht of the Reichsbank, sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world.”

    Carroll Quigley, Tragedy And Hope

    “The World Trade Organization, The World Bank, The International Monetary Fund and other financial institutions virtually write economic policy and parliamentary legislation. With a deadly combination of arrogance and ruthlessness, they take their sledgehammers to fragile, interdependent, historically complex societies and devastate them, all under the fluttering banner of ‘reform’.”

    Arundhati Roy

    “The counterfeit option is available only if a country happens to be in the unique position of having its currency accepted as the medium of international trade, as has been the case for the United States. In that event it is possible to create money out of nothing, and other nations have no choice but to accept it… The result is that America has continued to finance its trade deficit with fiat money – counterfeit, if you will – a feat which no other nation in the world could hope to accomplish.”

    G. Edward Griffin

    “The infamous `conditionalities’ policy for procuring emergency IMF loans… remains in force to this day… The prospective recipient of money must convince inspectors it is implementing a “realistic rate of exchange… as defined by the IMF. The focus on the exchange rate allows the IMF to control a country’s fiscal policy, government expenditure, tax policy, and public enterprise policy – in short, every aspect of national economic life… The formula is invariably the same. The debtor country is forced to slash imports, severely devalue its domestic currency (ensuring that relative dollar-denominated debt increases by multiples), and impose draconian cuts in government subsidies for food and other necessaries, while opening vital areas of the national economy to foreign takeovers on the cheap, justified as `free market reforms’ by the IMF.”

    Executive Intelligence Review

    In 1930, the Bank For International Settlements – BIS – was created by a coterie of international bankers for the purpose of handling collection of German war debt. Today, it functions as a central bank for central bankers.

    The BIS remains a nearly invisible affair despite wielding immense powers without being subject to any democratic office, imput, or influence. In short, not only is the BIS self-created and without political legitimacy but it wields great, behind-the-scenes, powers.

    This institution emerged as a way to implement war reparation policies devised by international bankers – i.e the infamous Dawes Plan. As mentioned, these “shock therapy” burdens devastated Germany after the First World War and led directly to the rise of Adolph Hitler. Today, these same policies are plunging the rest of the world into crisis by increasing indebtedness and servitude to international bankers.

    In Europe, the objective of the BIS is to remove whatever control any national central banks retain and move toward a private, European, central bank with the BIS as supranational power above and beyond any control by the people.

    As for the World Bank and International Monetary fund, after the chaos of World War II, the WB and IMF were formed in 1945 at the Bretton Woods conference. Capitalized with currency and gold from developed nations they provided credit for post-war reconstruction. Early borrowers were the devastated nations of Europe as reconstruction took priority over new development, until the late 1950’s when lending to lesser-developed countries proceeded in the wake of de-colonization.

    This conference gave birth to The World Bank, The International Monetary Fund and the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs (GATT). In effect, the Bretton Woods did for the world what the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 did for the United States. It provided a framework for the International Bankers to place the World into economic bondage through debt and set up the IMF to force austerity measures – in order to service debt and restructure economies, societies, and cultures according to the Banker’s specification. The hardships generated as a result have been legion.

    Another primary reason for Bretton Woods was to stabilize currency values and prevent competitive devaluations from ruining economies and rewarding speculators – something now under way big time due to our lack of tariff freedom and absence of compensating tariffs – which would obviate having to ruin the value of one’s own currency “in order to compete.”

    Originally, the IMF was to be a currency stabilization fund, enabling governments to intervene to maintain currency values by protecting them from speculators and “market forces.” After wreckage and war emerged from the Dawes Plan and Great Depression, Bretton Woods was then ostensibly intended to limit the influence which private, unelected, bankers exerted in international finance.

    Several decades later, President Nixon removed the dollar from a gold peg in 1971, and Bretton Woods, in effect, ended. As a result, currencies could then fluctuate freely and be driven by the whims of speculators, allowing destruction of stable economies by speculators in a “casino” environment.

    Given their structure, the IMF and World Bank function as instruments of a global financial oligarchy – i.e., one demanding private central banks and power to implement shock therapies serving bank interests by destroying the wealth, freedom, economic diversity and independence of people everywhere.

    In practice, the World Bank, IMF, and BIS impose conditions determined by private capital – i.e., the unelected. While giving lip service to “public” objectives, a capital-controlled World Bank-IMF continues to prop up despotic regimes while undermining democracy and domestic freedom and economy. As a result, democratic trade processes are denied and “free market” enclosures, privatizations, foreign-debt, and import-export regimes enriching multinationals are imposed. Working together, WB-IMF-BIS policies and GATT remove decision-making powers from the people and give capital a veto power in international, unelected, tribunals and private central banks removed from the people’s influence.

    With World Bank loans come debt burdens and explicit conditions on capital use – which translate into implicit ones on allowable forms of politics, culture, and economy. This means western-style cultural domination. Former Treasury Secretary Lawrence H. Summers revealed the intent when he stated “countries that do the right things will be rewarded with rapid capital inflows. Those that do things wrong are punished.” Given the IMF’s makeup, any democratic freedom and wage-labor power is seen as “wrong.” Another former Treasury Secretary, Robert Rubin, stated the real goal: “ending the Link between human rights and trade is a very good objective to shoot for.” Very Good?

    Capital’s agenda here means we must sever economy from morality and from any assessment of human rights, democratic prerogative, and environmental condition. Given this amoral “engagement” ethic, with the people’s own money and loan guarantees banking elites proceed to reward the “efficient” and punish more democratic, wage-labor oriented, systems as well as ecologically conservative and communal styles of life and economy.

    A “World Bank” controlled by capital enriches mega-contractors, multinationals, and dictators as long as they do the “right” thing. What “doing the right thing” means is capitalist code for destroying labor unions, persecuting dissenters, defeating native land rights, perfecting enclosure, and crushing institutions threatening to capital’s hegemony. Not only is the “right” thing determined by the few but those working to preserve natural liberty, sovereignty, cooperative organization, and seeking labor and land reforms are often abused, imprisoned, or exterminated for their resistance to capital’s forced interdependency.

    Once nations have significant foreign debt burdens (often undertaken by desperate rulers without the approval of the people) they find they have little alternative or freedom of dissent without incurring the wrath of institutions able to dictate the terms of “their” culture, economy, and trade. This neo-slavery emerges as a result of our lack of public ownership of central banks and a media now dominated by capital – see http://www.editorfreedom.com.

    Aide from the debilitating and disastrous mountain of public and private, interest-bearing, debt since the advent of the Fed our currency has shrunk in value by over 4% per year. As a result of imprudent, profit-seeking, management of “our” currency by bankers and “deficits don’t matter” politicians alike, the value of the dollar has fallen over 95% in value since the inception of the Fed, and some 30% in the past year or so against other major currencies – the latter decline due largely to the lack of compensating tariff arrangements appropriate for a still very disparate and undemocratic world, and a deliberate, beggar-thy-neighbor, policy of currency ruin.

    With the removal of tariff freedom and rational trade policies due to GATT-NAFTA (another ruling class coup similar to the Fed scheme) monetary officials are now purposely driving down the value of our dollar today to try to eliminate horrendous trade imbalances. By attempting to substitute monetary policy for trade policy, the value of all our assets and savings, national and personal, are driven downward. In effect, currency ruin is the greatest of tariffs, and everything we must now import to live (because “free trade” has nearly wiped out domestic producers) costs more… and then more again due to deliberate currency decline. So much for the benefits of forced free trade, for “universal gain” trade ideology and monetary stability.

    – THE WEB OF DEBT –

    “Once the government reclaims the power to create money from the banks, it will no longer need to sell its bonds to investors. It will not even need to levy income taxes… government-issued money would actually be less inflationary than the system we have now; and it is precisely because power and money corrupt that money creation needs to be done by a public body, exercised in full view and with full accountability… what has allowed government to be corrupted today is that it is actually run by the money cartel. Big business holds all the cards, because its affiliated banks have monopolized the business of issuing and lending the national money supply, a function the Constitution delegated solely to Congress.”

    Ellen Brown, Web Of Debt

    All the books presented here are essential reading to understand our monetary history, our corrupt banking system, and our debt-money prison. Ellen Brown’s Web Of Debt is one I especially recommend to everyone to better understand the current condition of “our” economic and banking system and the effective remedies so eloquently outlined in this book.

    As she states, “Our money system is not what we have been led to believe. The creation of money has been “privatized,” or taken over by a private money cartel. Except for coins, all of our money is now created as loans advanced by private banking institutions — including the private Federal Reserve. Banks create the principal but not the interest to service their loans. To find the interest, new loans must continually be taken out, expanding the money supply, inflating prices – and robbing you of the value of your money.

    Not only is virtually the entire money supply created privately by banks, but a mere handful of very big banks is responsible for a massive investment scheme known as “derivatives,” which now tallies in at hundreds of trillions of dollars. The banking system has been contrived so that these big banks always get bailed out by the taxpayers from their risky ventures, but the scheme has reached its mathematical limits.

    There isn’t enough money in the entire global economy to bail out the banks from a massive derivatives default today. When the investors realize that the “insurance” against catastrophe that they have purchased in the form of derivatives is worthless, they are liable to jump ship and bring the whole shaky edifice crashing down… Just the interest on the U.S. government’s burgeoning $9 trillion debt will soon be more than the taxpayers can afford to pay. When that happens, the economy will collapse unless the monetary system is radically overhauled.”

    – OUT OF DEBT, OUT OF DANGER –

    “Money creation is the greatest economic power known to man. That power ought always to be exercised in the interest of all the people, never for the sake of the private gain of a privileged few- The banks – commercial banks and the Federal Reserve – create all the money of this nation, and the nation and its people at interest on every dollar of that newly created money. This means that private banks exercise un-Constitutionally, immorally, and ridiculously the power to tax the people. For every newly created dollar dilutes to some extent the value of every other dollar already in circulation… A Federal Reserve system brought under control by the elected officials of the United States could be run in the public interest instead of in that of the money-lending community as is now the case.”

    “Much has been made of the fact that these so-called “Lincoln Greenbacks” depreciated in the course of time, relative to gold. But these notes bore upon their face this legend: “this note is a legal tender at its face value for all debts, public and private, except duties on imports and interest on the public debt.” Thus the government itself had to go to bankers to buy from them gold with which to pay the interest on the national debt. And importers had to go to the same bankers to secure money – other than greenbacks – with which to pay their import duties. The bankers interest in bringing about the depreciation of this government money will be obvious to any fair-minded person. In any case, due to the exception clause appearing on these “greenbacks” all the bankers had to do was to demand from the government and from the importers more than a dollar in greenbacks before they gave a gold dollar in exchange.”

    “We are sometimes ready to congratulate ourselves that our age has outgrown all superstitions. But the historian of the future will, I fancy, reckon… the strange superstition that, whenever money is invented, a percentage must be paid forever afterward as a propitiation to a banker. It is on that superstition that the whole empire of Mammon is built.”

    “When government bonds are “sold” to a bank what really happens is that the government gives the private bank an interest-bearing obligation of all the people of the Nation. The bank, it is true, credits the government with a brand new demand deposit, which it writes up on its books for the sole purpose of buying the bond. But this bankers’ promise to pay (which is what a demand deposit is today) has nothing in the world behind it except the bonds themselves. And the bonds in turn, everyone knows, derive their value entirely from the fact that the credit of the Government and the industry of the people are security and its repayment is guaranteed by the taxing power of the government. The sovereign government has, in such a case, “borrowed” from a private profit-making agency nothing in the world except the credit of the nation itself which the government had in the first place… Yet this and future generations must pay the banks interest on the bonds they have “bought” by this strange procedure…. Now why on earth would our government do such a thing?… It should be the nation itself that creates this money or credit and derives the economic advantage from so doing.”

    Rep. Jerry Voorhis, Out Of Debt, Out Of Danger

    – NO MORE NATIONAL DEBT –

    “Sovereign nations do not have to borrow their money into existence., yet the United States has been deceived into doing this since 1913. The compounding interest on this debt is now growing exponentially, and cannot be sustained. Unfortunately, we cannot just pay down the national debt. All our money – except for coins – is created out of debt. Under this debt money system, to reduce the debt is to reduce the national money. The only solution is to restructure our monetary system to forbid government borrowing. Fortunately, this is nothing new. The U.S. and other nations have done it before.”

    “The problem with the economy of every nation on earth has the same root – national debt – debt that is totally unnecessary… All nations can get out of debt and not incur any more debt. Any nation that did this would immediately stabilize their economic situation – that is, incur neither significant inflation, nor deflation – by design. Human societies run best on stability – a stable economic platform – one that can be predicted in the long term. Once the money power is taken away from the bi

    • The cause of the Revolution was that London, King DH, had outlawed the use of the colonies’ money, paper; the outlawed transactions had to be paid in gold; anyone with an eye and 2 cents could see that soon, the colonies would have NO MONEY! THE BANKSTERS were behind the law to pay only in gold! The City of London, no less! Great men, such as John Hancock had a glass ceiling; no matter how rich he was, he was an American, about the same as calling him a “nigger.” The British looked down on their American brothers with utter contempt, hatred. They were “rabble” to them. They were second glass citizens, or worse, third class to their British brothers! By the constitution, which is not worth the paper it’s written, the republican government could print its own money, and, as an example, Lincoln did just that! Greenbacks! All that the people need to do is elect a republican government back into power, and overthrow this private municipal corporation, the United States, Inc., that has ONLY authority over the 10 square miles and its territories granted to it by the states. The states have all the power to do exactly as the tenth amendment grants it. They can make another republican government by a constitutional convention by sending delegates. But there’s a huge problem! The States of ….. are now private municipal chartered corporations! The people would have to elect representatives to state constitutional conventions to form republican forms of state government! The people, in the original constitution, are guaranteed a republican form of state government. Let’s see if you can see the difference in what is pretending to be government by just the titles: State of Louisiana, Inc. vs. Louisiana Republic. State of Texas, Inc., a chartered private municipal corporation vs. Texas Republic. State of New York, Inc., vs New York Republic. In 1971, all the state governors at the time met with the International Monetary Fund Director and they all colluded to form State of …. private municipal corporations and developed a code, a way to fool the people that they had “law” when in fact it was merely a system of commerce. The Uniform Commercial Code. Every detail of a private municipal corporation is a transaction! It’s all conducting business and you’re only subservient to it if you allow it! Notice the difference in the ens legis, artificial entity, that only a corporation can deal with: JOHN FRANCIS DOE, notice the all caps, vs John Franics Doe. Were you ever taught to write your name in all caps? JOHN FRANCIS DOE is a fiction! It’s a corporate body of one! When someone calls out that fiction, and a flesh and blood man, says, “Here I am,! you, the flesh and blood man just came under the authority of whomever called out your private property, your name! You’ve assented to their authority by accepting responsibility, as in court, when the name is called out, and you’ve responded as if you are the fiction, the ens legis, the artificial entity/being, JOHN FRANCIS DOE. You’ve hung yourself by your tongue! If they’ve charged your fiction with a misdemeanor, you’ve made yourself liable for it by saying, “Here I am.” If you’ve been charged with murder, to your account, your fiction, JOHN FRANCIS DOES, and when you’ve heard your private property, your name, fiction, called out, and you respond, “Here I am,” you’re liable to be put to death. No matter what you do, never say, “Here I am.” You should say, under their system of commerce, “That’s my personal private property and it is common law copyrighted, figure that out, and you must have my written permission, in red ink, to use my private, common law copyrighted property. There is a large fee associated with its use in any way, shape, form or fashion.” NEVER assent to being “charged to your account, the private fiction, JOHN FRANCIS DOE! Tell whomever that you have no authority over my private personal common law copyrighted property! Figure out the process! It’s so simple, anyone can do it! You MUST determine who you really are in this world of commerce! If you are unaware of how their system works, they can kill you and your family and make all of you disappear due to YOUR ASSENT and YOUR CONSENT! Remember, you are hung by your tongue!

  15. Leon Trotsky, the founder and first leader of the Red Army, and
    V.I. Lenin, the first Premier of the newly formed Soviet Union,
    were the two main figures behind the Bolshevik Revolution.

    And who was behind them?

    Wall Street.

    In this classic interview, Anthony Sutton makes clear the point
    that the text books on history have been sanitized to hide Wall
    Streets fingerprints in the creation of our old cold war enemy, the
    Soviet Union.

    He also makes it clear that they knew what they were doing…

    Video:

    http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/6321.html

    • Very detailed history, but unfortunately history is hard to prove. Courts of law have difficult times proving facts only 5 years old. The cry of the 1% “Where is your proof?”

      I am sure the really wealthy families who DO HAVE REAL POLITICAL INFLUENCE to cause such conspiracy are unknown to even the best financial journalists.

      Taxing gold and REAL property i.e. land, monopoly sized factories, creation of a new currency and distribution to the 99% via Debit Cards which then has a right to purchase the equity shares freely traded Shares in Land Property Trusts, Companies etc, so that the 99% can become stakeholders in wealth, is the only way to right the monopoly the 1% have over the 99%

      I am not talking about Communism, I am talking about redistributive Capitalism. Free enterprise, with ownership divided among the people.

      Re-write the above in a Children’s Cartoon and get back to me cvpages dot buddy at gmail.com

  16. It’s really a nice and useful piece of info. I am satisfied that you simply shared this helpful information with us. Please keep us up to date like this. Thank you for sharing.

  17. hey there and thank you for your info – I have certainly picked up anything new from right here.

    I did however expertise a few technical points using this website, since I experienced to
    reload the website lots of times previous to I could get it to load
    properly. I had been wondering if your web host is OK?

    Not that I’m complaining, but sluggish loading instances times will
    very frequently affect your placement in google and can damage your
    high-quality score if advertising and marketing with Adwords.

    Well I am adding this RSS to my e-mail and can look out for much
    more of your respective exciting content. Make sure you update this again very
    soon.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s