portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reporting united states

9.11 investigation | save the biscuit

History of Money and Private Central Bank Ownership by Freemason/Zionists Mafia

Henry Ford (founder of the Ford Motor Company in 1903) stated: "It is well that the people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." (see The Foundation Economy by Fred Eggerton).

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

Henry Ford (founder of the Ford Motor Company in 1903) stated: "It is well that the people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." (see The Foundation Economy by Fred Eggerton).

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

The sections of this expose are:
2. History of the Private Dynasties Ownership of Federal Reserve System, Bank of England, HSBC Bank, etc. (Rothschild, Rockeffler, Warburg, etc.)
3. President John F. Kennedy's Executive Order Abolishing the Privately Owned Federal Reserve System issued just before his assassination and later ignored.
4. Congressman James Traficant's speech to Congress 1993 on The Fraud of the Federal Reserve.
5. More Historical Info on the Banking Fraud
6. References

Everyone has the right ... to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. — Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 19.

As with the Scottish constitution, the US constitution starts with "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this constitution for the United States of America."

Edmund Burke 1729-1797 stated: "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing." This is exactly what has happened and brought us to the sad situation today.

"Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind. And when the drums of war reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has 'closed', the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all their rights unto the leader and gladly so. How do I know? For this is what I have done. AND I AM CAESAR." --Julius Caesar

"Why of course the people don't want war ... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is (a democracy, or) a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship ...Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger."- Hermann Goering, at the Nuremberg Trials after World War II.


"Modern Banking" was actually created over 4,000 years ago in the ancient Babylonic days of slavery for the masses. [Of course, without the electronic information.] Let's Go FORWARD and understand how the power to create money interest-free was usurped from the people by the "money changers" in the past and how now the Private Central Bankers are in full control of the people (they use names like Federal Reserve or Bank of England to hide the fact that these banks are really privately owned).

Tell someone you are going to a convention of accountants and you might get a few yawns, yet money and how it works and controls the masses is probably one of the most interesting things on earth.

It is fascinating and almost magical how money appeared on our planet. Unlike most developments we enjoy, which can be traced back to a source, civilisation or inventor, money appeared in places then unconnected all over the world in a remarkably similar way.

Consider the American Indians using Wampum, West Africans trading in decorative metallic objects called Manillas and the Fijians economy based on whales teeth, some of which are still legal tender; add to that shells, amber, ivory, decorative feathers, cattle including oxen & pigs, a large number of stones including jade and quartz which have all been used for trade across the world, and we get a taste of the variety of accepted currency.

There is something charming and childlike imagining primitive societies, our ancestors, using all these colourful forms of money. As long as everyone concerned can agree on a value, this is a sensible thing for a community to do.

After all, the person who has what you need might not need what you have to trade. Money solves that problem neatly. Real value with each exchange, and everyone gaining from the convenience. The idea is really inspired which might explain why so many diverse minds came up with it.

Sadly, perhaps in the depth of the forest within earshot of people naturally involved in fair trade, a leech of an idea was being hatched which would prey on every individual needing trade to survive.

This idea and the enslaving process which it spawned was called usury; and despite being condemned worldwide by great thinkers, major religious institutions, and many social reformers on moral, ethical, spiritual and legal grounds, the process continues world wide, today better known as the charging of interest.

Just why usury is a negative force can best be explained using an analogy imagining our primitive tribe trading among themselves in an isolated community. As they trade using their accepted beads or stones, with each transaction both the buyer and seller benefit.

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

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

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

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

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

In our exploration of the History of Money we will be exposing how seemingly respectable institutions that are bleeding the world dry have been set up, and how they maintain their air of respectability through clever use of legislation.

We will also be looking at how the production of currency, meant to provide a way for us all to share, has been turned into a means to make huge profits for a given few at the expense of the rest of us.

History will disclose how more positive economic plans were proven to work too well, and how they were forced to stop by the institutions their success threatened, sending prospering communities into ruin.

Here we will look at what we inherited and in XAT3 (link at end of document) we will explore how we could change it to make it fairer for all.

Because money affects almost every aspect of our lives, how it works is something we should all be interested in understanding further, however we are mostly discouraged from doing this by experts, who assure us the topic is much too complicated for most of us to grasp.

Our accepting this leaves the whole subject largely unexplored, and allows those who do know to carry on unquestioned. As a result it is estimated that only one person in a thousand actually understands how money is created.

Reading this will not make you a financial wizard, but it will make you a 'one in a thousand' and hopefully in time help to raise the odds in favour of a better world.

"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 its issuance."
President James Madison

Money, money, money, it's always just been there, right? Wrong.

Obviously it's issued by the government to make it easy for us to exchange things. Wrong again!

Truth is most people don't realise that the issuing of money is essentially a private business, and that the privilege of issuing money has been a major bone of contention throughout history.

Wars have been fought and depressions have been caused in the battle over who issues the money; however the majority of us are not aware of this, and this is largely due to the fact that the winning side became and increasingly continues to be a vital and respected member of our global society, having an influence over large aspects of our lives including our education, our media and our governments.

While we might feel powerless in trying to stop the manipulation of money for private profit at our expense, it is easy to forget that we collectively give money it's value. We have been taught to believe printed pieces of paper have special value, and because we know others believe this too, we are willing to work all our lives to get what we are convinced others will want.

An honest look at history will show us how our innocent trust has been misused.

Let's start our exploration of money with:

JESUS FLIPS (many coins) 33 A.D.

Jesus was so upset by the sight of the money changers in the temple, he waded in and started to tip over the tables and drive them out with a whip, this being the one and only time we ever hear of him using force during his entire ministry.

So what caused the ultimate pacifist to become so aggressive?

For a long time the Jews had been called upon to pay their temple tax with a special coin called the half shekle. It was a measured half ounce of pure silver with no image of a pagan emperor on it.

It was to them the only coin acceptable to God.

But because there was only a limited number of these coins in circulation, the money changers were in a buyers market and like with anything else in short supply, they were able to raise the price to what the market would bare.

They made huge profits with their monopoly on these coins and turned this time of devotion into a mockery for profit. Jesus saw this as stealing from the people and proclaimed the whole setup to be. "A den of thieves". Jesus' exposing of the money changers made him a target for them.

Once money is accepted as a form of exchange, those who produce, loan out and manipulate the quantity of money are obviously in a very strong position. They are the "Money Changers".

MEDIEVAL ENGLAND (1000 - 1100 A.D.)

Here we find goldsmith's offering to keep other people's gold and silver safe in their vaults, and in return people walking away with a receipt for what they have left there.

These paper receipts soon became popular for trade as they were less heavy to carry around than gold and silver coins.

After a while, the goldsmith's must have noticed that only a small percentage of their depositor's ever came in to demand their gold at any one time. So cleverly the goldsmith's made out some receipts for gold which didn't even exist, and then they loaned it out to earn interest.

A nod and a wink amongst themselves, they incorporated this practice into the banking system. They even gave it a name to make it seem more acceptable, christening the practice 'Fractional Reserve Banking' which translates to mean, lending out many times more money than you have assets on deposit.

Today banks are allowed to loan out at least ten times the amount they actually are holding, so while you wonder how they get rich charging you 11% interest, it's not 11% a year they make on that amount but actually 110%.

THE TALLY STICKS (1100 - 1854)

King Henry the First produced sticks of polished wood, with notches cut along one edge to signify the denominations. The stick was then split full length so each piece still had a record of the notches.

The King kept one half for proof against counterfeiting, and then spent the other half into the market place where it would continue to circulate as money.

Because only Tally Sticks were accepted by Henry for payment of taxes, there was a built in demand for them, which gave people confidence to accept these as money.

He could have used anything really, so long as the people agreed it had value, and his willingness to accept these sticks as legal tender made it easy for the people to agree. Money is only as valuable as peoples faith in it, and without that faith even today's money is just paper.

The tally stick system worked really well for 726 years. It was the most successful form of currency in recent history and the British Empire was actually built under the Tally Stick system, but how is it that most of us are not aware of its existence?

Perhaps the fact that in 1694 the Bank of England at it's formation attacked the Tally Stick System gives us a clue as to why most of us have never heard of them. They realised it was money outside the power of the money changers, (the very thing King Henry had intended).

What better way to eliminate the vital faith people had in this rival currency than to pretend it simply never existed and not discuss it. That seems to be what happened when the first shareholder's in the Bank of England bought their original shares with notched pieces of wood and retired the system. You heard correctly, they bought shares. The Bank of England is a privately owned bank which was actually set up by investors buying shares.

These investors, who's names were kept secret, were meant to invest one and a quarter million pounds, but only three quarters of a million was received when it was chartered in 1694.

It then began to lend out many times more than it had in reserve, collecting interest on the lot.

This is not something you could just impose on people without preparation. The money changers needed to created the climate to make the formation of this private concern seem acceptable.

Here's how they did it.

With King Henry VIII relaxing the Usury Laws in the 1500's, the money changers flooded the market with their gold and silver coins becoming richer by the minute.

The English Revolution of 1642 was financed by the money changers backing Oliver Cromwell's successful attempt to purge the parliment and kill King Charles. What followed was 50 years of costly wars. Costly to those fighting them and profitable to those financing them.

So profitable that it allowed the money changers to take over a square mile of property still known as the City of London, which remains one of the three main financial centres in the world today.

The 50 years of war left England in financial ruin. The government officials went begging for loans from guess who, and the deal proposed resulted in a government sanctioned, privately owned bank which could produce money from nothing, essentially legally counterfeiting a national currency for private gain.

This privately owned bank was and still is known as The Bank of England.

Now the politicians had a source from which to borrow all the money they wanted to borrow, and the debt created was secured against public taxes.

You would think someone would have seen through this, and realised they could produce their own money and owe no interest, but instead the Bank of England has been used as a model and now nearly every nation has a Central Bank which is privately controlled.

These central banks have the power to take over a nations economy and become that nations real governing force. What we have here is a scam of mammoth proportions covering what is actually a hidden tax, being collected by private concerns.

The country sells bonds to the bank in return for money it cannot raise in taxes. The bonds are paid for by money produced from thin air. The government pays interest on the money it borrowed by borrowing more money in the same way. There is no way this debt can ever be paid, it has and will continue to increase.

If the government did find a way to pay off the debt, the result would be that there would be no bonds to back the currency, so to pay the debt would be to kill the currency.

With it's formation the Bank of England soon flooded Britain with money. With no quality control and no insistence on value for money, prices doubled with money being thrown in every direction.

One company was even offering to drain the Red Sea to find Egyptian gold lost when the sea closed in on their pursuit of Moses.

By1698 the national debt expanded from £1,250,000 to £16,000,000 and up went the taxes the debt was secured on.

As hard as it might be to believe, in times of economic upheaval, wealth is rarely destroyed and instead is often only transferred. And who benefits the most when money is scarce? You may have guessed. It's those controlling what everyone else wants, the money changer's.

When the majority of people are suffering through economic depression, you can be sure that a minority of people are continuing to get rich.

Even today the Bank of England expresses it's determination to prevent the ups and downs of booms and depressions, yet there have been nothing but ups and downs since it's formation with the British pound rarely being stable.

One thing however has been stable and that is the growing fortune of:


A goldsmith named Amshall Moses Bower opened a counting house in Frankfurt Germany in 1743. He placed a Roman eagle on a red shield over the door prompting people to call his shop the Red Shield Firm pronounced in German as "Rothschild".

His son later changed his name to Rothschild when he inherited the business. Loaning money to individuals was all well and good but he soon found it much more profitable loaning money to governments and Kings. It always involved much bigger amounts, always secured from public taxes.

Once he got the hang of things he set his sights on the world by training his five sons in the art of money creation, before sending them out to the major financial centres of the world to create and dominate the central banking systems.

J.P. Morgan was thought by many to be the richest man in the world during the second world war, but upon his death it was discovered he was merely a lieutenant within the Rothschild empire owning only 19% of the J.P. Morgan Companies.

"There is but one power in Europe and that is Rothschild."
19th century French commentator

We will explore a little more about the richest family a little later, after we've had a look at:


By the mid 1700's Britain was at its height of power, but was also heavily in debt.

Since the creation of the Bank of England, they had suffered four costly wars and the total debt now stood at £140,000,000, (which in those days was a lot of money).

In order to make their interest payments to the bank, the British government set about a programme to try to raise revenues from their American colonies, largely through an extensive program of taxation.

There was a shortage of material for minting coins in the colonies, so they began to print their own paper money, which they called Colonial Script. This provided a very successful means of exchange and also gave the colonies a sense of identity. Colonial Script was money provided to help the exchange of goods. It was debt free paper money not backed by gold or silver.

The Bank of England asked Benjamin Franklin how he would account for the new found prosperity in the colonies. Franklin replied.

"That is simple. In the colonies we issue our own money. It is called Colonial Script. 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 to no one."
Benjamin Franklin

America had learned that the people's confidence in the currency was all they needed, and they could be free of borrowing debts. That would mean being free of the Bank of England.

In Response the world's most powerful independent bank used it's influence on the British Parliment to press for the passing of the Currency Act of 1764.

This act made it illegal for the colonies to print their own money, and forced them to pay all future taxes to Britain in silver or gold.

Here is what Franklin said after that.

"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 unemployed."
Benjamin Franklin

"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 inability of the colonists to get power to issue their own money permanently out of the hands of George III and the international bankers was the PRIME reason for the Revolutionary War." Benjamin Franklin's autobiography

By the time the war began on 19th April 1775 much of the gold and silver had been taken by British taxation. They were left with no other choice but to print money to finance the war.

What is interesting here is that Colonial Script was actually working so well, it became a threat to the established economic system of the time.

The idea of issuing money as Franklin put it "in proper proportion to the demands of trade and industry" and not charging any interest, was not causing any problems or inflation. This unfortunately was alien to the Bank of England which only issued money for the sake of making a profit for it's shareholder's.


If you can't beat them, join them, might well have been his argument when arms dealer, Robert Morris suggested he be allowed to set up a Bank of England style central bank in the USA in 1781.

Desperate for money, the $400,000 he proposed to deposit, to allow him to loan out many times that through fractional reserve banking, must have looked really attractive to the impoverished American Government.

Already spending the money they would be loaned, no one made a fuss when Robert Morris couldn't raise the deposit, and instead suggested he might use some gold, which had been loaned to America from France.

Once in, he simply used fractional reserve banking, and with the banks growing fortune he loaned to himself, and his friends the money to buy up all the remaining shares. The bank then began to loan out money multiplied by this new amount to eager politicians, who were probably too drunk with the new 'power cash' to notice or care how it was done.

The scam lasted five years until in 1785, with the value of American money dropping like a lead balloon. The banks charter did not get renewed.

The shareholder's walking off with the interest did not go unnoticed by the governor.

"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."
Governor Morris


It worked once, it will work again. It's been six years. There are a lot of new hungry politicians. Let's give it a try. And so there it was, in 1791, the First Bank of the United States (BUS). Not only deceptively named to sound official, but also to take attention away from the real first bank which had been shut down.

It's initials however gave a clear indication that Americans were once again being taken for a ride. And true to it's British model, the name of the investors was never revealed.

Having gotten away with it a second time, some of them probably wished Amshall Rothschild had picked a different time to make his pronouncement from his private central bank in Frankfurt.

"Let me issue and control a nations money and I care not who writes the laws."
Amshall Rothschild

Not to worry, no one was listening, the American government borrowed 8.2 million dollars from the bank in the first 5 years and prices rose by 72%. This time round the money changer's had learned their lesson they had guaranteed a twenty year charter.

The president, who could see an ever increasing debt, with no chance of ever paying back, had this to say.

"I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our Constitution - taking from the federal government their power of borrowing."
Thomas Jefferson

While the independent press, who had not been bought off yet, called the scam "a great swindle, a vulture, a viper, and a cobra."

As with the real first bank, the government had been the only depositor to put up any real money, with the remainder being raised from loans the investors made to each other, using the magic of fractional reserve banking. When time came for renewal of the charter, the bankers were warning of bad times ahead if they didn't get what they wanted. The charter was not renewed.

Five month later Britain had attacked America and started the war of 1812.

Meanwhile a short time earlier, an independent Rothschild business, the Bank of France, was being looked upon with suspicion by none other than:

NAPOLEON (1803 - 1825)

He didn't trust the bank saying:

"The hand that gives is above the hand that takes. Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency: their sole object is gain."
Napoleon Bonaparte

For both sides of a war to be loaned money from the same privately owned Central Bank is not unusual. Nothing generates debt like war. A Nation will borrow any amount to win. So naturally if the loser is kept going to the last straw in a vain hope of winning, then the more resources will be used up by the winning side before their victory is obtained more resources used, more loans taken out, more money made by the bankers; and even more amazing, the loans are usually given on condition that the victor pays the debts left by the loser.

In 1803, instead of borrowing from the bank, Napoleon sold territory west of the Mississippi to the 3rd President of the United States, Thomas Jefferson for 3 million dollars in gold; a deal known as the Louisiana Purchase.

Three million dollars richer, Napoleon quickly gathered together an army and set about conquering much of Europe.

Each place he went to, Napoleon found his opposition being financed by the Bank of England, making huge profits as Prussia, Austria and finally Russia all went heavily into debt trying to stop him.

Four years later, with the main French army in Russia, Nathan Rothschild took charge of a bold plan to smuggle a shipment of gold through France to finance an attack by the Duke of Wellington from Spain.

Wellington's attack from the south and other defeats eventually forced Napoleon to abdicate. He was exiled to Elba, an Island off the coast of Italy. However in 1815 he escaped from exile and returned to Paris. The French soldiers sent out to capture him instead, rallied round their old leader.

By March of that year Napoleon had equipped an army with the help of borrowed money from the Eubard Banking House of Paris.

With 74,000 French troops led by Napoleon, sizing up to meet 67,000 British and other European Troops 200 miles NE of Paris on June 18th 1815, it was a difficult one to call. Back in London, the real potential winner, Nathan Rothschild, was poised to strike in a bold plan to take control of the British stock market, the bond market, and possibly even the Bank of England.

Nathan, knowing that information is power, stationed his trusted agent named Rothworth near the battle field.

As soon as the battle was over Rothworth quickly returned to London, delivering the news to Rothschild 24 hours ahead of Wellington's courier.

A victory by Napoleon would have devastated Britain's financial system. Nathan stationed himself in his usual place next to an ancient pillar in the stock market.

This powerful man was not without observers as he hung his head, and began openly to sell huge numbers of British Government Bonds.

Reading this to mean that Napoleon must have won, everyone started to sell their British Bonds as well.

The bottom fell out of the market until you could hardly give them away. Meanwhile Rothschild began to secretly buy up all the hugely devalued bonds at a fraction of what they were worth a few hours before.

In this way Nathan Rothschild captured more in one afternoon than the combined forces of Napoleon and Wellington had captured in their entire lifetime.

The 19th century became known as the age of the Rothschild's when it was estimated they controlled half of the world's wealth.

While their wealth continues to increase today, they have managed to blend into the background, giving an impression that their power has waned.

They only apply the Rothschild name to a small fraction of the companies they actually control.

Some authors claim that the Rothschild's had not only taken over the Bank of England but they had also in 1816 backed a new privately owned Central Bank in America called The Second Bank of The United States, causing huge problems to the American president.

ANDREW JACKSON (1828 - 1836)

When the American congress voted to renew the charter of The Second Bank of The United States, Jackson responded by using his veto to prevent the renewal bill from passing. His response gives us an interesting insight.

"It is not our own citizens only who are to receive the bounty of our government. More than eight millions of the stock of this bank are held by foreigners... is there no danger to our 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 its favour 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 a wide and unnecessary departure from these just principles." Andrew Jackson

In 1832 Jackson ordered the withdrawal of government deposits from the Second bank and instead had them put into safe banks.

The Second Banks head, Nicholas Biddle was quite candid about the power and intention of the bank when he openly threatened to cause a depression if the bank was not re-chartered, we quote.

"Nothing but widespread suffering will produce any effect on Congress... Our only safety is in 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 the re-charter of the bank."
Nicholas Biddle

By calling in existing loans and refusing to issue new loans he did cause a massive depression, but in 1836 when the charter ran out, the Second Bank ceased to function. When asked what he felt was the greatest achievement of his career Andrew Jackson replied without hesitation "I killed the bank!" However we will see this was not the end of private financial influence passing itself off as official when we look at.


With the Central Bank killed off, fractional reserve banking moved like a virus through numerous state chartered banks instead causing the instability this form of economics thrives on.

When people lose their homes someone else wins them for a fraction of their worth. Depression is good news to the lender; but war causes even more debt and dependency than anything else, so if the money changers couldn't have their Central Bank with a license to print money, a war it would have to be.

We can see from this quote of the then chancellor of Germany that slavery was not the only cause for the American Civil War.

"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 US, 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." Otto von Bismark chancellor of Germany

On the 12th of April 1861 this economic war began.

Predictably Lincoln, needing money to finance his war effort, went with his secretary of the treasury to New York to apply for the necessary loans. The money changers wishing the Union to fail offered loans at 24% to 36%. Lincoln declined the offer.

An old friend of Lincoln's, Colonel Dick Taylor of Chicago was put in charge of solving the problem of how to finance the war.

His solution is recorded as this.

"Just get Congress to pass a bill authorising the printing of full legal tender treasury notes... and pay your soldiers with them and go ahead and win your war with them also." Colonel Dick Taylor

When Lincoln asked if the people of America would accept the notes 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." Colonel Dick Taylor

Lincoln agreed to try this solution and printed 450 million dollars worth of the new bills using green ink on the back to distinguish them from other notes.

"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 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." Abraham Lincoln

From this we see that the solution worked so well Lincoln was seriously considering adopting this emergency measure as a permanent policy.

This would have been great for everyone except the money changers who quickly realised how dangerous this policy would be for them. They wasted no time in expressing their view in the London Times. Oddly enough, while the article seems to have been designed to discourage this creative financial policy, in it's put down we're clearly able to see the policies goodness.

"If this mischievous financial policy, which has its origin in North America, shall become endurated down to a fixture, then that Government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off debts and be without debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its commerce. It will become prosperous without precedent in the history of the world. The brains, and wealth of all countries will go to North America. That country must be destroyed or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe." Times of London

From this extract its plan to see that it is the advantage provided by the adopting of this policy which poses a threat to those not using it.

1863, nearly there, Lincoln needed just a bit more money to win the war, and seeing him in this vulnerable state, and knowing that the president could not get the congressional authority to issue more greenbacks, the money changers proposed the passing of the National Bank Act. The act went through.

From this point on the entire US money supply would be created out of debt by bankers buying US government bonds and issuing them from reserves for bank notes.

The greenbacks continued to be in circulation until 1994, their numbers were not increased but in fact decreased.

"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." John Kenneth Galbrath

The American economy has been based on government debt since 1864 and it is locked into this system. Talk of paying off the debt without first reforming the banking system is just talk and a complete impossibility.

That same year Lincoln had a pleasant surprise. Turns out the Tsar of Russia, Alexander II, was well aware of the money changers scam. The Tsar was refusing to allow them to set up a central bank in Russia.

If Lincoln could limit the power of the money changers and win the war, the bankers would not be able to split America and hand it back to Britain and France as planned. The Tsar knew that this handing back would come at a cost which would eventually need to be paid back by attacking Russia, it being clearly in the money changers sights.

The Tsar declared that if France or Britain gave help to the South, Russia would consider this an act of war. Britain and France would instead wait in vain to have the wealth of the colonies returned to them, and while they waited Lincoln won the civil war.

With an election coming up the next year, Lincoln himself would wait for renewed public support before reversing the National Bank Act he had been pressured into approving during the war.

Lincoln's opposition to the central banks financial control and a proposed return to the gold standard is well documented. He would certainly have killed off the national banks monopoly had he not been killed himself only 41 days after being re-elected.

The money changers were pressing for a gold standard because gold was scarce and easier to have a monopoly over.

Much of this was already waiting in their hands and each gold merchant was well aware that what they really had could be easily made to seem like much much more.

Silver would only widen the field and lower the share so they pressed for...


"Right after the Civil War there was considerable talk about reviving Lincoln's brief experiment with the Constitutional monetary system. Had not the European money-trust intervened, it would have no doubt become an established institution." W.Cleon Skouse.

Even after his death, the idea that America might print it's own debt free money set off warning bells throughout the entire European banking community.

On April 12th in 1866, the American congress passed the Contraction Act, allowing the treasury to call in and retire some of Lincoln's greenbacks. With only the banks standing to gain from this, it's not hard to work out the source of this action.

To give the American public the false impression that they would be better off under the gold standard, the money changers used the control they had to cause economic instability and panic the people.

This was fairly easy to do by calling in existing loans and refusing to issue new ones, a tried and proven method of causing depression. They would then spread the word through the media they largely controlled that the lack of a single gold standard was the cause of the hardship which ensued, while all this time using the Contraction Act to lower the amount of money in circulation.

It went from
$1.8 billion in circulation in 1866 allowing $50.46 per person,
to $1.3 billion in 1867 allowing $44.00 per person,
to $0.6 billion in 1876 making only $14.60 per person and down
to $0.4 billion only ten years later leaving only $6.67 per person
and a continually growing population.

Most people believe the economists when they tell us that recessions and depressions are part of the natural flow, but in truth the money supply is controlled by a small minority who have always done so and will continue to do so if we let them.

By 1872 the American public was beginning to feel the squeeze, so the Bank of England, scheming in the back rooms, sent Ernest Seyd, with lots of money to bribe congress into demonetising silver.

Ernest drafted the legislation himself, which came into law with the passing of the Coinage Act, effectively stopping the minting of silver that year. Here's what he said about his trip, obviously pleased with himself.

"I went to America in the winter of 1872-73, authorised to secure, if I could, the passage of a bill demonetising silver. It was in the interest 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." Ernest Seyd

Within three years, with 30% of the work force unemployed, the American people began to harken back to the days of and silver backed money the greenbacks.

The US Silver Commission was set up to study the problem and responded with telling history:

"The disaster of the Dark Ages was caused by decreasing money and falling prices... Without money, civilisation 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,million. By the end of the fifteenth century it had shrunk to less than $200,million. History records no other such disastrous transition as that from the Roman Empire to the Dark Ages..." United States Silver Commission

While they obviously could see the problems being caused by the restricted money supply, this declaration did little to help the problem, and in 1877 riots broke out all over the country. The bank's response was to do nothing except to campaign against the idea that greenbacks should be reissued.

The American Bankers Association secretary James Buel expressed the bankers attitude well in a letter to fellow members of the association. He wrote:

"It is advisable to do all in your power to sustain such prominent daily and weekly newspapers, especially the Agricultural and Religious Press, as will 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 the government 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 interest that we may control legislation." James Buel American Bankers Association

What this statement exposes is the difference in mentality between your average person and a banker. With a banker 'less really is more' and every need an opportunity to exploit.

James Garfield became President in 1881 with a firm grasp of where the problem lay.

"Whosoever controls the volume of money in any country is absolute master of all industry and commerce... And when you realise 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." James Garfield

Within weeks of releasing this statement President Garfield was assasinated.

The cry from the streets was to...

FREE SILVER (1891 - 1912)

Fleecing of the flock is the term the money changers use for the process of booms and depressions which make it possible for them to repossess property at a fraction of it's worth. In 1891 a major fleece was being planned.

"On Sept 1st, 1894, we will not renew our loans under any consideration. On Sept 1st we will demand our money. We will foreclose and become mortgagees 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

The continued gold standard made this possible.

William Jennings Bryan was the Democratic candidate for president in 1896, campaigning to bring silver back as a money standard. (free Silver)

"We will answer their demand for a gold standard by saying to them: You shall not press down upon the brow of labour this crown of thorns, you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold." William Jennings Bryan

Of course the money changers supported his opposition on the Republican side so long as he wanted the gold standard maintained. The factory bosses were somehow convinced to tell their work force that business would close down if Bryan was elected, and everyone would lose their jobs.

The Republicans won by a small margin.

Bryan tried again in 1900 and in 1908 but lost both times. He became secretary of state under Wilson in 1912 but became disenchanted and resigned in 1915 under suspicious circumstances connected with the sinking of the Lucitania which drove America into the First World War .


If you want to work out the cause of the crash of 1907, checking who benefited is where you might like to look first.

With the stock market slump causing most of the over extended banks to falter, in steps J.P. Morgan offering to save the day. People will do strange things when in a panic, and this might explain why Morgan was authorised to print $200 million from nothing, which he then used to prop things up.

Some of the troubled banks with less than 1% in reserve had no choice. It was accept this solution or go under. Even if they had worked out that their problems had been caused by the same people now offering the solution, there is not a lot they could have done about it.

J.P.Morgan was hailed a hero.

"All this trouble could be averted if we appointed a committee of six or seven men like J.P.Morgan to handle the affairs of our country." Woodrow Wilson (total idiot!)

But not everyone was fooled.

"Those not favourable to the money trust could be squeezed out of business and the people frightened into demanding changes in the banking and currency laws which the Money Trust would frame." Rep. Charkes A. Lindbergh (R-MN)

Causing booms and busts is a tried and proven method of raking in massive wealth, and what people often forget when they lose what they have, is that in the process someone else has won it.

Apart from making a small number rich at the expense of the many, in this case the instability also served the second purpose of encouraging the public to believe that they would be better off living under a Central Bank and a Gold Standard.

Desperate people have little time for logic.


In Washington the statue of Lincoln sitting in his chair is facing a building called the Federal Reserve Headquarters.

This institution would not be there if Lincoln had lived to finish his second term in office.

It is not Federal and it has doubtful reserves. The name is an open deception designed to give this private bank the appearance that it is operating in the public's interest, when in fact it is run solely to gain private profit for it's select stock holders. It came into being as the result of one of the slickest moves in financial history. Here's how.
A secret meeting was held on Jekyll Island (owned by J.P. Morgan) in Georgia (around 1910) at which the roadmap towards creating the Federal Reserve was finalized. It included the birth of a banking cartel to protect its members from competition; the strategy of how to convince Congress and the public that this cartel was an agency of the United States government, etc.. At this meeting were seven men who represented an estimated one forth of the total wealth of the entire world:
1. Nelson W. Aldrich, Republican "whip" in the Senate, Chairman of the National Monetary Commission, business associate of J.P. Morgan, father-in-law to John D. Rockefeller, Jr.;
2. Abraham Piatt Andrew, Assistant Secretary of the United States Treasury;
3. Frank A. Vanderlip, president of the National City Bank of New York, the most powerful of the banks at that time,representing William Rockefeller and the international investment banking house of Kuhn, Loeb & Company;
4. Henry P. Davison, senior partner of the J.P Morgan Company;
5. Charles D. Norton, president of J.P. Morgan's First National Bank ofNew York;
6. Benjamin Strong, head of J.P. Morgan's Bankers Trust Company;and
7. Paul M. Warburg, a partner in Kuhn, Loeb & Company, a representative of the Rothschild banking dynasty in England and France, and brother to Max Warburg who was head of the Warburg banking consortium in Germany and the Netherlands.
The Illuminati interests wanted to create a Central Bank in America. They wanted to create the privately owned Federal Reserve modeled on the privately owned Bank of England. First, they needed a bunch of banking crisis' that would push public opinion towards a Federal Reserve system. These were provided by the Illuminati, including J.P. Morgan's Knickerbocker Panic of 1907. Second, they needed a favorable U.S. president in office. Rothschild agent Colonel House provided this by getting Woodrow Wilson elected. The American people were being conditioned. To provide the 'reform of the American banking system" a congressional National Monetary Commission was created and a man related to the Rockefellers, Nelson Aldrich, was put in charge. For two years this Commission traveled around Europe hob-nobbing with the IllumInati and getting directions as to how the central bank should be set up. Then the Commission returned in 1910, and Nelson Aldrich went to a secret meeting at the Jekyll Island Hunt Club in Georgia to write the legislation for an American central bank to be run by the IllumInati. Others at the Jekyll island meeting were these Illuminati men - A. Platt Andrew, Frank Vanderiip (of a Kuhn-Loeb & Company bank), Henry Davidson (of J.P. Morgan), Charies Norton (of a Morgan bank), Paul Warburg (of Kuhn-Loeb & Company and brother-in-law of Schiff), Benjamin Strong (of another Morgan company). Most of these men were connected to Jacob Schiff or J.P. Morgan, who in turn were agents for the House of Rothschild.
The Titanic which sank in 1912 was carrying the richest men on earth. These men who went down with the Titanic were wealthy Jews who were resisting the establishment of a private centralized bank in America, particularly John Jacob Astor, who was a personal friend of Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis. Brandeis greatly resisted the establishment of the private Central Bank. Astor, Guggenheim, and Straus were three extremely wealthy Jewish men who went down with the Titanic. Astor was some say the wealthiest man in the world other than the Pope. However, he was NOT using his wealth in accord with the Rothschild Order. After his death in the Titanic, his son, John Jacob Astor IV, took over his money trust (see Eugene Sue's The Wandering Jew). John Jacob was willing to go along with being part of the privately owned central bank system.
The Federal Reserve bill was sneakily passed through congress in the winter of 1913 and President Woodrow Wilson signed the bill into law. The Illuminati, particularly the Rockefellers and Rothschilds, bad usurped the financial power of the United States. The first governor of the New York branch of the Federal Reserve was Benjamin Strong. The first governor of the FED's board of directors was Paul Warburg. Both connected to Schiff, J.P. Morgan, Jr, and the House of Rothschild. The FED has been an effective tool of the Illuminati and the Rothschilds, creating crisis such as the Great Depression (which J.P. Morgan, Jr was very involved in creating). Apparentiy (according to Congressman Louis McFadden), the Depression helped consolidate financial power over the US., putting It in the hands of the Rothschild banking alliance between J.P. Morgan's First National Bank group and Schiff's Kuhn, Loeb-run National City Bank. The Great Depression also lead to Roosevelt's New Deal.
On 23rd December 1913 the house of representatives had past the Federal Reserve Act, but it was still having difficulty getting it out of the senate. Most members of congress had gone home for the holidays, but unfortunately the senate had not adjourn sine dei (without day) so they were technically still in session. There were only three members still present. On a unanimous consent voice vote the 1913 Federal Reserve Act was passed. No objection was made, possibly because there was no one there to object.

Charles Lindbergh would have objected.

"The financial system has been turned over to... the federal reserve board. That board administers the finance system by authority of... a purely profiteering group. The system is private, conducted for the sole purpose of obtaining the greatest possible profits from the use of other peoples money." Rep Charles A, Lindbergh (R-MN)

Louis T. McFadden would have objected.

"We have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board... This evil institution has impoverished... the people of the United States... and has practically bankrupted our Government. It has done this through... the corrupt practice of the moneyed vultures who control it."
Rep. Louis T, McFadden (R-PA)

Barry Goldwater would also have objected.

"Most Americans have no real understanding of the operation of the international money lenders... The accounts of the Federal Reserve System have never been audited. It operates outside the control of Congress and... manipulates the credit of the United States." Sen. Barry Goldwater (R-AZ)

Most Americans would object if they knew.

The Federal Reserve is the largest single creditor of the United States Government, and they are also the people who decide how much the average persons car payments are going to be, what their house payments are going to be, and whether they have a job or not.

The three people who passed the Federal Reserve Act in 1913, knew exactly what they were doing when they set up this private bank, modelled on the Bank of England and the fact that THE BANK OF ENGLAND had been operating independently unopposed since 1694 must have given them a great deal of confidence indeed.


War uses up more materials more quickly than most anything else on earth. In war expensive equipment doesn't wear out slowly, it gets blown up.

(It's interesting to note that during the 119 year period from the founding of the Bank of England to Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo, England had been at war for 56 years, while the rest of the time preparing for it. In the process the money changers had been getting rich.)

So there it was, the newly formed Federal Reserve poised to produce any money the U.S. Government might need from thin air with each dollar standing to make a healthy interest.

Nine days after it's formation the Federal Reserve founders were wishing each other a Happy New Year. What good fortune might 1914 bring?

WORLD WAR I (1914-1918)

The Germans borrowed money from the German Rothschilds bank, the British from the British Rothschilds bank, and the French from the French Rothschilds.

American super banker J.P. Morgan was amongst other things also a sales agent for war materials. Six months into the war his spending of $10 million a day made him the largest consumer on the planet.

The Rockefeller's and the head of president Willson's War Industries Board, Bernard Baruch each made some 200 million dollars while families contributed their sons to the bloody front lines, but profit was not the only motive for involvement.

Russia had spoiled the money changers plan to split America in two, and remained the last major country not to have it's own central bank. Now they would pay for their stubborn independence.

Three years after the start of the war the entire Russian Royal Family was killed and Communism began.

You might find it strange to learn that the Russian Revolution was also fuelled with British money. Capitalist businessmen financing Communism?

Author Gary Allen gives his explanation:

"If one understands that socialism is not a share-the-wealth program, but is in reality a method to consolidate and control the wealth, then the seeming paradox of super-rich men promoting socialism becomes no paradox at all. Instead, it becomes logical, even the perfect tool of power-seeking megalomaniacs. Communism or more accurately, socialism, is not a movement of the downtrodden masses, but of the economic elite." Gary Allen, Author

W.Cleon Skousen wrote in his book 'The Naked Capitalist'. "Power from any source tends to create an appetite for additional power... It was almost inevitable that the super-rich would one day aspire to control not only their own wealth, but the wealth of the whole world. To achieve this, they were perfectly willing to feed the ambitions of the power-hungry political conspirators who were committed to the overthrow of all existing governments and the establishments of a central world-wide dictatorship." W.Cleon Skousen

Extreme revolutionary groups were controlled by being financed when they complied and cut off, with money sometimes being given to their opposition, when they didn't.

If you find this hard to believe, listen to what the so called dictator of the new Soviet Union had to say.

"The state does not function as we desired. The car does not obey. A man is at the wheel and seems to lead it, but the car does not drive in the desired direction. It moves as another force wishes." Vladimir Lenin

Rep. Louis T. McFadden, chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee throughout the 1920-30s explained it this way.

"The course of Russian history has, indeed, been greatly affected by the operations of international bankers... The Soviet Government has been given United States Treasury funds by the Federal Reserve Board... acting through the Chase Bank.

England has drawn money from us through the Federal Reserve Banks and has re-lent it at high rates of interest to the Soviet Government... The Dnieperstory Dam was built with funds unlawfully taken from the United States Treasury by the corrupt and dishonest Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks." Rep. Louis T.McFadden (D-PA)

Even when Communism collapsed in the Soviet Union, Boris Yeltsin revealed that most of the foreign aid was ending up, we quote. "straight back into the coffers of western banks in debt service."


With Russia down the money changers now had control of every major national economy. Like a steam roller moving and a wolf gathering it's pack, there was only one thing left to do and that was to go global. The first attempt was the proposal at the Paris Peace Conference after WWI to set up the League of Nations. Old habits die hard, and even what they called 'the war to end all wars' was not enough to convince nations to dissolve their boundaries. The League died.

If politicians really were being controlled, you would think at least one would break ranks and cry out against it. Many did. One was no less than the president of the United States speaking before his death in 1919.

"These International bankers and Rockefeller-Standard Oil interests control the majority of newspapers and the columns of these papers to club into submission or drive out of public office officials who refuse to do the bidding of the powerful corrupt cliques which compose the invisible government." Theodore Roosevelt

Another was the Mayor of New York expanding on Roosevelt's statement in 1922.

"The warning of Theodore Roosevelt has much timeliness today, for the real menace of our republic is this invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy length over City, State, and nation... It seizes in its long and powerful tentacles our executive officers, our legislative bodies, our schools, our courts, our newspapers, and every agency created for the public protection...

To depart from mere generalisations, let me say that at the head of this octopus are the Rockefeller-Standard Oil interest and a small group of powerful banking houses generally referred to as the international bankers. The little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes.

They practically control both parties, write political platforms, make catspaws of party leaders, use the leading men of private organisations, and resort to every device to place in nomination for high public office only such candidates as will be amenable to the dictates of corrupt big business...

These international bankers and Rockefeller-Standard Oil interests control the majority of newspapers and magazines in this country." John Hylan, Mayor of New York. 1922

These warnings fell on deaf ears, drowned out by the music and excitement of the roaring 20's. People don't tend to complain much in times of prosperity, so the money changers used this boom time they had created to defuse any complaints about their growing control.


Stack in front of you the biographies of all the Wall Street giants, J.P. Morgan, Joe F. Kennedy, J.D Rockefeller, Bernard Baruch, and you'll find they all marvel at how they got out of the stock market and put their assets in gold just before the crash.
Non mention a secret directive, since revealed, sent by the father of the Federal Reserve, Paul Warburg, warning of the coming collapse and depression.

With control of the press and the education system, few Americans are aware that the Fed caused the depression. It is however a well known fact among leading top economists.

"The Federal Reserve definitely caused the Great depression by contracting the amount of currency in circulation by one-third from 1929 to 1933." Milton Friedman, Nobel Prize winning economist

"It was not accidental. It was a carefully contrived occurrence... The international bankers sought to bring about a condition of despair here so that they might emerge as rulers of us all." Rep. Louis T.McFadden (D-PA)

"I think it can hardly be disputed that the statesmen and financiers of Europe are ready to take almost any means to re-acquire rapidly the gold stock which Europe lost to America as the result of World War I." Rep. Louis T.McFadden (D-PA)

40 billion dollars somehow vanished in the crash.

It didn't really vanish, it simply shifted into the hands of the money changers. This is how Joe Kennedy went from having 4 million dollars in 1929 to having over 100 million in 1935.

During this time the Fed caused a 33% reduction of the money supply, causing deeper depression.

The Illuminati's two greatest weapons are secrecy and money. Mayer Amschel Rothschild, head of the House of Rothschild, and who was also head of the Illuminati, said in 1838, "Allow me to issue and control the money of a nation and I care not who writes its laws." How very true! Even in today's society, if a federally-sponsored charity does not listen to what these groups want, it will be cut off from all governmental funding. This is "monetarial dictatorship."

Down the corridor of time, a political figure emerged in the 1920's who would become President of the United States. During the 1932 presidential campaign, Franklin D. Roosevelt's political platform was based on what he termed "The New Deal," though many rumors were spreading that this platform did not represent his true plans. Fearing a deeper depression, the public began a run on the banks. Many closed their doors by the time Roosevelt was inaugurated.

Even the Great Depression, beginning in late 1929, was part of this overall plan. Congressman Louis T. McFadden, Chairman of the House Banking Committee, said... "It was no accident. It was a carefully contrived occurrence. The international bankers sought to bring about a condition of despair here so they might emerge as rulers of us all." (sounds like a familiar story, i.e. 911, famous Masonic words from Bush "out of chaos will emerge order").

So the Roosevelt administration asked the United States Congress to pass legislation which would force the American people to give up their gold in exchange for paper money. When the passing of the appropriate legislation was accomplished, the American people were forced to give up their gold for this new paper money called "greenbacks" or US Government Notes (contrast this with the Federal Reserve Notes which we now have). They had received $20.67 in paper money for an ounce of gold. This sounded fair in the very beginning, but, shortly thereafter, the government raised the price of gold to $35.00 an ounce. In short, the government (during the great depression) had robbed the American populace of over three billion dollars. Senator Carter Glass was asked his opinion on this new development. He replied, "President Roosevelt, I think that this is worse than anything that Ali Baba's forty thieves could ever have perpetrated."

As Roosevelt's "New Deal" was put into motion, every new dollar bill coming off the presses carried with it two new seals that had never been there before; the Two Seals of the Illuminati. They could now openly declare that their conspiracy had finally born fruit, their "NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM" or "New Deal."


We've been talking about how the privately owned Federal Reserve can produce money from thin air. Here's how it's done.

1. The purchase of bonds is approved by the Federal Open Market Committee.

2. The Fed buys the bonds which it pays for with electronic credits made to the sellers bank. These credits are based on nothing.

3. The receiving banks then use these credits as reserves from which they can loan out ten times the amount.

To reduce the amount of money in the economy they simply reverse the process.

The Fed sells bonds to the public and money is drawn from the purchasers bank to pay for them.

Each million withdrawn lowers the banks ability to loan by 10 million.

The Federal bank in this way has overall control of the US money supply, as each country's central bank does in the same way. The bankers through the magic of fractional reserve banking have been delegated the right to create 90% of the money supply. This control makes a mockery of any elected government. It places so called leaders behind a toy steering wheel, like the plastic ones, set up to amuse small children.

Or as Rep.Charles Lindbergh father of famous aviator Lucky Lindy puts it when commenting on the Federal Reserve Act:

"This act establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President signs this bill, the invisible government by the Monetary Power will be legalised.

The people may not know it immediately, but the day of reckoning is only a few years removed... The worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking bill."
Rep. Charles Lindbergh (R-MN)

Or as Woodrow Wilson put it:

"We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled governments in the civilised world - no longer a government of free opinion, no longer a government by... a vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.

Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organised, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it."
Woodrow Wilson

In order to clearly establish that this is not a conspiracy theory, but is actually how things are controlled, we further quote Charles Lindbergh. From the house of representatives, Lindbergh was well placed to see exactly what was happening back then and continues to happen today.

"To cause high prices all the Federal Reserve board will do will be to lower the re-discount rate..., producing an expansion of credit and a rising stock market; then when... business men are adjusted to these conditions, it can check... prosperity in mid-career by arbitrarily raising the rate of interest.

It can cause the pendulum of a rising and falling market to swing gently back and forth by slight changes in the discount rate, or cause violent fluctuations by greater rate variation, and in either case it will possess inside information as to financial conditions and advance knowledge of the coming change, either up or down.

This is the strangest, most dangerous advantage ever placed in the hands of a special privilege class by any Government that ever existed.

The system is private, conducted for the sole purpose of obtaining the greatest possible profits from the use of other people's money.

They know in advance when to create panics to their advantage. They also know when to stop panic. Inflation and deflation work equally well for them when they control finance..." Rep. Charles Lindbergh (R-MN)


Most all will be aware of Hitler's rise to power. What they probably don't know is that he was almost completely financed by money drawn from the privately owned American Federal Reserve.

"After WWI, Germany fell into the hands of the international bankers. Those bankers bought her and they now own her, lock, stock, and barrel. They have purchased her industries, they have mortgages on her soil, they control her production, they control all her public utilities.

The international German bankers have subsidised the present Government of Germany and they have also supplied every dollar of the money Adolph Hitler has used in his lavish campaign to build up threat to the government of Bruening.

When Bruening fails to obey the orders of the German International Bankers, Hitler is brought forth to scare the Germans into submission...

Through the Federal Reserve Board over $30 billion of American money has been pumped into Germany. You have all heard of the spending that has taken place in Germany...

Modernistic dwellings, her great planetariums, her gymnasiums, her swimming pools, her fine public highways, her perfect factories. All this was done on our money. All this was given to Germany through the Federal Reserve Board. The Federal Reserve Board has pumped so many billions of dollars into Germany that they dare not name the total."
Congressman Louis T.McFadden (D-PA) who served twelve years as Chairman of the Committee on Banking and Currency.


In 1933 new President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed a bill forcing all the American people, to hand over all their gold at base rate. With the exception of rare coins. He disowned himself from the bill claiming to not have read it and his secretary of the treasury claimed this was "what the experts wanted".

Bought at bargain basement price with money produced from nothing by the Federal Reserve, the gold was melted down and stacked in the newly built bullion depository called Fort Knox. Once collected in 1935 the price of gold was raised from $20.66 up to $35 per ounce, but only non American gold qualified to be sold. This meant those who had avoided the crash by investing in gold they had shipped to London could now nearly double their money while the rest of America starved.

But that's not all folks. By the end of WWII Fort Knox did hold 70% of the world's gold, but over the years it was sold off to the European money changers while a public audit of Fort Knox reserves was repeatedly denied.

Rumours spread about missing gold.

"Allegations of missing gold from our Fort Knox vaults are being widely discussed in European circles. But what is puzzling is that the Administration is not hastening to demonstrate conclusively that there is no cause for concern over our gold treasure - if indeed it is in a position to do so." Edith Roosevelt

Finally in 1981 President Ronald Reagan was convinced to have a look into Fort Knox with a view to re-introducing the Gold Standard. He appointed a group called The Gold Commission. They found that the US Treasury owned no gold at all.

All the Fort Knox gold remaining is now being held as collateral by the Federal Reserve against the national debt. Using credits made from nothing. The Fed had robbed the largest treasure of gold on earth.

WORLD WAR II (1939-1945)

World War II saw the US debt increased by 598%, while Japan's debt went up by 1,348%, with France up by 583% and Canada up by 417%.

When you hear this, what is your first impression? Do you automatically think this is bad or this is good? Most of us feel a well programmed sense of desperation when we hear figures like this, but remember, to the money changers, this is music to their ears.

With the hot war over, the cold war began, the arms race causing more and more borrowing. Now the money changers could really concentrate on global domination.

Step one, the European Monetary Union and NAFTA.

Step two, centralise the global economy via the World Central Bank.


In Washington, the headquarters of both the World Bank and the IMF (International Monetary Fund) face each other on the same street. What are these organisations, and who controls them?

To find out we need to look back to just after WWI. At this point the money changers were attempting to consolidate the central banks under the guise of peacemaking. To stop future wars they put forward the formation of a world central bank named the Bank of International Settlements, a world court called the World Court in the Hague, and a world executive for legislation called the League of Nations.

On June 4, 1963, a virtually unknown Presidential decree, Executive Order 11110, was signed with the authority to basically strip the Federal Reserve Bank of its power to create from nothing and loan money to the United States Federal Government at interest. With the stroke of a pen, President Kennedy declared that the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank would soon be out of business. President Kennedy Nov. 12, 1963 said: "The high office of the President has been used to foment a plot to destroy the American's freedom and before I leave office, I must inform the citizen of this plight." On Nov. 22nd, he was assassinated.

Note that all four presidents who tried to end the banking monopolies were assassinated (Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, Kennedy) and anyone who tries to expose these Banking Dynasties is demonized like Rep. Congressman James Traficant in 1993 and many others. Note also that most of the other US Presidents have been and are part of the Freemason/Zionist Brotherhoods. Another interesting fact to consider is that of the 37 Presidents of the United States before Jimmy Carter, at least 18 or 21 or 42 (depending on which source you believe, 33 of them alone go back to Charlemagne, one of the most famous medieval monarchs of what we now call France and who just happens to be a major figure in the story of these bloodlines and their expansion out of Britain, France, Germany, and elsewhere) were close relatives. Of the 224 ancestors in the family tree of 21 Presidents, we find 13 Roosevelt's, 16 Coolidge's, and 14 Tyler's. Another source manages to relate 60 percent of the Presidents and link most of them to the super-rich Astor family.

In his 1966 book entitled Tragedy and Hope, president Clinton's mentor Carroll Quigley writes about the banking dynasties:

"The powers of financial capitalism had [a] far-reaching [plan], 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 meetings and conferences.

The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations.

Each central bank... 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, Professor, Georgetown University

They got 2 out of 3. The league of nations failed largely owing to the suspicions of the people and while opposition concentrated on this, the other two proposals snuck their way through.

It would take another war to wear the public resistance down. Wall street invested heavily to rebuild Germany, as the Chase bank had propped up the Russian revolution.

Now the Chase merged with the Warburg's Manhattan Bank to form the ChaseManhattan which would later merge with the Chemical Bank to become the largest bank on Wall Street.

In 1944 the US approved it's full participation in the IMF and the World Bank. By 1945 the second League of Nations was approved under the new name 'The United Nations'. The war had dissolved all opposition. The methods used in the National Banking Act of 1864 and the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 were now simply used on a Global scale.

The Federal Reserve Act allowing the creation of Federal Reserve notes is mirrored by the IMF's authority to produce money called Special Drawing Rights (SDR's). It is estimated the IMF has produced $30 billion dollars worth of SDR's so far. In the United States SDR's are already accepted as legal money, and all other member nations are being pressured to follow suit. With SDR's being partially backed by gold, a world gold standard is sneaking it's way in through the back door, which comes with no objection from the money changers who now hold two-thirds of the worlds gold and can use this to structure the worlds economy to their further advantage.

We have gone from the goldsmith's fraud being reproduced on a national scale through the Bank of England and the Federal Reserve, to a Global level with the IMF and the World Bank. Unless we together stop giving these exchange units their power by our collective faith in them, the future will probably see the Intergalactic Bank and the Federation of Planets Reserve set up in much the same way.

This radical transfer of power has taken place with absolutely no mandate from the people.

Nations borrow Special Drawing Right from the International Monetary Fund in order to pay interest on their mounting debts. With these SDR's produced at no cost, the IMF charges more interest. This contrary to bold claims does not alleviate poverty or further any development. It just creates a steady flow of wealth from borrowing nations to the money changers who now control the IMF and the World Bank.

The permanent debt of Third World Countries is constantly being increased to provide temporary relief from the poverty being caused by previous borrowing.

These repayments already exceed the amount of new loans. By 1992 Africa's debt had reached $290 billion dollars, which is two and a half times greater than it was in 1980. A noble attempt to repay it has caused increased infant mortality and unemployment, plus deteriorating schools, and general health and welfare problems.

As world resources continue to be sucked into this insatiable black hole of greed, if allowed to continue the entire world will face a similar fate.

As one Prominent Brazilian Politician put it.

"The Third World War has already started. It is a silent war. Not, for that reason, any less sinister. The war is tearing down Brazil, Latin America, and practically all the Third World. Instead of soldiers dying, there are children. It is a war over the Third World debt, one which has as its main weapon, interest, a weapon more deadly than the atom bomb, more shattering than a laser beam."

If a group or organisation had used it's hard earned money to help these developing nations, then we might sympathise that there should be a real effort to repay these loans. But the money used was created from fractional reserve banking. The money loaned to the Third World came from the 90% the banks allow themselves to loan on the 10% they actually held. It didn't exist, it was created from nothing, and now people are suffering and dying in an effort to pay it back.

Peter Kershaw in "Economic Solutions" and Larry Burkett in "The Coming Economic Earthquake" have named the private owners of the United States Federal Reserve system established in 1913 (under Benjamin Strong, the Reserve System was brought into interlocking relations with the Bank of England and the Bank of France and Reserve Governors and heads of European central banks brought on the Great Depression of 1929-31) as:
1) The Rockefeller Family - New York
2) The Rothschild Family - London
3) The Rothschild Family - Berlin
4) The Lazard Brothers - Paris
5) Israel Seiff - Italy
6) Kuhn-Loeb Company - Germany
7) The Warburgs - Amsterdam Representative of the Rothschild Family in France
8) The Warburgs - Hamburg Representative of the Rothschild Family in Germany 9) Lehman Brothers - New York
10) Goldman & Sachs - New York. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York, which controls the 11 other Federal Reserve branches, is majority controlled by a) Chase-Manhattan (a Rockefeller stronghold) - 6,389,445 shares - 32.3% b) Citibank - 4,051,851 shares - 20.5%.

The HSBC bank controlled by the Freemasons is another example of a fraudulent setup that gets to create money from nothing and charge interest on it. More on how the Federal Reserve System fraud operates later in this document by Edward Griffin and Eustace Mullin.

This has gone beyond clever financing, its wholesale murder and it's time we stopped it.
Highlights of U.S. Financial History.
Date Event
1787 U.S. Constitution is ratified granting Congress alone the right to COIN money - not to print it. Only gold and silver were considered REAL money!!
1791 1st. U.S. Bank is chartered.
1811 Charter of U.S. Bank expires.
1812 War with Great Britain over the lapsed charter. The MONEY POWER tries to get the New England States to leave the Union.
1816 2nd Bank of the U.S. is chartered.
1832 President Jackson vetoes charter of 2nd Bank.
1860 Civil War begins. Defeated MONEY POWER successful in getting 13 States to leave the Union.
1862 Congress passes Banking Act authorizing the printing of paper money (greenbacks) to finance the war. This was supposed to be an emergency measure only until the war was over. All the provisions of the Banking Act were to expire in 20 years.
1873 Silver is demonetized. Free coinage of silver is ended. U.S. goes on gold standard.
1882 Banking Act expires but is renewed for another 20 years.
1901 President McKinley is assassinated by MONEY POWER and Roosevelt becomes President.
1902 Banking Act which gave the U.S. paper money was supposed to expire this year. Due to the murder of President McKinley, the banking laws and paper money system was continued.
1910 Postal Savings Bank is inaugurated.
1910 Secret meeting on Jekyll Island, Georgia, to charter 3rd U.S. Bank.
1913 Monster reborn. President Wilson signs bill authorizing the creation of 3rd U.S. Bank.
1917 President Wilson destroys Postal Savings Bank by refusing to lift ceiling on deposits.
1929 Great Depression begins due to manipulation of economy by U.S. Bank.
1933 Possession of gold is outlawed. U.S. citizens forbidden to own gold by order of President Roosevelt.
1960 Goldfinger begins to steal U.S. gold reserves from Fort Knox.
1971 U.S. is completely off the gold standard. Foreign holders of dollars are promised U.S. land as collateral instead of gold.
1990 Fall of the Soviet Union. U.S. gold reserves start to move to European Central Bank.
The Federal Reserve dollar is the official currency of the United States. It is also widely used as a reserve currency outside of the United States. Currently, the issuance of currency is controlled by the private Federal Reserve Banking system. The most commonly used symbol for the U.S. dollar is the dollar sign ($). The ISO 4217 code for the United States Dollar is USD. When currently issued in circulating form, denominations equal to or less than a dollar are emitted as coins while denominations equal to or greater than a dollar are emitted as Federal Reserve notes.
Until 1974 the value of the United States dollar was tied to and backed by either silver, gold, or a combination of the two. From 1792 to 1873 the U.S. dollar was freely backed by both gold and silver at a ratio of 15:1 under a system known as bimetallism. Through a series of legislative changes from 1873 to 1900, the status of silver was slowly diminished until 1900 when a gold standard was formally adopted. The gold standard survived, with several modifications, until 1974.
Modern U.S. dollar banknotes have been printed by the Federal Reserve since 1929. Notes above the $100 denomination ceased being printed in 1946. Below are some Federal Reserve Notes from the private central bank known fraudulently as the US Federal Reserve System, i.e. these are not the original public US Government United States Notes which are much less than 1% of the notes in circulation.
Both United States Notes and Federal Reserve notes are parts of the national currency of the United States and both are legal tender. They circulate as money in the same way. However, the issuing authority for them comes from different statutes. United States Notes were redeemable in gold until 1933, when the United States abandoned the gold standard. Since then, both currencies have served essentially the same purpose, and have had the same value. Because United States Notes serve no function that is not already adequately served by Federal Reserve Notes, their issuance was discontinued, and none have been placed in to circulation since January 21, 1971.
United States Notes (characterized by a red seal and serial number) were the first national currency, authorized by the Legal Tender Act of 1862 and began circulating during the Civil War. The Treasury Department issued these notes directly into circulation, and they are obligations of the United States Government. The issuance of United States Notes is subject to limitations established by Congress. It established a statutory limitation of $300 million on the amount of United States Notes authorized to be outstanding and in circulation. While this was a significant figure in Civil War days, it is now a very small fraction of the total currency in circulation in the United States.
GREENBACKS were a form of paper currency in the United States, so named from the green colour used on the backs of the notes. They are treasury notes, and were first issued by the government in 1862, "as a question of hard necessity," to provide for the expenses of the Civil War. The first act, providing for the issue Of notes to the amount of $150,000,000, was that of the 25th February 1862; the acts of 11th July 1862 and 3rd March 1863 each authorized further issues of $150,000,000. In January 1879 the nominal amount of notes then stood at $346,681,000, which is still outstanding.
The so-called Greenback party (also called the Independent, and the national party) first appeared in a presidential campaign in 1876, when its candidate, Peter Cooper, received 81,740 votes. It advocated increasing the volume of greenbacks, forbidding bank issues, and the paying in greenbacks of the principal of all government bonds not expressly payable in coin. In 1884 their candidate Benjamin F. Butler (also the candidate of the Anti-Monopoly party) received 175,370 votes. Subsequently the party went out of existence. Peter Cooper wanted to free the people from the yoke of the privately owned central banking systems controlled by the Rothschilds & associates. "At a reception in his honour in his later years he summed up his philosophy: 'I have endeavoured to remember that the object of life is to do good.'" This quote is remarkable when compared to others of similar means who were Cooper's contemporaries. An article by Peter Lyon in American Heritage ("Peter Cooper, the Honest Man," February 1959, v.10, #2) notes in particular Cornelius Vanderbilt ("Law? What do I care about the law? Hain't I got the power?"), William Tweed, who plundered hundreds of millions of dollars from New York City, and Uncle Dan Drew ("It's the still hog that eats the most"). Cooper gave his money away without receiving any tax breaks. As alluded to above, his family fully supported him in this, giving up their own inheritances to match a grant by Andrew Carnegie just after Cooper's death. His example directly nudged Carnegie, George Peabody, Matthew Vassar, Ezra Cornell and many others into commencing their more famous philanthropies. Cooper was the first wealthy industrialist of the 19th century to equate the acquisition of wealth with social responsibility. It is a tragedy that history, especially the history we teach our schoolchildren, seems to have largely forgotten this pivotal figure in the history of New York City, the United States, and perhaps the world. Peter Cooper died on April 4, 1883 in New York City at the age of 92. Thousands of New Yorkers spontaneously poured into the streets as his casket was taken to its resting place in Green-Wood Cemetary in Brooklyn, in tribute to the great man who had dedicated his life and fortune to the city he loved so well.
The following is a list of the portraits on all denominations of US notes original greenbacks.
Denomination U.S. Paper Currency Features
$1.00 George Washington (1st U.S. President) on front. Great Seal of the United States on back.

$2.00 Thomas Jefferson (3rd U.S. President) on front. Declaration of Independence on back.

$5.00 Abraham Lincoln (16th U.S. President) on front. Lincoln Memorial on back.

$10.00 Alexander Hamilton (1st U.S. Treasury Secretary) on front. U.S. Treasury Building on back.

$20.00 Andrew Jackson (7th U.S. President) on front. White House on back.

$50.00 Ulysses S. Grant (18th U.S. President) on front. U.S. Capitol on back.

$100.00 Benjamin Franklin on front. Independence Hall on back.

* $500.00 William McKinley (25th U.S. President) on front. $500 on back. Has not been printed since 1946.

* $1000.00 Grover Cleveland (22nd & 24th U.S. President) on front. "One Thousand Dollars" on back. Has not been printed since 1969.

* $5000.00 James Madison (4th U.S. President) on front. $5000 on back. Has not been printed since 1946.

* $10,000.00 Salmon P. Chase (25th U.S. Treasury Secretary) on front. $10,000 on back. Has not been printed since 1946.
* $100,000.00 Woodrow Wilson (28th U.S. President) on front. The largest note ever printed by the U.S. Bureau of Engraving and Printing. Printed from December 18, 1934 through January 9, 1935. Used for transactions between Federal Reserve Banks. Not circulated among the general public.

* No longer printed and being withdrawn from circulation.
Today, like the currency of most nations, the Federal Reserve Note dollar is fiat money without intrinsic value. Some argue that it has no backing and would be entirely worthless, except for the fact that people have been persuaded to use and accept it as if it had worth. According to the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, as of July 31, 2000, there were $539,890,223,079 in total currency in worldwide circulation, of which $364,724,397,100 was in the $100 denomination (compare this to the United States Government Notes of which $346,681,000 are in circulation).
Federal Reserve notes are legal tender currency notes. They are issued by the Federal Reserve Banks and have replaced United_States_Notes which were once issued by the Treasury Department. The authority of the Federal Reserve Banks to issue notes comes from the fraudulent Federal Reserve Act of 1913. A commercial bank belonging to the Federal Reserve System can obtain Federal Reserve notes from the Federal Reserve Bank in its district whenever it wishes. It must pay for them in full, dollar for dollar, by drawing down its account with its district Federal Reserve Bank. Despite no longer being issued by Treasury Department, Federal Reserve notes must be ritually signed by the Treasurer of the United States and the United States Secretary of the Treasury before becoming legal currency.
Federal Reserve Banks obtain the notes from the United States Bureau of Engraving and Printing (BEP). It pays the BEP for the cost of producing the notes, which then become liabilities of the Federal Reserve Banks, and obligations of the United States Government.
Federal Reserve notes are not redeemable in gold, silver or any other commodity. This has been the case since 1933. The notes have no value for themselves, but for what they will buy. They have no backing other than the "full faith of the US government", i.e., the government's ability to levy taxes to pay its debts and US property and assets. In another sense, because they are legal tender, Federal Reserve notes are "backed" by all the goods and services in the economy.
The name for the United States dollar comes from the Spanish dollar (which itself is derived from the thaler) which was the silver coin widely circulated in the United States during the time of the American Revolutionary War. Although private banks issued currency that was backed in Spanish dollars, the Federal government did not do so until the American Civil War. The Thaler was a silver coin first minted in Bohemia, in 1518. The name thaler originally came from the guldengroschen (great gulden, being of silver but equal in value to a gold gulden) coins minted from the silver from a rich mine at Joachimsthal (St. Joachim's Valley, Czech: Jαchymov) in what is now the Czech Republic and called the Joachimsthaler, where thal means "valley". St. Joachim, the father of the Virgin Mary, was portrayed on the coin. The Thaler was a very popular coin and became used thoughout Europe with equivalent coins such as the peso and the crown being issued and in general use. In England the word dollar was in use for the thaler for 200 years before the issue of the American Dollar, and until the half crown ceased to be used following decimalisation in 1971, the term "half a dollar" could be heard for "half a crown". The Thaler was introduced and became the most spread currency in Sweden under the name Daler during the early 17th century. The Daler was in circulation until 1873 when it was replaced by the Krona, the new currency introduced by the Scandinavian Monetary Union.
Original United States Government Notes (not private Federal Reserve Notes)


The six kinds of currency in 1929, colored coded with the colors of their seals and serial numbers, and with the denominations they were issued in series 1928 and 1929 (though not always in those years themselves), were:
• United States Notes (Series 1928: $1 $2 $5)
• Gold Certificates (Series 1928: $10 $20 $50 $100 $500 $1000 $5000 $10,000)
• National Bank Notes (Series 1929: $5 $10 $20 $50 $100)
• Silver Certificates (Series 1928: $1)
• Federal Reserve Bank Notes (Series 1929: $5 $10 $20 $50 $100)
• Federal Reserve Notes (Series 1928: $5 $10 $20 $50 $100 $500 $1000 $5000 $10,000)
The three kinds of currency that remained after the Depression were:
• United States Notes (Series 1953: $2 $5)
• Silver Certificates (Series 1953: $5 $10 -- Series 1957: $1)
• Federal Reserve Notes (Series 1950: $5 $10 $20 $50 $100)
And all that remained by 1970 were:
• Federal Reserve Notes (Series 1969: $1 $5 $10 $20 $50 $100 -- Series 1976: $2).
Until 1963 all United States currency stated that its value was "Payable to the Bearer on Demand," which reflected the circumstance that real money was originally considered to be gold or silver coin, not a paper document. In that year, however, when Silver Certificates were discontinued and the first $1 Federal Reserve Note and the last $2 and $5 United States Notes were issued, the ancient formula was deleted from the new series. A year later the last silver was eliminated from United States coins. Thus paper and tokens became United States money. This entire process, starting with the New Deal, or perhaps even the Civil War, and culminating in 1963, was unconstitutional. Article I, Section 10, Paragraph 1 of the United States Constitution says, "No State shall...make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts." So the question is, if the States can't do it, this must mean that the Federal Government can. No... The Tenth Amendment says, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." The Constitution, as it happens, does not "delegate" the power to "make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts" to the Federal Government. Therefore, government at no level has the power to make anything but gold and silver coin tender in payment of debts. James Madison himself called paper money a "wicked scheme." It is, when its purpose is to inflate debts and license fiscal irresponsibility by government (the greatest debtor). That is the kind of government we now have.
Federal Reserve Notes, until 1981
$1 1963
1969 1974 1977 1981
$2 1976

$5 1928 1934
1950 1963 1969 1974 1977 1981
$10 1928
1963 1969 1974 1977 1981
$20 1928
1934 1950 1963 1969 1974 1977 1981
$50 1928 1934 1950 1963 1969 1974 1977 1981

$100 1928 1934 1950 1963 1969 1974 1977 1981

$500 1928
$1000 1928 1934

$5000 1928
$10,000 1928 1934
A new kind of currency was created by the Federal Reserve Act of December 23, 1913. The Federal Reserve System was initially designed to be a decentralized organization of no less than twelve Federal Reserve Banks: Boston (1-A), New York (2-B), Philadelphia (3-C), Cleveland (4-D), Richmond (5-E), Atlanta (6-F), Chicago (7-G), St. Louis (8-H), Minneapolis (9-I), Kansas City (10-J), Dallas (11-K), and San Francisco (12-L). The names of the banks and their characteristic number or letter have always appeared on Federal Reserve Notes and Federal Reserve Bank Notes issued by them. This assignment clearly reflects the distribution of population and economic development in 1914. It has not been modified since. The significance of the multiple Federal Reserve Banks and the decentralized system, however, has declined. The system was made a lot more centralized in the 1930's, as part of the aforementioned conclusion that only the federal government can be trusted with power over the economy, banking, and money. The Depression at the time was seen as resulting from the misbehavior of "speculators" and loose practices by the financial and stock markets. However, it is now much clearer that one of the prime villains at the beginning of the Great Depression was the Federal Reserve System itself, whose mistakes had nothing to do with lack of power or centralization. Indeed, the System could have responded better if it had been even less, not more, centralized than it was. Nevertheless, centralization continues, and the new, redesigned Federal Reserve Notes no longer bear the seal of their bank of issue, though the bank is still indicated, without name, by the letter and number code. Compare the Series 1996 $50 Federal Reserve Note with the previous Series 1993 $50 Federal Reserve Note [reverse].
Since Federal Reserve Notes were initially redeemable in gold (though perhaps only at the United States Treasury), they would have been just the kind of reassuring currency to supply to banks during a run. Since there was only a fractional reserve behind the Notes, however, the temptation would always be there to overextend them for political purposes. Although the Treasury had been unable to print money since 1878, it was now given an indirect ability to do so, whenever it could persuade the Federal Reserve to create money by buying United States securities itself, either directly from the Treasury or indirectly off the open market.
The problem is what happened during the Depression. When banking panics started (as unemployment abruptly jumpted from 6% to 15% at the end of 1930), the private Federal Reserve suddenly didn't trust other priavate banks enough to back them up. Unfortunately, so many banks were seen as insolvent and allowed to fail that it took the whole United States economy down with it. But the Federal Reserve could be proud of being financially solid itself! Failed banks means bankers out of a job. Perhaps even bankers committing suicide. But among all the Depression stories about window leaps on Wall Street, there don't seem to be any about leaps from the nearby Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
Thus the Federal Reserve System has become the last thing that was supposed to be possible in America: A Central Bank. And a political football. The inflation of the 1970's never was blamed on the Federal Reserve expanding the money supply too quickly, even though the popular economic theory of the time, Neo-Keynesianism, held that inflation could cause prosperity. That didn't work out very well. But it has been more obvious recently that the lower inflation of the 1980's and 90's has been the result of restraint in money creation.

2. History of the Privately owned Federal Reserve System

From Chapter 1 & 10, The Creature from Jekyll Island by Edward Griffin and from The Secrets of the Federal Reserve by Eustace Mullins. (copy of the 1913 Federal Reserve Act below)

In brief, the private banking cartel known as the Federal Reserve System was setup in 1913 at the same time that the 16th Amendment was introduced to force income taxes onto Americans. The 16th Amendment was not legally ratified and this is why people are challenging the legality of income taxes that go to pay the interest on the money created from nothing by the private Federal Reserve System. The FED owners have become immensely wealthy by creating money out of nothing and lending it to the tax payers. Owners of the Fed are listed further down. The same scam happens with the Bank of England and HSBC, both controlled by the Freemason/Illuminati Zionist families (Rothschild, etc.).
The secret meeting on Jekyll Island (owned by J.P.Morgan) in Georgia (around 1910) at which the Federal Reserve was conceived and a roadmap was laid towards the birth of a banking cartel to protect its members from competition, and the strategy of how to convince Congress and the public that this cartel was an agency of the United States government. Seven men who represented an estimated one forth of the total wealth of the entire world were present at that meeting:
1. Nelson W. Aldrich, Republican "whip" in the Senate, Chairman of the National Monetary Commission, business associate of J.P. Morgan, father-in-law to John D. Rockefeller, Jr.;
2. Abraham Piatt Andrew, Assistant Secretary of the United States Treasury;
3. Frank A. Vanderlip, president of the National City Bank of New York, the most powerful of the banks at that time,representing William Rockefeller and the international investment banking house of Kuhn, Loeb & Company;
4. Henry P. Davison, senior partner of the J.P Morgan Company;
5. Charles D. Norton, president of J.P. Morgan's First National Bank ofNew York;
6. Benjamin Strong, head of J.P. Morgan's Bankers Trust Company;and
7. Paul M. Warburg, a partner in Kuhn, Loeb & Company, a representative of the Rothschild banking dynasty in England and France, and brother to Max Warburg who was head of the Warburg banking consortium in Germany and the Netherlands.
These competitors colluded to create a banking cartel who collateral is the US taxpayer and all properties of the US government. In 1913, the same year that the Federal Reserve Act was passed into law, a subcommittee of the House Committee on Currency and Banking, under the chairmanship of Arsene Pujo of Louisiana, completed its investigation into the concentration of financial power in the United States. Pujo was considered to be a spokesman for the oil interests, part of the very group under investigation, and did everything possible to sabotage the hearings. In spite of his efforts, however, the final report of the committee at large was devastating.
It stated: Your committee is satisfied from the proofs submitted, even in the absence of data from the banks, that there is an established and well defined identity and community of interest between a few leaders of finance...which has resulted in great and rapidly growing concentration of the control of money and credit in the hands of these few men... When we consider, also, in this connection that into these reservoirs of money and credit there flow a large part of the reserves of the banks of the country, that they are also the agents and correspondents of the out-of-town banks in the loaning of their surplus funds in the only public money market of the country, and that a small group of men and their partners and associates have now further strengthened their hold upon the resources of these institutions by acquiring large stock holdings therein, by representation on their boards and through valuable patronage, we begin to realize something of the extent to which this practical and effective domination and control over our greatest financial, railroad and industrial corporations has developed, largely within the past five years, and that it is fraught with peril to the welfare of the country.
The purpose of this meeting on Jekyll Island was...to come to an agreement on the structure and operation of a banking cartel. The goal of the cartel, as is true with all of them, was to maximize profits by minimizing competition between members, to make it difficult for new competitors to enter the field, and to utilize the police power of government to enforce the cartel agreement.
In more specific terms, the purpose and, indeed, the actual outcome of this meeting was to create the blueprint for the Federal Reserve System.
On 23rd December 1913 the house of representatives had past the Federal Reserve Act, but it was still having difficulty getting it out of the senate. Most members of congress had gone home for the holidays, but unfortunately the senate had not adjourn sine dei (without day) so they were technically still in session. There were only three members still present. On a unanimous consent voice vote the 1913 Federal Reserve Act was passed. No objection was made, possibly because there was no one there to object.
The first leak regarding this meeting found its way into print in 1916. It appeared in Leslie's Weekly and was written by a young financial reporter by the name of B.C. Forbes, who later founded Forbes Magazine. The article was primarily in praise of Paul Warburg, and it is likely that Warburg let the story out during conversations with the writer. At any rate, the opening paragraph contained a dramatic but highly accurate summary of both the nature and purpose of the meeting: Picture a party of the nation's greatest bankers stealing out of New York on a private railroad car under cover of darkness, stealthily hieing hundreds of miles South, embarking on a mysterious launch, sneaking on to an island deserted by all but a few servants, living there a full week under such rigid secrecy that the names of not one of them was once mentioned lest the servants learn the identity and disclose to the world this strangest, most secret expedition in the history of American finance.
I am not romancing. I am giving to the world, for the first time, the real story of how the famous Aldrich currency report, the foundation of our new currency system, was written.

In 1930, Paul Warburg wrote a massive book - 1750 pages in all - entitled "The Federal Reserve System, Its Origin and Growth". In this tome, he described the meeting and its purpose but did not mention either its location or the names of those who attended. But he did say: "The results of the conference were entirely confidential. Even the fact there had been a meeting was not permitted to become public." Then in a footnote he added: "Though eighteen years have since gone by, I do not feel free to give a description of this most interesting conference concerning which Senator Aldrich pledged all participants to secrecy."
In the February 9, 1935, issue of the Saturday Evening Post, an article appeared written by Frank Vanderlip. In it he said: "Despite my views about the value to society of greater publicity for the affairs of corporations, there was an occasion, near the close of 1910, when I was as secretive - indeed, as furtive - as any conspirator....I do not feel it is any exaggeration to speak of our secret expedition to Jekyll Island as the occasion of the actual conception of what eventually became the Federal Reserve System....We were told to leave our last names behind us. We were told, further, that we should avoid dining together on the night of our departure. We were instructed to come one at a time and as unobtrusively as possible to the railroad terminal on the New Jersy littoral of the Hudson, where Senator Aldrich's private car would be in readiness, attached to the rear end of a train for the South....
Once aboard the private car we began to observe the taboo that had been fixed on last names. We addressed one another as "Ben," "Paul," "Nelson," "Abe" - it is Abraham Piatt Andrew. Davison and I adopted even deeper disguises, abandoning our first names. On the theory that we were always right, he became Wilbur and I became Orville, after those two aviation pioneers, the Wright brothers....The servants and train crew may have known the identities of one or two of us, but they did not know all, and it was the names of all printed together that would have made our mysterious journey significant in Washington, in Wall Street, even in London. Discovery, we knew, simply must not happen, or else all our time and effort would be wasted.
If it were to be exposed publicly that our particular group had got together and written a banking bill, that bill would have no chance whatever of passage by Congress.

As with all cartels, it had to be created by legislation and sustained by the power of government under the deception of protecting the consumer.
As John Kenneth Galbraith explained it: "It was his [Aldrich's] thought to outflank the opposition by having not one central bank but many. And the word bank would itself be avoided."--Galbraith says "...Warburg has, with some justice, been called the father of the system."
Professor Edwin Seligman, a member of the international banking family of J. & W. Seligman, and head of the Department of Economics at Columbia University, writes that "...in its fundamental features, the Federal Reserve Act is the work of Mr. Warburg more than any other man in the country."
Another brother, Max Warburg, was the financial adviser of the Kaiser and became Director of the Reichsbank in Germany. This was, of course, a central bank, and it was one of the cartel models used in the construction of the Federal Reserve System. The Reichsbank, incidentally, a few years later would create the massive hyperinflation that occured in Germany, wiping out the middle class and the entire German economy as well.

...A. Barton Hepburn of Chase National Bank was even more candid. He said:

"The measure recognizes and adopts the principles of a central bank. Indeed, if all works out as the sponsers of the law hope, it will make all incorporated banks together joint owners of a central dominating power." And that is about as good a definition of a cartel as one is likely to find.-- ...it is incapable of achieving its stated objectives.-- ...why is the System incapable of achieving its stated objectives? The painful answer is: those were never its true objectives.—
Anthony Sutton, former Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution for War, Revolution and Peace, and also Professor of Economics at California State University, Los Angeles, provides a somewhat deeper analysis. He writes: "Warburg's revolutionary plan to get American Society to go to work for Wall Street was astonishingly simple. Even today,... academic theoreticians cover their blackboards with meaningless equations, and the general public struggles in bewildered confusion with inflation and the coming credit collapse, while the quite simple explanation of the problem goes undiscussed and almost entirely uncomprehended. The Federal Reserve System is a legal private monopoly of the money supply operated for the benefit of the few under the guise of protecting and promoting the public interest.--"
The real significance of the journey to Jekyll Island and the creature that was hatched there was inadvertantly summarized by the words of Paul Warburg's admiring biographer, Harold Kellock: "Paul M. Warburg is probably the mildest-mannered man that ever personally conducted a revolution. It was a bloodless revolution: he did not attempt to rouse the populace to arms. He stepped forth armed simply with an idea. And he conquered. That's the amazing thing. A shy, sensitive man, he imposed his idea on a nation of a hundred million people."
THE MANDRAKE MECHANISM...What is it? It is the method by which the Federal Reserve creates money out of nothing; the concept of usury as the payment of interest on pretended loans; the true cause of the hidden tax called inflation; the way in which the Fed creates boom-bust cycles.

In the 1940s, there was a comic strip character called Mandrake the Magician. His specialty was creating things out of nothing and, when appropriate, to make them disappear back into that same void. It is fitting, therefore, that the process to be described in this section should be named in his honor.

In the previous chapters, we examined the technique developed by the political and monetary scientists to create money out of nothing for the purpose of lending. This is not an entirely accurate description because it implies that money is created first and then waits for someone to borrow it. On the other hand, textbooks on banking often state that money is created out of debt. This also is misleading because it implies that debt exists first and then is converted into money. In truth, money is not created until the instant it is borrowed. It is the act of borrowing which causes it to spring into existence. And, incidentally, it is the act of paying off the debt that causes it to vanish. There is no short phrase that perfectly describes that process. So, until one is invented along the way, we shall continue using the phrase "create money out of nothing" and occasionally add "for the purpose of lending" where necessary to further clarify the meaning.
So, let us now...see just how far this money/debt-creation process has been carried -- and how it works.

The first fact that needs to be considered is that our money today has no gold or silver behind it whatsoever. The fraction is not 54% nor 15%. It is 0%. It has traveled the path of all previous fractional money in history and already has degenerated into pure fiat money. The fact that most of it is in the form of checkbook balances rather than paper currency is a mere technicality; and the fact that bankers speak about "reserve ratios" is eye wash. The so-called reserves to which they refer are, in fact, Treasury bonds and other certificates of debt. Our money is pure fiat through and through.
The second fact that needs to be clearly understood is that, in spite of the technical jargon and seemingly complicated procedures, the actual mechanism by which the Federal Reserve creates money is quite simple. They do it exactly the same way the goldsmiths of old did except, of course, the goldsmiths were limited by the need to hold some precious metals in reserve, whereas the Fed has no such restriction.

The Federal Reserve is candid
The Federal Reserve itself is amazingly frank about this process. A booklet published by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York tells us: "Currency cannot be redeemed, or exchanged, for Treasury gold or any other asset used as backing. The question of just what assets 'back' Federal Reserve notes has little but bookkeeping significance."
Elsewhere in the same publication we are told: "Banks are creating money based on a borrower's promise to pay (the IOU)...Banks create money by 'monetizing' the private debts of businesses and individuals."

In a booklet entitled Modern Money Mechanics, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago says:

In the United States neither paper currency nor deposits have value as commodities. Intrinsically, a dollar bill is just a piece of paper. Deposits are merely book entries. Coins do have some intrinsic value as metal, but generally far less than their face amount.
What, then, makes these instruments -- checks, paper money, and coins -- acceptable at face value in payment of all debts and for other monetary uses? Mainly, it is the confidence people have that they will be able to exchange such money for other financial assets and real goods and services whenever they choose to do so. This partly is a matter of law; currency has been designated "legal tender" by the government -- that is, it must be accepted.
In the fine print of a footnote in a bulletin of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, we find this surprisingly candid explanation: Modern monetary systems have a fiat base -- literally money by decree -- with depository institutions, acting as fiduciaries, creating obligations against themselves with the fiat base acting in part as reserves. The decree appears on the currency notes: "This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private." While no individual could refuse to accept such money for debt repayment, exchange contracts could easily be composed to thwart its use in everyday commerce. However, a forceful explanation as to why money is accepted is that the federal government requires it as payment for tax liabilities. Anticipation of the need to clear this debt creates a demand for the pure fiat dollars.

Money would vanish without debt
It is difficult for Americans to come to grips with the fact that their total money supply is backed by nothing but debt, and it is even more mind boggling to visualize that, if everyone paid back all that was borrowed, there would be no money left in existence. That's right, there would not be one penny in circulation -- all coins and all paper currency would be returned to bank vaults -- and there would be not one dollar in any one's checking account. In short, all money would disappear.

Marriner Eccles was the Governor of the Federal Reserve System in 1941. On September 30 of that year, Eccles was asked to give testimony before the House Committee on Banking and Currency. The purpose of the hearing was to obtain information regarding the role of the Federal Reserve in creating conditions that led to the depression of the 1930s. Congressman Wright Patman, who was Chairman of that committee, asked how the Fed got the money to purchase two billion dollars worth of government bonds in 1933. This is the exchange that followed.
ECCLES: We created it.
PATMAN: Out of what?
ECCLES: Out of the right to issue credit money.
PATMAN: And there is nothing behind it, is there, except our government's credit?
ECCLES: That is what our money system is. If there were no debts in our money system, there wouldn't be any money.
It must be realized that, while money may represent an asset to selected individuals, when it is considered as an aggregate of the total money supply, it is not an asset at all. A man who borrows $1,000 may think that he has increased his financial position by that amount but he has not. His $1,000 cash asset is offset by his $1,000 loan liability, and his net position is zero. Bank accounts are exactly the same on a larger scale. Add up all the bank accounts in the nation, and it would be easy to assume that all that money represents a gigantic pool of assets which support the economy. Yet, every bit of this money is owed by someone. Some will owe nothing. Others will owe many times what they possess. All added together, the national balance is zero. What we think is money is but a grand illusion. The reality is debt.

Robert Hemphill was the Credit Manager of the Federal Reserve Bank in Atlanta. In the foreword to a book by Irving Fisher, entitled 100% Money, Hemphill said this:
If all the bank loans were paid, no one could have a bank deposit, and there would not be a dollar of coin or currency in circulation. This is a staggering thought. We are completely dependent on the commercial banks. Someone has to borrow every dollar we have in circulation, cash, or credit. If the banks create ample synthetic money we are prosperous; if not, we starve. We are absolutely without a permanent money system. When one gets a complete grasp of the picture, the tragic absurdity of our hopeless situation is almost incredible -- but there it is.
With the knowledge that money in America is based on debt, it should not come as a surprise to learn that the Federal Reserve System is not the least interested in seeing a reduction in debt in this country, regardless of public utterances to the contrary. Here is the bottom line from the System's own publications. The Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia says: "A large and growing number of analysts, on the other hand, now regard the national debt as something useful, if not an actual blessing....[They believe] the national debt need not be reduced at all."
The Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago adds: "Debt -- public and private -- is here to stay. It plays an essential role in economic processes.... What is required is not the abolition of debt, but its prudent use and intelligent management."
What's wrong with a little debt?
There is a kind of fascinating appeal to this theory. It gives those who expound it an aura of intellectualism, the appearance of being able to grasp a complex economic principle that is beyond the comprehension of mere mortals. And, for the less academically minded, it offers the comfort of at least sounding moderate. After all, what's wrong with a little debt, prudently used and intelligently managed? The answer is nothing, provided the debt is based on an honest transaction. There is plenty wrong with it if it is based upon fraud.
An honest transaction is one in which a borrower pays an agreed upon sum in return for the temporary use of a lender's asset. That asset could be anything of tangible value. If it were an automobile, for example, then the borrower would pay "rent." If it is money, then the rent is called "interest." Either way, the concept is the same.
When we go to a lender -- either a bank or a private party -- and receive a loan of money, we are willing to pay interest on the loan in recognition of the fact that the money we are borrowing is an asset which we want to use. It seems only fair to pay a rental fee for that asset to the person who owns it. It is not easy to acquire an automobile, and it is not easy to acquire money -- real money, that is. If the money we are borrowing was earned by someone's labor and talent, they are fully entitled to receive interest on it. But what are we to think of money that is created by the mere stroke of a pen or the click of a computer key? Why should anyone collect a rental fee on that?
When banks place credits into your checking account, they are merely pretending to lend you money. In reality, they have nothing to lend. Even the money that non-indebted depositors have placed with them was originally created out of nothing in response to someone else's loan. So what entitles the banks to collect rent on nothing? It is immaterial that men everywhere are forced by law to accept these nothing certificates in exchange for real goods and services. We are talking here, not about what is legal, but what is moral. As Thomas Jefferson observed at the time of his protracted battle against central banking in the United States, "No one has a natural right to the trade of money lender, but he who has money to lend."
Third reason to abolish the system
Centuries ago, usury was defined as any interest charged for a loan. Modern usage has redefined it as excessive interest. Certainly, any amount of interest charged for a pretended loan is excessive. The dictionary, therefore, needs a new definition. Usury: The charging of any interest on a loan of fiat money.

Let us, therefore, look at debt and interest in this light. Thomas Edison summed up the immorality of the system when he said: People who will not turn a shovel of dirt on the project nor contribute a pound of materials will collect more money...than will the people who will supply all the materials and do all the work.

Is that an exaggeration? Let us consider the purchase of a $100,000 home in which $30,000 represents the cost of the land, architect's fee, sales commissions, building permits, and that sort of thing and $70,000 is the cost of labor and building materials. If the home buyer puts up $30,000 as a down payment, then $70,000 must be borrowed. If the loan is issued at 11% over a 30-year period, the amount of interest paid will be $167,806. That means the amount paid to those who loan the money is about 2 1/2 times greater than paid to those who provide all the labor and all the materials. It is true that this figure represents the time-value of that money over thirty years and easily could be justified on the basis that a lender deserves to be compensated for surrendering the use of his capital for half a lifetime. But that assumes the lender actually had something to surrender, that he had earned the capital, saved it, and then loaned it for construction of someone else's house. What are we to think, however, about a lender who did nothing to earn the money, had not saved it, and, in fact, simply created it out of thin air? What is the time-value of nothing?
As we have already shown, every dollar that exists today, either in the form of currency, checkbook money, or even credit card money -- in other words, our entire money supply -- exists only because it was borrowed by someone; perhaps not you, but someone. That means all the American dollars in the entire world are earning daily and compounding interest for the banks which created them. A portion of every business venture, every investment, every profit, every transaction which involves money -- and that even includes losses and the payment of taxes -- a portion of all that is earmarked as payment to a bank. And what did the banks do to earn this perpetually flowing river of wealth? Did they lend out their own capital obtained through investment of stockholders? Did they lend out the hard-earned savings of their depositors? No, neither of these were their major source of income. They simply waved the magic wand called fiat money.
The flow of such unearned wealth under the guise of interest can only be viewed as usury of the highest magnitude. Even if there were no other reasons to abolish the Fed, the fact that it is the supreme instrument of usury would be more than sufficient by itself.
Who creates the money to pay the interest?
One of the most perplexing questions associated with this process is "Where does the money come from to pay the interest?" If you borrow $10,000 from a bank at 9%, you owe $10,900. But the bank only manufactures $10,000 for the loan. It would seem, therefore, that there is no way that you -- and all others with similar loans -- can possibly pay off your indebtedness. The amount of money put into circulation just isn't enough to cover the total debt, including interest. This has led some to the conclusion that it is necessary for you to borrow the $900 for interest, and that, in turn, leads to still more interest. The assumption is that, the more we borrow, the more we have to borrow, and that debt based on fiat money is a neverending spiral leading inexorably to more and more debt.
This is a partial truth. It is true that there is not enough money created to include the interest, but it is a fallacy that the only way to pay it back is to borrow still more. The assumption fails to take into account the exchange value of labor. Let us assume that you pay back your $10,000 loan at the rate of approximately $900 per month and that about $80 of that represents interest. You realize you are hard pressed to make your payments so you decide to take on a part-time job. The bank, on the other hand, is now making $80 profit each month on your loan. Since this amount is classified as "interest," it is not extinguished as is the larger portion which is a return of the loan itself. So this remains as spendable money in the account of the bank. The decision then is made to have the bank's floors waxed once a week. You respond to the ad in the paper and are hired at $80 per month to do the job. The result is that you earn the money to pay the interest on your loan, and -- this is the point -- the money you receive is the same money which you previously had paid. As long as you perform labor for the bank each month, the same dollars go into the bank as interest, then out of the revolving door as your wages, and then back into the bank as loan repayment.
It is not necessary that you work directly for the bank. No matter where you earn the money, its origin was a bank and its ultimate destination is a bank. The loop through which it travels can be large or small, but the fact remains all interest is paid eventually by human effort. And the significance of that fact is even more startling than the assumption that not enough money is created to pay back the interest. It is that the total of this human effort ultimately is for the benefit of those who create fiat money. It is a form of modern serfdom in which the great mass of society works as indentured servants to a ruling class of financial nobility.
Understanding the illusion
That's really all one needs to know about the operation of the banking cartel under the protection of the Federal Reserve. But it would be a shame to stop here without taking a look at the actual cogs, mirrors, and pulleys that make the magical mechanism work. It is a truly fascinating engine of mystery and deception. Let us, therefore, turn our attention to the actual process by which the magicians create the illusion of modern money. First we shall stand back for a general view to see the overall action. Then we shall move in closer and examine each component in detail.
The mandrake mechanism: an overview
The entire function of this machine is to convert debt into money. It's just that simple. First, the Fed takes all the government bonds which the public does not buy and writes a check to Congress in exchange for them. (It acquires other debt obligations as well, but government bonds comprise most of its inventory.) There is no money to back up this check. These fiat dollars are created on the spot for that purpose. By calling those bonds "reserves," the Fed then uses them as the base for creating 9 additional dollars for every dollar created for the bonds themselves. The money created for the bonds is spent by the government, whereas the money created on top of those bonds is the source of all the bank loans made to the nation's businesses and individuals. The result of this process is the same as creating money on a printing press, but the illusion is based on an accounting trick rather than a printing trick. The bottom line is that Congress and the banking cartel have entered into a partnership in which the cartel has the privilege of collecting interest on money which it creates out of nothing, a perpetual override on every American dollar that exists in the world. Congress, on the other hand, has access to unlimited funding without having to tell the voters their taxes are being raised through the process of inflation. If you understand this paragraph, you understand the Federal Reserve System.
Now for a more detailed view. There are three general ways in which the Federal Reserve creates fiat money out of debt. One is by making loans to the member banks through what is called the Discount Window. The second is by purchasing Treasury bonds and other certificates of debt through what is called the Open Market Committee. The third is by changing the so-called reserve ratio that member banks are required to hold. Each method is merely a different path to the same objective: taking IOUs and converting them into spendable money.
The Discount Window is merely bankers' language for the loan window. When banks run short of money, the Federal Reserve stands ready as the "bankers' bank" to lend it. There are many reasons for them to need loans. Since they hold "reserves" of only about one or two per cent of their deposits in vault cash and eight or nine per cent in securities, their operating margin is extremely thin. It is common for them to experience temporary negative balances caused by unusual customer demand for cash or unusually large clusters of checks all clearing through other banks at the same time. Sometimes they make bad loans and, when these former "assets" are removed from their books, their "reserves" are also decreased and may, in fact, become negative. Finally, there is the profit motive. When banks borrow from the Federal Reserve at one interest rate and lend it out at a higher rate, there is an obvious advantage. But that is merely the beginning. When a bank borrows a dollar from the Fed, it becomes a one-dollar reserve. Since the banks are required to keep reserves of only about ten per cent, they actually can loan up to nine dollars for each dollar borrowed.
Let's take a look at the math. Assume the bank receives $1 million from the Fed at a rate of 8%. The total annual cost, therefore, is $80,000 (.08 X $1,000,000). The bank treats the loan as a cash deposit, which means it becomes the basis for manufacturing an additional $9 million to be lent to its customers. If we assume that it lends that money at 11% interest, its gross return would be $990,000 (.11 X $9,000,000). Subtract from this the bank's cost of $80,000 plus an appropriate share of its overhead, and we have a net return of about $900,000. In other words, the bank borrows a million and can almost double it in one year. That's leverage! But don't forget the source of that leverage: the manufacture of another $9 million which is added to the nation's money supply.
The most important method used by the Federal Reserve for the creation of fiat money is the purchase and sale of securities on the open market. But, before jumping into this, a word of warning. Don't expect what follows to make any sense. Just be prepared to know that this is how they do it.

The trick lies in the use of words and phrases which have technical meanings quite different from what they imply to the average citizen. So keep your eye on the words. They are not meant to explain but to deceive. In spite of first appearances, the process is not complicated. It is just absurd.
Start with...
The federal government adds ink to a piece of paper, creates impressive designs around the edges, and calls it a bond or Treasury note. It is merely a promise to pay a specified sum at a specified interest on a specified date. As we shall see in the following steps, this debt eventually becomes the foundation for almost the entire nation's money supply.13 In reality, the government has created cash, but it doesn't yet look like cash. To convert these IOUs into paper bills and checkbook money is the function of the Federal Reserve System. To bring about that transformation, the bond is given to the Fed where it is then classified as a...
An instrument of government debt is considered an asset because it is assumed the government will keep its promise to pay. This is based upon its ability to obtain whatever money it needs through taxation. Thus, the strength of this asset is the power to take back that which it gives. So the Federal Reserve now has an "asset" which can be used to offset a liability. It then creates this liability by adding ink to yet another piece of paper and exchanging that with the government in return for the asset. That second piece of paper is a...
There is no money in any account to cover this check. Anyone else doing that would be sent to prison. It is legal for the Fed, however, because Congress wants the money, and this is the easiest way to get it. (To raise taxes would be political suicide; to depend on the public to buy all the bonds would not be realistic, especially if interest rates are set artificially low; and to print very large quantities of currency would be obvious and controversial.) This way, the process is mysteriously wrapped up in the banking system. The end result, however, is the same as turning on government printing presses and simply manufacturing fiat money (money created by the order of government with nothing of tangible value backing it) to pay government expenses. Yet, in accounting terms, the books are said to be "balanced" because the liability of the money is offset by the "asset" of the IOU. The Federal Reserve check received by the government then is endorsed and sent back to one of the Federal Reserve banks where it now becomes a...

Once the Federal Reserve check has been deposited into the government's account, it is used to pay government expenses and, thus, is transformed into many...
These checks become the means by which the first wave of fiat money floods into the economy. Recipients now deposit them into their own bank accounts where they become...
Commercial bank deposits immediately take on a split personality. On the one hand, they are liabilities to the bank because they are owed back to the depositors. But, as long as they remain in the bank, they also are considered as assets because they are on hand. Once again, the books are balanced: the assets offset the liabilities. But the process does not stop there. Through the magic of fractional-reserve banking, the deposits are made to serve an additional and more lucrative purpose. To accomplish this, the on-hand deposits now become reclassified in the books and called...
Reserves for what? Are these for paying off depositors should they want to close out of their accounts? No. That's the lowly function they served when they were classified as mere assets. Now that they have been given the name of "reserves," they become the magic wand to materialize even larger amounts of fiat money. This is where the real action is: at the level of the commercial banks. Here's how it works. The banks are permitted by the Fed to hold as little as 10% of their deposits in "reserve." That means, if they receive deposits of $1 million from the first wave of fiat money created by the Fed, they have $900,000 more than they are required to keep on hand ($1 million less 10% reserve). In bankers' language, that $900,000 is called...
The word "excess" is a tipoff that these so-called reserves have a special destiny. Now that they have been transmuted into an excess, they are considered as available for lending. And so in due course these excess reserves are converted into...
But wait a minute. How can this money be loaned out when it is owned by the original depositors who are still free to write checks and spend it any time they wish? The answer is that, when the new loans are made, they are not made with the same money at all. They are made with brand new money created out of thin air for that purpose. The nation's money supply simply increases by ninety per cent of the bank's deposits. Furthermore, this new money is far more interesting to the banks than the old. The old money, which they received from depositors, requires them to pay out interest or perform services for the privilege of using it. But, with the new money, the banks collect interest, instead, which is not too bad considering it cost them nothing to make. Nor is that the end of the process. When this second wave of fiat money moves into the economy, it comes right back into the banking system, just as the first wave did, in the form of...
The process now repeats but with slightly smaller numbers each time around. What was a "loan" on Friday comes back into the bank as a "deposit" on Monday. The deposit then is reclassified as a "reserve" and ninety per cent of that becomes an "excess" reserve which, once again, is available for a new "loan." Thus, the $1 million of first wave fiat money gives birth to $900,000 in the second wave, and that gives birth to $810,000 in the third wave ($900,000 less 10% reserve). It takes about twenty-eight times through the revolving door of deposits becoming loans becoming deposits becoming more loans until the process plays itself out to the maximum effect, which is...
The amount of fiat money created by the banking cartel is approximately nine times the amount of the original government debt which made the entire process possible. When the original debt itself is added to that figure, we finally have...
The total amount of fiat money created by the Federal Reserve and the commercial banks together is approximately ten times the amount of the underlying government debt. To the degree that this newly created money floods into the economy in excess of goods and services, it causes the purchasing power of all money, both old and new, to decline. Prices go up because the relative value of the money has gone down. The result is the same as if that purchasing power had been taken from us in taxes. The reality of this process, therefore, is that it is a...
Without realizing it, Americans have paid over the years, in addition to their federal income taxes and excise taxes, a completely hidden tax equal to many times the national debt! And that still is not the end of the process. Since our money supply is purely an arbitrary entity with nothing behind it except debt, its quantity can go down as well as up. When people are going deeper into debt, the nation's money supply expands and prices go up, but when they pay off their debts and refuse to renew, the money supply contracts and prices tumble. That is exactly what happens in times of economic or political uncertainty. This alternation between period of expansion and contraction of the money supply is the underlying cause of...
Who benefits from all of this? Certainly not the average citizen. The only beneficiaries are the political scientists in Congress who enjoy the effect of unlimited revenue to perpetuate their power, and the monetary scientists within the banking cartel called the Federal Reserve System who have been able to harness the American people, without their knowing it, to the yoke of modern feudalism.
Reserve Ratios
The previous figures are based on a "reserve" ratio of 10% (a money-expansion ratio of 10-to-1). It must be remembered, however, that this is purely arbitrary. Since the money is fiat with no previous-metal backing, there is no real limitation except what the politicians and money managers decide is expedient for the moment. Altering this ratio is the third way in which the Federal Reserve can influence the nation's supply of money. The numbers, therefore, must be considered as transient. At any time there is a "need" for more money, the ratio can be increased to 20-to-1 or 50-to-1, or the pretense of a reserve can be dropped altogether. There is virtually no limit to the amount of fiat money that can be manufactured under the present system.
Because the Federal Reserve can be counted on to "monetize" (convert into money) virtually any amount of government debt, and because this process of expanding the money supply is the primary cause of inflation, it is tempting to jump to the conclusion that federal debt and inflation are but two aspects of the same phenomenon. This, however, is not necessarily true. It is quite possible to have either one without the other.
The banking cartel holds a monopoly in the manufacture of money. Consequently, money is created only when IOUs are "monetized" by the Fed or by commercial banks. When private individuals, corporations, or institutions purchase government bonds, they must use money they have previously earned and saved. In other words, no new money is created, because they are using funds that are already in existence. Therefore, the sale of government bonds to the banking system is inflationary, but when sold to the private sector, it is not. That is the primary reason the United States avoided massive inflation during the 1980s when the federal government was going into debt at a greater rate than ever before in its history. By keeping interest rates high, these bonds became attractive to private investors, including those in other countries.15 Very little new money was created, because most of the bonds were purchased with American dollars already in existence. This, of course, was a temporary fix at best. Today, those bonds are continually maturing and are being replaced by still more bonds to include the original debt plus accumulated interest. Eventually this process must come to an end and, when it does, the Fed will have no choice but to literally buy back all the debt of the '80s -- that is, to replace all of the formerly invested private money with newly manufactured fiat money -- plus a great deal more to cover the interest. Then we will understand the meaning of inflation.
On the other side of the coin, the Federal Reserve has the option of manufacturing money even if the federal government does not go deeper into debt. For example, the huge expansion of the money supply leading up to the stock market crash in 1929 occurred at a time when the national debt was being paid off. In every year from 1920 through 1930, federal revenue exceeded expenses, and there were relatively few government bonds being offered. The massive inflation of the money supply was made possible by converting commercial bank loans into "reserves" at the Fed's discount window and by the Fed's purchase of banker's acceptances, which are commercial contracts for the purchase of goods.
Now the options are even greater. The Monetary Control Act of 1980 has made it possible for the Creature to monetize virtually any debt instrument, including IOUs from foreign governments. The apparent purpose of this legislation is to make it possible to bail out those governments which are having trouble paying the interest on their loans from American banks. When the Fed creates fiat American dollars to give foreign governments in exchange for their worthless bonds, the money path is slightly longer and more twisted, but the effect is similar to the purchase of U.S. Treasury Bonds. The newly created dollars go to the foreign governments, then to the American banks where they become cash reserves. Finally, they flow back into the U.S money pool (multiplied by nine) in the form of additional loans. The cost of the operation once again is born by the American citizen through the loss of purchasing power. Expansion of the money supply, therefore, and the inflation that follows, no longer even require federal deficits. As long as someone is willing to borrow American dollars, the cartel will have the option of creating those dollars specifically to purchase their bonds and, by so doing, continue to expand the money supply.
We must not forget, however, that one of the reasons the Fed was created in the first place was to make it possible for Congress to spend without the public knowing it was being taxed. Americans have shown an amazing indifference to this fleecing, explained undoubtedly by their lack of understanding of how the Mandrake Mechanism works. Consequently, at the present time, this cozy contract between the banking cartel and the politicians is in little danger of being altered. As a practical matter, therefore, even though the Fed may also create fiat money in exchange for commercial debt and for bonds of foreign governments, its major concern likely will be to continue supplying Congress.
The implications of this fact are mind boggling. Since our money supply, at present at least, is tied to the national debt, to pay off that debt would cause money to disappear. Even to seriously reduce it would cripple the economy. Therefore, as long as the Federal Reserve exists, America will be, must be, in debt.

The purchase of bonds from other governments is accelerating in the present political climate of internationalism. Our own money supply increasingly is based upon their debt as well as ours, and they, too, will not be allowed to pay it off even if they are able.
While it is true that the Mandrake Mechanism is responsible for the expansion of the money supply, the process also works in reverse. Just as money is created when the Federal Reserve purchases bonds or other debt instruments, it is extinguished by the sale of those same items. When they are sold, the money is given back to the System and disappears into the inkwell or computer chip from which it came. Then, the same secondary ripple effect that created money through the commercial banking system causes it to be withdrawn from the economy. Furthermore, even if the Federal Reserve does not deliberately contract the money supply, the same result can and often does occur when the public decides to resist the availability of credit and reduce its debt. A man can only be tempted to borrow, he cannot be forced to do so.

There are many psychological factors involved in a decision to go into debt that can offset the easy availability of money and a low interest rate: A downturn in the economy, the threat of civil disorder, the fear of pending war, an uncertain political climate, to name just a few. Even though the Fed may try to pump money into the economy by making it abundantly available, the public can thwart that move simply by saying no, thank you. When this happens, the olds debts that are being paid off are not replaced by new ones to take their place, and the entire amount of consumer and business debt will shrink. That means the money supply also will shrink, because, in modern America, debt is money. And it is this very expansion and contraction of the monetary pool -- a phenomenon that could not occur if based upon the laws of supply and demand -- that is at the very core of practically every boom and bust that has plagued mankind throughout history.
In conclusion, it can be said that modern money is a grand illusion conjured by the magicians of finance in politics. We are living in an age of fiat money, and it is sobering to realize that every previous nation in history that has adopted such money eventually was economically destroyed by it. Furthermore, there is nothing in our present monetary structure that offers any assurances that we may be exempted from that morbid roll call.
Correction. There is one. It is still within the power of Congress to abolish the Federal Reserve System.


The American dollar has no intrinsic value. It is a classic example of fiat money with no limit to the quantity that can be produced. Its primary value lies in the willingness of people to accept it and, to that end, legal tender laws require them to do so.
It is true that our money is created out of nothing, but it is more accurate to say that it is based upon debt. In one sense, therefore, our money is created out of less than nothing. The entire money supply would vanish into the bank vaults and computer chips if all debts were repaid.
Under the present System, therefore, our leaders cannot allow a serious reduction in either the national or consumer debt. Charging interest on pretended loans is usury, and that has become institutionalized under the Federal Reserve System.
The Mandrake Mechanism by which the Fed converts debt into money may seem complicated at first, but it is simple if one remembers that the process is not intended to be logical but to confuse and deceive. The end product of the Mechanism is artificial expansion of the money supply, which is the root cause of the hidden tax called inflation.
This expansion then leads to contraction and, together, they produce the destructive boom-bust cycle that has plagued mankind throughout history wherever fiat money has existed.
More on How Money is Created by The Private Banks
"Modern Banking" was actually created over 4,000 years ago in Babylon. [Of course, without the electronic information.] Henry Ford (founder of the Ford Motor Company in 1903) stated: "It is well that the people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning."
The "lending" techniques that are used are beyond brilliant. It took some very, very smart people to figure out how to appear to be lending money, but in actuality have the value supplied by the person who is borrowing (wanting a loan). When you discover the truth, you will be seething mad... .
The whole truth is NOT revealed to the borrower by the bank. The bank or other lending institution does NOT disclose to you that your promissory note to repay the loan is actually an asset to the bank - that they deposit. The bank does not let you know that a promissory note is actually a "negotiable instrument" under the Uniform Commercial Code, and that it will be deposited to fund your loan. Nor do you learn that the bank has a liability to you of approximately the amount of the loan. (The bank owes you by their own bookkeeping entries!)
The bank does NOT tell you that you factually provided the actual cash value for your own loan! Thus, the bank only appears to be lending you anything. That's right: banks and lending institutions only appear to lend money. Let's go through how money is created at the "government" level, then we'll see how this applies to you and your alleged debt.
How Money Is Created In the U.S.:
1. Congress says, "We need $10 Billion."
2. So they go over to the treasury and say, "We need $10 Billion."
3. The U.S. Treasury prints up $10 Billion in government bonds.
4. They take those bonds over to the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank (Fed), you know, just down the road from the Treasury.
5. They walk into the Fed with these $10 Billion in bonds and say, "We need to borrow $10 Billion."
6. The Fed takes that $10 Billion in Bonds and agrees to then loan the U.S. Government $10 Billion.
7. The Fed writes into their little ledger with a stubby pencil, "Owes us $10 Billion." (Actually, it's done by computer nowadays.)
8. The Fed then creates money out of thin air by authorizing some currency to be printed. Note that the legal tender in the US is the private Federal Reserve Note (not a United States Government Note).
9. Now the U.S. Government owes another $10 Billion.

Government officials agree that this is how the banking system works today:
Representative Wright Patman, former Chairman of a House Banking Committee said:
"The Federal Reserve Banks create money out of thin air to buy Government bonds... The Federal Reserve Bank is a total money making machine."
Former Federal Reserve Bank Chairman Eccles was asked by Patman, "Mr. Eccles, how did you get the money to buy these two billion dollars of government bonds." Mr. Eccles replied, "We create it." "Out of what?" Patman asked. "Out of the right to issue credit money.", i.e. out of nothing (by the way, this right to create money out of nothing was given to the Private Federal Reserve Bank by a fraudulent act of Congress in 1913 known as the Federal Reserve Act, same fraud has been happening since the 17th century with the Private Bank of England).
Former Congress Louis McFadden, former chairman of the House Committee on Banking and Currency remarked about the Federal Reserve Bank: "A super-state controlled by international bankers and international industrialists acting together to enslave the world for their own pleasure."
When the unconstitutional Federal Reserve Act was about to be passed in 1913, Congressman Charles Lindbergh said, "This Act establishes the most gigantic trust on Earth. When the President signs this bill, the invisible government by the monetary power will be legalized. The people may not know it immediately, but the day of reckoning is only a few years removed...The worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking bill."
If you're an honest, ethical person, then you believe that all lenders should be repaid. If the Federal Reserve Banking System repaid the loan from the U.S. Government, the "debt" would be cancelled.
Let's Take a Quick Look Over That
The bonds printed by the treasury have an actual value of $10 Billion. They take the actual value of $10 Billion in bonds over to the privately owned Fed bank to "borrow" the $10 Billion in currency.(~?~)
[Note: If an asset is anything that can be sold, and then the money received can be deposited into a bank, then there was nothing actually lent to the U.S. Government, was there? They provided bonds that could be sold for $10 Billion in exchange for the $10 Billion from the Fed. Where was the loan? There was none. The Fed and the U.S. Government made an exchange, and the Fed lied and called it a loan.]
Now, we all know that the people who run the government aren't the brightest, but to give away the bonds so they can borrow money is just ridiculous, wouldn't you agree?
Look, I don't expect you to believe that without some proof. I mean, it's just insane, right? Listen to a recording about the Story of the Federal Reserve System. It's FREE to you, over an hour long, and it's called The Creature from Jeckyll Island, by G. Edward Griffin. Mr. Griffin is a well-respected authority on the creation of the Federal Reserve Banking System, and has written a best-selling book of the same name. The link to the audio clip is:  http://www.eliminatemortgages.com/creature.rm .
How This Applies to You
On a national level, we see the absurdity behind the "money creation" process. But when it's right there in our face, it's a little harder to "see the forest through all the trees."
Money is created on a local level through the banks and other lending institutions in much the same way. The value is first provided to the bank, the bank deposits the asset, and the asset you provided is used as the value to fund the "loan" to you.
Again, I know it sounds absurd, like, "How can they get away with this?" I wondered the same thing when I first came across this information. The Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago came out with a very revealing publication back in the 1990s called Modern Money Mechanics. While the file itself is a web page, in the physical publication on page 6 we find the exact mechanics of this, including the bookkeeping entries. (There is more information at  http://banksrestorationact.4mg.com .)
So how does the bank loan actually work?
1. You want a loan for your home.
2. The bank advertises that they loan money.
3. You "apply" for a "loan."
4. They put you through the ringer and make you glad and relieved that you were able to be approved for a loan. (You know, like they are doing you a really big favor.)
5. They have you sign a promissory note.

And here's the part you're never supposed to know

6. Since your promissory note can be sold for money, it's an asset. (Covered more in the Research section.)
7. The bank deposits the asset into an account for approximately the amount of the note.
8. The bank cuts you a check from the deposit you never knew about (or transfers the money to those who should be receiving it).
9. And you think you owe money back on a loan, when in fact all that was made was an exchange.

Just in case you don't believe the above, printoff the affidavit below and try to get any bank president to sign it! He won't!!!
Affidavit for the Bankers
The undersigned affiant, being duly sworn on oath, deposes and says: That he/she is an officer of the below named financial institution, a nationally chartered commercial bank or lending institution or organization purchasing promissory notes, hereinafter called bank. That, as an officer of the bank, he/she has the authority to execute this affidavit on behalf of the bank and to bind the bank to its provisions. It is understood that an exchange is not a loan. It is understood that the borrower's promissory note is not used to fund any check. It is understood that the bank does not record the promissory note as abank asset offset by a abank liability. It is understood the bank complies with and follows the Federal Reserve Bank's policies and procedures. It is understood that the bank does not use the same or a similar bookkeeping entry to record the promissory note as a loan to the bank. It is understood that when banks participate in ranting loans the economic effect is not the same or similar to stealing, counterfeiting, or a swindle. Banks who follow the Federal Reserve Bank's policies and procedures deny customers neither equal protection under the alw, nor money, nor credit. The bank fully discloses to each and every borrower all material facts concerning if the borrower provided the funds to issue the bank loan check or if other depositors or investors fund the bank loan check. It is understood that the one who funded the loan should be repaid their money. It is understood that cash is the money and a bank liability indicates that the bank owes cash. I agree that if I have made a false statement regarding bank loans, then any and all loans or alleged loans issued or purchased at the bank are forgiven, without recourse, and shall immediately be considered null and void. Signed under penalty of perjury.
Signature of Bank Officer __________________________________________
Print Name of Bank Officer__________________________________________
Name of Bank: ___________________________________________________
Address of Bank: _________________________________________________
City/State/Zip: ___________________________________________________
Sworn to and subscribed before me this _____ day of ___________________, 20____
Signature of Notary Public ________________________________________________
Now Let's Look at That...
If you think about it, the bankers' scheme is really quite brilliant. I mean, what other business in the whole world allows you to create money based on the value that someone else gives you, then charge that person again plus interest? Wow!
So the real question becomes, "If the promissory note is an asset, what funded the bank's ownership of the note?"
Answer: They still don't really own it. They made an exchange - Your promissory note (asset to the bank) was exchanged for approximately the amount of the loan. You gave the bank an asset worth $100,000 and the bank returned $100,000 to you. Where was the loan? There wasn't one. But you really do have to admit, it's brilliant.
Listen, we're not the first people to "discover" this was going on. But we have figured out some things that no one else has!
As an honest, ethical person who believes that all loans should be repaid, do you agree that the bank should repay your loan to them? After all, they deposited your promissory note. Your promissory note is an asset that they exchanged for a check. Where's the loan? Factually, there isn't one. And since all lenders should be repaid, shouldn't the bank repay your loan to them? If so, you wouldn't have the "debt" and would live better.
Quickly, when you deposit money in your checking account, does the bank now owe you that money when you want it? Yes. The bank has a new asset, the $100 you deposited into your checking account. The bank also has a new matching liability that says the bank owes you $100. Assets = Liabilities.
The bookkeeping entries are nearly identical for a deposit into your checking account and for a new loan. By lending, the banks now have more assets and liabilities.
If you were to lend me $500, your "pool of money" would be smaller. When a bank "loans" money, their "pool of money" increases.
Quick Summary behind How a Bank Loan Works
Money is created today by "lending," so all money today is born as "debt money."
The person who wants a loan must provide to the bank something that he or she doesn't know is valuable, called a promissory note.
The promissory note is a bank asset, and that asset is deposited into a demand deposit type of account.
The asset deposited is what provides the bank the value to be able to "lend" to you and others.
The bank exchanges value for value, just like the Federal Reserve Bank and our Government, then lies about it and calls it a loan.
You and millions of others believe you have a debt.
This has the similar economic effect of counterfeiting, swindling and stealing.
More on Equal Protection
Our founding fathers knew about this type of banking. That's why there were provisions in the Constitution of the United States of America to stop this type of banking system to infest our nation.
Article 1, Section 8, clause 5 states:
"Congress shall have the power to coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures."
Article 1, Section 10 in part states:
"No state shall use any Thing but gold and silver coin as a tender in payment of its debts;"
Is it more difficult to create money with "creative bookkeeping," (or as President Bush says, "Cookin' the Books") by depositing your promissory note and not telling you? Or is it more difficult to mine the gold and silver to mint the money?
Mining is difficult and expensive. Bookkeeping entries cost virtually nothing.
Take a look at the definition of "Bank" in the 4th Edition of Black's Law Dictionary:
"An institution, of great value in the commercial world, empowered to receive deposits of money, to make loans, and to issue its promissory notes (designed to circulate as money, and commonly called 'bank notes' or 'bank-bills,') or to perform any one or more of these functions."
If a promissory note is designed to circulate as money, like money it can be deposited into a checking account, can't it? You bet.
That was never disclosed in the bank loan agreement, was it? No.
See, if gold and silver coin were the money, the current banking system could not exist. Our founding fathers knew that.
Since the promissory note is a negotiable instrument, per the Uniform Commercial Code, at what point did the bank "own" the promissory note? A note is an IOU. It says "I owe you $X, which is to be repaid on this or that date, or through payments."
Did you give the bank permission to turn your "promise to pay" into money? Probably not. By the bank altering the note and turning it into a negotiable instrument, they changed the cost and the risk to you and them. Before they deposit the note into a checking account, you thought the agreement was that they were going to loan you money. They were the ones at risk. It's your duty to pay them.
When the bank deposited the note, the entire cost of the loan was funded by you, and you're now supposed to pay them? That's not what you agreed to, is it? Because of this banking system, you are in "debt" with "money" that you provided the value for. There's a lot more to this and you should know it, but it's also a lot to try to learn quickly.
By the way, what is the difference between the economics of the current banking system and a thief who steals from you? And a counterfeiter who "loans" you counterfeiter at no cost to him? A cheap con artist who swindles you into believing you owe him money? What is the difference between the banking system today and a counterfeiter, theif, and a swindler? There is no economic difference.
You can get more information from: Ted Susu-Mago  http://eliminatemortgages.com/. Here's just some of what you will discover for yourself when you get more information:
• The "Big Plan" the Bankers had - way back in 1892 - and are still carrying forth.
• They say there's a positive and a negative for everything, so what are the two faces of debt?
• When the U.S. declared bankruptcy in 1933, what did they really do to our money?
• What is so valuable about being able to control the interest rates?
• How is public debt really measured, and how do you increase the public debt every time you use a credit card, take out a "loan" or use electronic money?

Chart of who "owns" the Federal Reserve

Chart 1
Federal Reserve Directors: A Study of Corporate and Banking Influence
Published 1976
Chart 1 reveals the linear connection between the Rothschilds and the Bank of England, and the London banking houses which ultimately control the Federal Reserve Banks through their stockholdings of bank stock and their subsidiary firms in New York. The two principal Rothschild representatives in New York, J. P. Morgan Co., and Kuhn,Loeb & Co. were the firms which set up the Jekyll Island Conference at which the Federal Reserve Act was drafted, who directed the subsequent successful campaign to have the plan enacted into law by Congress, and who purchased the controlling amounts of stock in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York in 1914. These firms had their principal officers appointed to the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and the Federal Advisory Council in 1914. In 1914 a few families (blood or business related) owning controlling stock in existing banks (such as in New York City) caused those banks to purchase controlling shares in the Federal Reserve regional banks. Examination of the charts and text in the House Banking Committee Staff Report of August, 1976 and the current stockholders list of the 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks show this same family control.

N.M. Rothschild , London - Bank of England
| |
| J. Henry Schroder

| Banking | Corp.
| |
Brown, Shipley - Morgan Grenfell - Lazard - |
& Company & Company Brothers |
| | | |
--------------------| -------| | |
| | | | | |
Alex Brown - Brown Bros. - Lord Mantagu - Morgan et Cie -- Lazard ---|
& Son | Harriman Norman | Paris Bros |
| | / | N.Y. |
| | | | | |
| Governor, Bank | J.P. Morgan Co -- Lazard ---|
| of England / N.Y. Morgan Freres |
| 1924-1938 / Guaranty Co. Paris |
| / Morgan Stanley Co. | /
| / | \Schroder Bank
| / | Hamburg/Berlin
| / Drexel & Company /
| / Philadelphia /
| / /
| / Lord Airlie
| / /
| / M. M. Warburg Chmn J. Henry Schroder
| | Hamburg --------- marr. Virginia F. Ryan
| | | grand-daughter of Otto
| | | Kahn of Kuhn Loeb Co.
| | |
| | |
Lehman Brothers N.Y -------------- Kuhn Loeb Co. N. Y.
| | --------------------------
| | | |
| | | |
Lehman Brothers - Mont. Alabama Solomon Loeb Abraham Kuhn
| | __|______________________|_________
Lehman-Stern, New Orleans Jacob Schiff/Theresa Loeb Nina Loeb/Paul Warburg
------------------------- | | |
| | Mortimer Schiff James Paul Warburg
_____________|_______________/ |
| | | | |
Mayer Lehman | Emmanuel Lehman \
| | | \
Herbert Lehman Irving Lehman \
| | | \
Arthur Lehman \ Phillip Lehman John Schiff/Edith Brevoort Baker
/ | Present Chairman Lehman Bros
/ Robert Owen Lehman Kuhn Loeb - Granddaughter of
/ | George F. Baker
| / |
| / |
| / Lehman Bros Kuhn Loeb (1980)
| / |
| / Thomas Fortune Ryan
| | |
| | |
Federal Reserve Bank Of New York |
|||||||| |
______National City Bank N. Y. |
| | |
| National Bank of Commerce N.Y ---|
| | \
| Hanover National Bank N.Y. \
| | \
| Chase National Bank N.Y. \
| |
| |
Shareholders - National City Bank - N.Y. |
----------------------------------------- |
| /
James Stillman /
Elsie m. William Rockefeller /
Isabel m. Percy Rockefeller /
William Rockefeller Shareholders - National Bank of Commerce N. Y.
J. P. Morgan -----------------------------------------------
M.T. Pyne Equitable Life - J.P. Morgan
Percy Pyne Mutual Life - J.P. Morgan
J.W. Sterling H.P. Davison - J. P. Morgan
NY Trust/NY Edison Mary W. Harriman
Shearman & Sterling A.D. Jiullard - North British Merc. Insurance
| Jacob Schiff
| Thomas F. Ryan
| Paul Warburg
| Levi P. Morton - Guaranty Trust - J. P. Morgan
Shareholders - First National Bank of N.Y.
J.P. Morgan
George F. Baker
George F. Baker Jr.
Edith Brevoort Baker
US Congress - 1946-64
Shareholders - Hanover National Bank N.Y.
James Stillman
William Rockefeller
Shareholders - Chase National Bank N.Y.
George F. Baker

Chart 2
Federal Reserve Directors: A Study of Corporate and Banking Influence
- Published 1983
The J. Henry Schroder Banking Company chart encompasses the entire history of the twentieth century, embracing as it does the program (Belgium Relief Commission) which provisioned Germany from 1915-1918 and dissuaded Germany from seeking peace in 1916; financing Hitler in 1933 so as to make a Second World War possible; backing the Presidential campaign of Herbert Hoover ; and even at the present time, having two of its major executives of its subsidiary firm, Bechtel Corporation serving as Secretary of Defense and Secretary of State in the Reagan Administration.
The head of the Bank of England since 1973, Sir Gordon Richardson, Governor of the Bank of England (controlled by the House of Rothschild) was chairman of J. Henry Schroder Wagg and Company of London from 1963-72, and director of J. Henry Schroder,New York and Schroder Banking Corporation,New York,as well as Lloyd's Bank of London, and Rolls Royce. He maintains a residence on Sutton Place in New York City, and as head of "The London Connection," can be said to be the single most influential banker in the world.

J. Henry Schroder
Baron Rudolph Von Schroder
Hamburg - 1858 - 1934
Baron Bruno Von Schroder
Hamburg - 1867 - 1940
F. C. Tiarks |
1874-1952 |
| |
marr. Emma Franziska |
(Hamburg) Helmut B. Schroder
J. Henry Schroder 1902 |
Dir. Bank of England |
Dir. Anglo-Iranian |
Oil Company J. Henry Schroder Banking Company N.Y.
J. Henry Schroder Trust Company N.Y.
| |
Allen Dulles John Foster Dulles
Sullivan & Cromwell Sullivan & Cromwell
Director - CIA U. S. Secretary of State
Rockefeller Foundation

Prentiss Gray
Belgian Relief Comm. Lord Airlie
Chief Marine Transportation -----------
US Food Administration WW I Chairman; Virgina Fortune
Manati Sugar Co. American & Ryan daughter of Otto Kahn
British Continental Corp. of Kuhn,Loeb Co.
| |
| |
M. E. Rionda |
------------ |
Pres. Cuba Cane Sugar Co. |
Manati Sugar Co. many other |
sugar companies. _______|
| |
| |
G. A. Zabriskie |
--------------- | Emile Francoui
Chmn U.S. Sugar Equalization | --------------
Board 1917-18; Pres Empire | Belgian Relief Comm. Kai
Biscuit Co., Columbia Baking | Ping Coal Mines, Tientsin
Co. , Southern Baking Co. | Railroad,Congo Copper, La
| Banque Nationale de Belgique
Suite 2000 42 Broadway | N. Y |
| | |
| | |
Edgar Richard Julius H. Barnes Herbert Hoover
------------- ---------------- --------------
Belgium Relief Comm Belgium Relief Comm Chmn Belgium Relief Com
Amer Relief Comm Pres Grain Corp. U.S. Food Admin
U.S. Food Admin U.S. Food Admin Sec of Commerce 1924-28
1918-24, Hazeltine Corp. 1917-18, C.B Pitney Kaiping Coal Mines
| Bowes Corp, Manati Congo Copper, President
| Sugar Corp. U.S. 1928-32
John Lowery Simpson
Sacramento,Calif Belgium Relief |
Comm. U. S. Food Administration Baron Kurt Von Schroder
Prentiss Gray Co. J. Henry Schroder -----------------------
Trust, Schroder-Rockefeller, Chmn Schroder Banking Corp. J.H. Stein
Fin Comm, Bechtel International Bankhaus (Hitler's personal bank
Co. Bechtel Co. (Casper Weinberger account) served on board of all
Sec of Defense, George P. Schultz German subsidiaries of ITT . Bank
Sec of State (Reagan Admin). for International Settlements,
| SS Senior Group Leader,Himmler's
| Circle of Friends (Nazi Fund),
| Deutsche Reichsbank,president
Schroder-Rockefeller & Co. , N.Y.
Avery Rockefeller, J. Henry Schroder
Banking Corp., Bechtel Co., Bechtel
International Co. , Canadian Bechtel
Company. |
Gordon Richardson
Governor, Bank of England
1973-PRESENT C.B. of J. Henry Schroder N.Y.
Schroder Banking Co., New York, Lloyds Bank
Rolls Royce

Chart 3
Federal Reserve Directors: A Study of Corporate and Banking Influence
- Published 1976
The David Rockefeller chart shows the link between the Federal Reserve Bank of New York,Standard Oil of Indiana,General Motors and Allied Chemical Corportion (Eugene Meyer family) and Equitable Life (J. P. Morgan).

Chairman of the Board
Chase Manhattan Corp
Chase Manhattan Corp. |
Officer & Director Interlocks|---------------------
------|----------------------- |
| |
Private Investment Co. for America Allied Chemicals Corp.
| |
Firestone Tire & Rubber Company General Motors
| |
Orion Multinational Services Ltd. Rockefeller Family & Associates
| |
ASARCO. Inc Chrysler Corp.
| |
Southern Peru Copper Corp. Intl' Basic Economy Corp.
| |
Industrial Minerva Mexico S.A. R.H. Macy & Co.
| |
Continental Corp. Selected Risk Investments S.A.
| |
Honeywell Inc. Omega Fund, Inc.
| |
Northwest Airlines, Inc. Squibb Corporation
| |
Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. Olin Foundation
| |
Minnesota Mining & Mfg Co (3M) Mutual Benefit Life Ins. Co. of NJ
| |
American Express Co. AT & T
| |
Hewlett Packard Pacific Northwestern Bell Co.
| |
FMC Corporation BeachviLime Ltd.
| |
Utah Intl' Inc. Eveleth Expansion Company
| |
Exxon Corporation Fidelity Union Bancorporation
| |
International Nickel/Canada Cypress Woods Corporation
| |
Federated Capital Corporation Intl' Minerals & Chemical Corp.
| |
Equitable Life Assurance Soc U.S. Burlington Industries
| |
Federated Dept Stores Wachovia Corporation
| |
General Electric Jefferson Pilot Corporation
| |
Scott Paper Co. R. J. Reynolds Industries Inc.
| |
American Petroleum Institute United States Steel Corp.
| |
Richardson Merril Inc. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.
| |
May Department Stores Co. Norton-Simon Inc.
| |
Sperry Rand Corporation Stone-Webster Inc.
| |
San Salvador Development Company Standard Oil of Indiana

Chart 4
Federal Reserve Directors: A Study of Corporate and Banking Influence
- Published 1976
This chart shows the interlocks between the Federal Reserve Bank of New York J. Henry Schroder Banking Corp., J. Henry Schroder Trust Co., Rockefeller Center, Inc., Equitable Life Assurance Society ( J.P. Morgan), and the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.

Alan Pifer, President
Carnegie Corporation
of New York
Carnegie Corporation
Trustee Interlocks --------------------------
---------------------- |
| |
Rockefeller Center, Inc J. Henry Schroder Trust Company
| |
The Cabot Corporation Paul Revere Investors, Inc.
| |
Federal Reserve Bank of Boston Qualpeco, Inc.
Owens Corning Fiberglas
New England Telephone Co.
Fisher Scientific Company
Mellon National Corporation
Equitable Life Assurance Society
Twentieth Century Fox Corporation
J. Henry Schroder Banking Corporation

Chart 5
Federal Reserve Directors: A Study of Corporate and Banking Influence
- Published 1976
This chart shows the link between the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Brown Brothers Harriman,Sun Life Assurance Co. (N.M. Rothschild and Sons), and the Rockefeller Foundation.

Maurice F. Granville
Chairman of The Board
Texaco Incorporated
Texaco Officer & Director Interlocks ---------------- Liggett & Myers, Inc.
------------------------------------ |
| |
| |
L Arabian American Oil Company St John d'el Ray Mining Co. Ltd.
O | |
N Brown Brothers Harriman & Co. National Steel Corporation
D | |
O Brown Harriman & Intl' Banks Ltd. Massey-Ferguson Ltd.
N | |
American Express Mutual Life Insurance Co.
| |
N. American Express Intl' Banking Corp. Mass Mutual Income Investors Inc.
M. | |
Anaconda United Services Life Ins. Co.
R | |
O Rockefeller Foundation Fairchild Industries
T | |
H Owens-Corning Fiberglas Blount, Inc.
S | |
C National City Bank (Cleveland) William Wrigley Jr. Co
H | |
I Sun Life Assurance Co. National Blvd. Bank of Chicago
L | |
D General Reinsurance Lykes Youngstown Corporation
| |
General Electric (NBC) Inmount Corporation

** Source: Federal Reserve Directors: A Study of Corporate and Banking Influence. Staff Report,Committee on Banking,Currency and Housing, House of Representatives, 94th Congress, 2nd Session, August 1976.
Back to BBS Files Menu...

5. President John F. Kennedy's Executive Order Abolishing the Privately Owned Federal Reserve System issued just before his assassination and later ignored.


JFK and his brother were going to clean up the CIA/FBI, the military establishment, stop the war in Vietnam, stop organized crimes and mafias and abolish the privately held Federal Reserve system, and ensure that the Middle East including Israel are a nuclear free zone. Unfortunately, they were both assassinated and now we are seeing a United States controlled by Zionists and illuminatis.

In a comment made to a Columbia University class on Nov. 12, 1963, ten days before his assassination, President John Fitzgerald Kennedy allegedly said:

"The high office of the President has been used to foment a plot to destroy the American's freedom and before I leave office, I must inform the citizen of this plight."

In this matter, John Fitzgerald Kennedy appears to be the subject of his own book... a true Profile of Courage.

In "Economic Solutions," Peter Kershaw provided a list of the ten primary shareholders in the Federal Reserve banking system that was established in 1913:

i) The Rothschild Family - London
ii) The Rothschild Family - Berlin
iii) The Lazard Brothers - Paris
iv) Israel Seiff - Italy
v) Kuhn-Loeb - Germany
vi) The Warburgs - Amsterdam
vii) The Warburgs - Hamburg
viii) Lehman Brothers - New York City
ix) Goldman & Sachs - New York City
x) The Rockefeller Family - New York City

Jim Marrs adds in his excellent book "Rule By Secrecy" that the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, which undeniably controls the 11 other Federal Reserve branches, is essentially controlled by two financial institutions:

a) Chase-Manhattan (a Rockefeller stronghold) - 6,389,445 shares - 32.3%
b) Citibank - 4,051,851 shares - 20.5%

Thus, these two entities control nearly 53% of the New York Federal Reserve Bank. The power they have is mind-boggling. It is the Federal Reserve private organization that prints the money. JFK wanted the US Government to print it. Read on.

JFK vs. The Federal Reserve (in trying to change the above) by Anthony Wayne Lawgiver.org

On June 4, 1963, a virtually unknown Presidential decree, Executive Order 11110, was signed with the authority to basically strip the Federal Reserve Bank of its power to loan money to the United States Federal Government at interest. With the stroke of a pen, President Kennedy declared that the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank would soon be out of business.

The Christian Law Fellowship has exhaustively researched this matter through the Federal Register and Library of Congress. We can now safely conclude that this Executive Order has never been repealed, amended, or superceded by any subsequent Executive Order. In simple terms, it is still valid.

When President John Fitzgerald Kennedy - the author of Profiles in Courage - signed this Order, it returned to the federal government, specifically the Treasury Department, the Constitutional power to create and issue currency - money - without going through the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank. President Kennedy's Executive Order 11110 [the full text is displayed further below] gave the Treasury Department the explicit authority: "to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury." This means that for every ounce of silver in the U.S. Treasury's vault, the government could introduce new money into circulation based on the silver bullion physically held there. As a result, more than $4 billion in United States Notes were brought into circulation in $2 and $5 denominations. $10 and $20 United States Notes were never circulated but were being printed by the Treasury Department when Kennedy was assassinated. It appears obvious that President Kennedy knew the Federal Reserve Notes being used as the purported legal currency were contrary to the Constitution of the united States of America.

United States Notes" were issued as an interest-free and debt-free currency backed by silver reserves in the U.S. Treasury. We compared a "Federal Reserve Note" issued from the private central bank of the United States (the Federal Reserve Bank a/k/a Federal Reserve System), with a "United States Note" from the U.S. Treasury issued by President Kennedy's Executive Order. They almost look alike, except one says "Federal Reserve Note" on the top while the other says "United States Note". Also, the Federal Reserve Note has a green seal and serial number while the United States Note has a red seal and serial number.

President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 and the United States Notes he had issued were immediately taken out of circulation. Federal Reserve Notes continued to serve as the legal currency of the nation. According to the United States Secret Service, 99% of all U.S. paper "currency" circulating in 1999 are Federal Reserve Notes.

Kennedy knew that if the silver-backed United States Notes were widely circulated, they would have eliminated the demand for Federal Reserve Notes. This is a very simple matter of economics. The USN was backed by silver and the FRN was not backed by anything of intrinsic value. Executive Order 11110 should have prevented the national debt from reaching its current level (virtually all of the nearly $9 trillion in federal debt has been created since 1963) if LBJ or any subsequent President were to enforce it. It would have almost immediately given the U.S. Government the ability to repay its debt without going to the private Federal Reserve Banks and being charged interest to create new "money". Executive Order 11110 gave the U.S.A. the ability to, once again, create its own money backed by silver and realm value worth something.

Again, according to our own research, just five months after Kennedy was assassinated, no more of the Series 1958 "Silver Certificates" were issued either, and they were subsequently removed from circulation. Perhaps the assassination of JFK was a warning to all future presidents not to interfere with the private Federal Reserve's control over the creation of money. It seems very apparent that President Kennedy challenged the "powers that exist behind U.S. and world finance". With true patriotic courage, JFK boldly faced the two most successful vehicles that have ever been used to drive up debt:

1) war (Viet Nam, another oil & resources wealth grabbing war); and,
2) the creation of money by a privately owned central bank.

His efforts to have all U.S. troops out of Vietnam by 1965 combined with Executive Order 11110 would have destroyed the profits and control of the private Federal Reserve Bank.

Executive Order 11110

AMENDMENT OF EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 10289 AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE PERFORMANCE OF CERTAIN FUNCTIONS AFFECTING THE DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY. By virtue of the authority vested in me by section 301 of title 3 of the United States Code, it is ordered as follows:

SECTION 1. Executive Order No. 10289 of September 19, 1951, as amended, is hereby further amended - (a) By adding at the end of paragraph 1 thereof the following subparagraph (j): "(j) The authority vested in the President by paragraph (b) of section 43 of the Act of May 12, 1933, as amended (31 U.S.C. 821 (b)), to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury not then held for redemption of any outstanding silver certificates, to prescribe the denominations of such silver certificates, and to coin standard silver dollars and subsidiary silver currency for their redemption," and (b) By revoking subparagraphs (b) and (c) of paragraph 2 thereof. SECTION 2. The amendment made by this Order shall not affect any act done, or any right accruing or accrued or any suit or proceeding had or commenced in any civil or criminal cause prior to the date of this Order but all such liabilities shall continue and may be enforced as if said amendments had not been made.

June 4, 1963

Once again, Executive Order 11110 is still valid. According to Title 3, United States Code, Section 301 dated January 26, 1998:

Executive Order (EO) 10289 dated Sept. 17, 1951, 16 F.R. 9499, was as amended by:
EO 10583, dated December 18, 1954, 19 F.R. 8725;
EO 10882 dated July 18, 1960, 25 F.R. 6869;
EO 11110 dated June 4, 1963, 28 F.R. 5605;
EO 11825 dated December 31, 1974, 40 F.R. 1003;
EO 12608 dated September 9, 1987, 52 F.R. 34617

The 1974 and 1987 amendments, added after Kennedy's 1963 amendment, did not change or alter any part of Kennedy's EO 11110. A search of Clinton's 1998 and 1999 EO's and Presidential Directives has also shown no reference to any alterations, suspensions, or changes to EO 11110.

The Federal Reserve Bank, a.k.a Federal Reserve System, is a Private Corporation. Black's Law Dictionary defines the "Federal Reserve System" as: "Network of twelve central banks to which most national banks belong and to which state chartered banks may belong. Membership rules require investment of stock and minimum reserves." Privately-owned banks own the stock of the FED. This was explained in more detail in the case of Lewis v. United States, Federal Reporter, 2nd Series, Vol. 680, Pages 1239, 1241 (1982), where the
court said: "Each Federal Reserve Bank is a separate corporation owned by commercial banks in its region. The stock-holding commercial banks elect two thirds of each Bank's nine member board of directors."

The Federal Reserve Banks are locally controlled by their member banks. Once again, according to Black's Law Dictionary, we find that these privately owned banks actually issue money:

"Federal Reserve Act Law which created Federal Reserve banks which act as agents in maintaining money reserves, issuing money in the form of bank notes, lending money to banks, and supervising banks. Administered by Federal Reserve Board (q.v.)".

The privately owned Federal Reserve (FED) banks actually issue (create) the "money" we use. In 1964, the House Committee on Banking and Currency, Subcommittee on Domestic Finance, at the second session of the 88th Congress, put out a study entitled Money Facts which contains a good description of what the FED is: "The Federal Reserve is a total money-making machine. It can issue money or checks. And it never has a problem of making its checks good because it can obtain the $5 and $10 bills necessary to cover its check simply by asking the Treasury Department's Bureau of Engraving to print them."

Any one person or any closely knit group who has a lot of money has a lot of power. Now imagine a group of people who have the power to create money. Imagine the power these people would have. This is exactly what the privately owned FED is!

No man did more to expose the power of the FED than Louis T. McFadden, who was the Chairman of the House Banking Committee back in the 1930s. In describing the FED, he remarked in the Congressional Record, House pages 1295 and 1296 on June 10, 1932:

"Mr. Chairman, we have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal reserve banks. The Federal Reserve Board, a Government Board, has cheated the Government of the United States and he people of the United States out of enough money to pay the national debt. The depredations and the iniquities of the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal reserve banks acting together have cost this country enough money to pay the national debt several times over. This evil institution has impoverished and ruined the people of the United States; has bankrupted itself, and has practically bankrupted our Government. It has done this through the maladministration of that law by which the Federal Reserve Board, and through the corrupt practices of the moneyed vultures who control it."

Some people think the Federal Reserve Banks are United States Government institutions. They are not Government institutions, departments, or agencies. They are private credit monopolies which prey upon the people of the United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers. Those 12 private credit monopolies were deceitfully placed upon this country by bankers who came here from Europe and who repaid us for our hospitality by undermining our American institutions.

The FED basically works like this: The government granted its power to create money to the FED banks. They create money, then loan it back to the government charging interest. The government levies income taxes to pay the interest on the debt. On this point, it's interesting to note that the Federal Reserve Act and the sixteenth amendment, which gave congress the power to collect income taxes, were both passed in 1913. The incredible power of the FED over the economy is universally admitted. Some people, especially in the banking and academic communities, even support it. On the other hand, there are those, such as President John Fitzgerald Kennedy, that have spoken out against it. His efforts were spoken about in Jim Marrs' 1990 book Crossfire:"

Another overlooked aspect of Kennedy's attempt to reform American society involves money. Kennedy apparently reasoned that by returning to the constitution, which states that only Congress shall coin and regulate money, the soaring national debt could be reduced by not paying interest to the bankers of the Federal Reserve System, who print paper money then loan it to the government at interest. He moved in this area on June 4, 1963, by signing Executive Order 11110 which called for the issuance of $4,292,893,815 in United States Notes through the U.S. Treasury rather than the traditional Federal Reserve System. That same day, Kennedy signed a bill changing the backing of one and two dollar bills from silver to gold, adding strength to the weakened U.S. currency.

Kennedy's comptroller of the currency, James J. Saxon, had been at odds with the powerful Federal Reserve Board for some time, encouraging broader investment and lending powers for banks that were not part of the Federal Reserve system. Saxon also had decided that non-Reserve banks could underwrite state and local general obligation bonds, again weakening the dominant Federal Reserve banks."

In a comment made to a Columbia University class on Nov. 12, 1963, ten days before his assassination, President John Fitzgerald Kennedy allegedly said:

"The high office of the President has been used to foment a plot to destroy the American's freedom and before I leave office, I must inform the citizen of this plight."

In this matter, John Fitzgerald Kennedy appears to be the subject of his own book... a true Profile of Courage.

6. Congressman James Traficant's speech to Congress 1993 on The Fraud of the Federal Reserve.
United States Congressional Record, March 17, 1993 Vol. 33, page H-1303
Speaker-Rep. James Traficant, Jr. (Ohio) addressing the House:

"Mr. Speaker, we are here now in chapter 11.. Members of Congress are official trustees presiding over the greatest reorganization of any Bankrupt entity in world history, the U.S. Government. We are setting forth hopefully, a blueprint for our future. There are some who say it is a coroner's report that will lead to our demise.
It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1, Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent. H.J.R. 192, 73rd Congress m session June 5, 1933 - Joint Resolution To Suspend The Gold Standard and Abrogate The Gold Clause dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official capacities of all United States Governmental Offices, Officers, and Departments and is further evidence that the United States Federal Government exists today in name only.

The receivers of the United States Bankruptcy are the International Bankers, via the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. All United States Offices, Officials, and Departments are now operating within a de facto status in name only under Emergency War Powers. With the Constitutional Republican form of Government now dissolved, the receivers of the Bankruptcy have adopted a new form of government for the United States. This new form of government is known as a Democracy, being an established Socialist/Communist order under a new governor for America. This act was instituted and established by transferring and/or placing the Office of the Secretary of Treasury to that of the Governor of the International Monetary Fund. Public Law 94-564, page 8, Section H.R. 13955 reads in part: "The U.S. Secretary of Treasury receives no compensation for representing the United States."
Gold and silver were such a powerful money during the founding of the united states of America, that the founding fathers declared that only gold or silver coins can be "money" in America. Since gold and silver coinage were heavy and inconvenient for a lot of transactions, they were stored in banks and a claim check was issued as a money substitute. People traded their coupons as money, or "currency." Currency is not money, but a money substitute. Redeemable currency must promise to pay a dollar equivalent in gold or silver money. Federal Reserve Notes (FRNs) make no such promises, and are not "money." A Federal Reserve Note is a debt obligation of the federal United States government, not "money?' The federal United States government and the U.S. Congress were not and have never been authorized by the Constitution for the united states of America to issue currency of any kind, but only lawful money, -gold and silver coin. It is essential that we comprehend the distinction between real money and paper money substitute. One cannot get rich by accumulating money substitutes, one can only get deeper into debt. We the People no longer have any "money." Most Americans have not been paid any "money" for a very long time, perhaps not in their entire life. Now do you comprehend why you feel broke? Now, do you understand why you are "bankrupt," along with the rest of the country?

Federal Reserve Notes (FRNs) are unsigned checks written on a closed account. FRNs are an inflatable paper system designed to create debt through inflation (devaluation of currency). when ever there is an increase of the supply of a money substitute in the economy without a corresponding increase in the gold and silver backing, inflation occurs.
Inflation is an invisible form of taxation that irresponsible governments inflict on their citizens. The Federal Reserve Bank who controls the supply and movement of FRNs has everybody fooled. They have access to an unlimited supply of FRNs, paying only for the printing costs of what they need. FRNs are nothing more than promissory notes for U.S. Treasury securities (T-Bills) - a promise to pay the debt to the Federal Reserve Bank.
There is a fundamental difference between "paying" and "discharging" a debt. To pay a debt, you must pay with value or substance (i.e. gold, silver, barter or a commodity). With FRNs, you can only discharge a debt. You cannot pay a debt with a debt currency system. You cannot service a debt with a currency that has no backing in value or substance. No contract in Common law is valid unless it involves an exchange of "good & valuable consideration." Un-payable debt transfers power and control to the sovereign power structure that has no interest in money, law, equity or justice because they have so much wealth already.
Their lust is for power and control. Since the inception of central banking, they have controlled the fates of nations. The Federal Reserve System is based on the Canon law and the principles of sovereignty protected in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. In fact, the international bankers used a "Canon Law Trust" as their model, adding stock and naming it a "Joint Stock Trust." The U.S. Congress had passed a law making it illegal for any legal "person" to duplicate a "Joint Stock Trust" in 1873. The Federal Reserve Act was legislated post-facto (to 1870), although post-facto laws are strictly forbidden by the Constitution. [1:9:3]
The Federal Reserve System is a sovereign power structure separate and distinct from the federal United States government. The Federal Reserve is a maritime lender, and/or maritime insurance underwriter to the federal United States operating exclusively under Admiralty/Maritime law. The lender or underwriter bears the risks, and the Maritime law compelling specific performance in paying the interest, or premiums are the same.
Assets of the debtor can also be hypothecated (to pledge something as a security without taking possession of it.) as security by the lender or underwriter. The Federal Reserve Act stipulated that the interest on the debt was to be paid in gold. There was no stipulation in the Federal Reserve Act for ever paying the principle.
Prior to 1913, most Americans owned clear, allodial title to property, free and clear of any liens or mortgages until the Federal Reserve Act (1913) "Hypothecated" all property within the federal United States to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, -in which the Trustees (stockholders) held legal title. The U.S. citizen (tenant, franchisee) was registered as a "beneficiary" of the trust via his/her birth certificate. In 1933, the federal United States hypothecated all of the present and future properties, assets and labor of their "subjects," the 14th Amendment U.S. citizen, to the Federal Reserve System.

In return, the Federal Reserve System agreed to extend the federal United States corporation all the credit "money substitute" it needed. Like any other debtor, the federal United States government had to assign collateral and security to their creditors as a condition of the loan. Since the federal United States didn't have any assets, they assigned the private property of their "economic slaves", the U.S. citizens as collateral against the un-payable federal debt. They also pledged the unincorporated federal territories, national parks forests, birth certificates, and nonprofit organizations, as collateral against the federal debt. All has already been transferred as payment to the international bankers.

Unwittingly, America has returned to its pre-American Revolution, feudal roots whereby all land is held by a sovereign and the common people had no rights to hold allodial title to property. Once again, We the People are the tenants and sharecroppers renting our own property from a Sovereign in the guise of the Federal Reserve Bank. We the people have exchanged one master for another.
This has been going on for over eighty years without the "informed knowledge" of the American people, without a voice protesting loud enough. Now it's easy to grasp why America is fundamentally bankrupt.

Why don't more people own their properties outright? Why are 90% of Americans mortgaged to the hilt and have little or no assets after all debts and liabilities have been paid? Why does it feel like you are working harder and harder and getting less and less?
We are reaping what has been sown, and the results of our harvest is a painful bankruptcy, and a foreclosure on American property, precious liberties, and a way of life. Few of our elected representatives in Washington, D.C. have dared to tell the truth. The federal United States is bankrupt. Our children will inherit this un-payable debt, and the tyranny toenforce paying it.
America has become completely bankrupt in world leadership, financial credit and its reputation for courage, vision and human rights. This is an undeclared economic war, bankruptcy, and economic slavery of the most corrupt order! Wake up America! Take back your Country."[ IS IT ANY WONDER THAT THE "ELITE" ARE OUT TO DESTROY REP TRAFICANT? He is hitting the CFR/TC and the UN where it hurts! LMsr.] Image: United States Congressional Record, March 17, 1993 Vol. 33, page H-1303
Added by: Chester L McWhorter Sr: Forming the Federal Reserve System are the primary Federal Reserve "Banks" of: Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Cleveland, Richmond, Atlanta, Chicago, St Louis, Minneapolis, Kansas City, Dallas, and San Francisco. These banks are not real banks..you cannot cash a check there, open an account, etc. These "banks" are also holding companies of smaller banks. In all of this discussion about income tax, we should be ever mindful of the fact that CONGRESS is the key. CONGRESS votes to spend the money. Congress gives the IRS its power. Congress gives the IRS its OWN budget. Congress is elected by the people. The IRS is A DECOY.

>>>>Disclaimer: This document may be used as you will except: If you change anything in the text, remove my name and other Ident. You may use it without my identification also if you wish...I only ask that people read it and think...think...think. Sources/Ref's if not in the text will be found on the last page of Doc and 000.0.6. CLMsr.<<<< We have a Constitution and our Bill of Rights (the first 10 amendments) that makes us free. Right? Then visit: http://www.trimonline.org/  http://www.getusout.org/  http://www.thenewamerican.com/  http://www.givemeliberty.org/  http://www.trimonline.org/  http://www.getusout.org/  http://www.thenewamerican.com/  http://www.givemeliberty.org/  link to www.jbs.org
Then take a look at these sites:  http://www.dixierising.com/  http://www.dixienet.org/  http://www.palmetto.org/  http://www.southerncaucus.org/  http://www.dixierising.com/  http://www.dixienet.org/  http://www.palmetto.org/  http://www.southerncaucus.org/  link to www.spofga.org

NOTE # 1: This is the FIRST doc in a string of about 37 regarding the Income Tax, How it was illegally forced upon us, the collusion of various nation banks, including The Bank of England, the Banks of Europe, the Banks of the USA that make up the Non-Government organization known as the Fed and the bankers themselves dedicated to making this a Socialist Nation. As David Rockefeller reportedly said in 1973 when he and others formed the Trilateral Commission, "We will have this a Socialist Nation by the end of the year
2000." Well, with the help of our past Communist President, he damned well
nearly did it. If Comrade Gore had been elected, it would be now! The last
doc in this series is a plan that was presented to President Bush when he
visited Florida recently. It was put directly into his hands. He has not
acted upon it. We The People must initiate a campaign of letters, faxes,
e-mails, and phone calls to him and others in our otherwise corrupt
government letting them know of our displeasure. For God and Country, Chet.
NOTE # 2: You may forward this to every member of Congress. Nothing beats a letter AND a phone call.
AS/Chester L McWhorter Sr, c/o 504 N. Brighton Rd, Lecanto, Occupied Florida. 34461. Ph: 352-344-9073. Fax: Same. E-mail:  robertthebruce@naturecoast.net 01 of 37 Rockefeller Quote: We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we [ the CFR ] need is the right major crisis and the nation[s] will accept the New World Order. End Quote. David Rockefeller: Founder and Honorary Chairman,
Council of the Americas; Chairman, Americas Society; Founder, Forum of the
Americas; Chairman, Emeritus, Council on Foreign Relations [CFR]; Founder
and Honorary Chairman, Trilateral Commission [TC]; Chairman, The
Bilderbergs. [ How does the 11 Sept 2001 attack upon our country figure
into this? ]
The Bankruptcy of the United States is a 38 part document.
See Contents on left column.
The Bankruptcy of The United States Part 1-39
Part 1 Part 2 Part 3 Part 4 Part 5 Part 6 Part 7 Part 8 Part 9 Part 10
Part 11 Part 12 Part 13 Part 14 Part 15 Part 16 Part 17 Part 18 Part 19 Part 20
Part 21 Part 22 Part 23 Part 24 Part 25 Part 26 Part 27 Part 28 Part 29 Part 30
Part 31 Part 32 Part 33 Part 34 Part 35 Part 36 Part 37 Part 38 Page 39
IT'S TIME TO CIRCLE THE WAGONS The Federal Reserve manipulates U.S. currency, interest rates, and inflation for the advantage of its owners. Since 1998, NORFED has provided The Liberty Dollar - an inflation proof currency owned by the people, not the Federal Reserve.

The Short Road To Chaos And DestructionAn Expose of the Federal Reserve Banking System  http://www.worldnewsstand.net/today/articles/chaos.htm
The End of Ordinary Money, Part I  http://www.aci.net/kalliste/money1.htm The End of Ordinary Money, Part II:

President Kennedy, the Federal Reserve and Executive Order 11110
The Federal Reserve Is A PRIVATELY OWNED Corporation "The American Dream" Fire 'em all!
Mathematic PROOF: Federal Reserve CAUSED Great Depression Part 1: Mathematic PROOF the Federal Reserve CAUSED the Great Depression. Part 2: Congressman Louis T. McFadden's famous 1932 Congressional Address. Nature and iniquitous history of the private international banks deceitfully called The Federal Reserve System. A blueprint for irreversible multiplication of debt in proportion to commerce, until world-wide economic collapse under insoluble debt. Tens of thousands of visitors voted this page a Starting Point Hotsite award, November 7, 1998. Hopefully, mathematic proof of a singular prescription for perfected economy will ultimately serve as the impetus for world-wide establishment of mathematically perfected economy.  http://www.perfecteconomy.com/principal---federal-reserve-system.html

Who Owns The Federal Reserve? There has been much speculation about who owns the Federal Reserve Corporation. It has been one of the great secrets of the century, because the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 provided that the names of the owner banks be kept secret. However, R. E. McMaster publisher of the newsletter The Reaper, asked his Swiss banking contacts which banks hold the controlling stock in the Federal Reserve Corporation. The Federal System is by the way a private Corporation # 62 domiciled in Puerto Rico. The answer to who owns the Fed and by proxy the entire USA: Rothschild Banks of London and Berlin,Lazard Brothers Bank of Paris ,Israel 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. In The Secrets Of The Federal Reserve, Eustace Mullins indicates that, because the Federal Reserve Bank of New York sets interest rates and controls the daily supply and price of currency throughout the U.S., the owners of that bank are the real directors of the entire system. Mullins states: "The shareholders of these banks which own the stock of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York are the people who have controlled our political and economic destinies since 1914. They are the Rothschilds, Lazard Freres (Eugene Mayer), Israel Sieff, Kuhn Loeb Company, Warburg Company, Lehman Brothers, Goldman Sachs, the Rockefeller family, and the J.P. Morgan interests."
The Federal Zone: Cracking the Code of Internal Revenue
The 545 People Responsible For All of America's Woes
IRS ~ Tax Info Government has its eye on your money !
NY TIMES: Saying Income Tax Is Illegal
AMERICAN PATRIOT FRIENDS NETWORK [ www.apfn.net &  http://www.apfn.org/]

5. More Historical Information on The Banking Frauds
The U.S. Bank was chartered by Congress in the year 1791, its charter was to last for 20 years, and expire in 1811. George Washington signed the bill establishing the bank after listening to the advice of his secretary of the treasury, Alexander Hamilton. Thomas Jefferson opposed the creation of the bank as unconstitutional. He said:
" A private central bank issuing the public currency is a greater menace to the liberties of the people than a standing army"
The U.S. Bank was modeled after the Bank of England. The Bank of England was established by the Jesuits in 1694 to control that country and make slaves of the people. The Bank was given the right to create fiat money by use of the printing press.
The printing press was God's gift to Martin Luther. The printing of the Bible in the languages of the people was the weapon that Luther used to break the chains of millions and free them from the Babylonian Captivity. Rome's answer to the printing of the Holy Scriptures was the printing of MONEY. The Bank of England was allowed to print money and loan to the government at 8% interest.
When the Bank of England controlled British Government found out that the U.S. Bank would not be re-chartered, they declared war on the United States. Washington D.C., was invaded and the White House was burned to the ground. General Andrew Jackson (another great Scot whose parents came from Hibernia) was the hero of that war.
At the battle of New Orleans on January 8, 1815, with a small army of volunteers, General Jackson defeated 10,000 British veterans of the campaign against Napoleon in Europe. It was the most lop-sided victory in the history of warfare. During the 19th century, January 8, was a BIG holiday and celebration in the U.S. Almost like the 4th of July in January.
Despite this great victory over the British and the Bank of England, the Bank of the U.S. was re-chartered in 1816 for another 20 years.
The people loved the hero of the battle of New Orleans and elected him to the Presidency in the year 1829. He served his country in that high office for 8 years. Little did he know before taking the oath of office that he would face a far more dangerous enemy than ever he faced from the British rifles.
That ferocious enemy was the MONEY POWER represented by the U.S. Bank.
Because of massive fraud and corruption, President Jackson was determined not to renew its charter when it expired in 1836. Fighting the British was child's play compared to fighting the money power. His main opponent was Nicholas Biddle who was president of the Second Bank.
Biddle was Rome's agent in America . . . and her best brain. He graduated from the University of Pennsylvania at the age of 13 and from Princeton at 17. He mastered the secret science of paper money and banking at an early age.
He was head of the 2nd Bank of the U.S. With many Congressmen and Senators financially beholden to him, he wielded great political power. He deliberately created a banking panic and a depression for the purpose of frightening the voters and blaming it on President Jackson. Biddle was later arrested and charged with fraud but his powerful protectors shielded him from justice . . . in this life.
Jackson's unflinching determination and unwavering patriotism prevailed against Biddle and his Bank. President Jackson called the Bank a monster and was determined to pull all its teeth. He said:
"I am ready with the screws to draw every tooth and then the stumps."
And our hero did exactly as he promised. When he left office, the U.S. had a real currency consisting of silver and gold coins. Our hero called paper money "RAG MONEY" and this is what he said about it:
"The paper-money system and its natural associations--monopoly and exclusive privileges--have already struck their roots too deep in the soil, and it will require all your efforts to check its further growth and to eradicate the evil."
The Federal Reserve or 3rd Bank of the U.S.
So great was the victory of our hero, that Rome did not try again to establish a central bank until the 20th century. The groundwork for this 3rd Bank was laid during a top secret meeting on Jekyll Island, Georgia, in 1910. The co-conspirators were some of the most powerful people in Europe and America. They included: Theodore Roosevelt, Paul Warburg, Woodrow Wilson, Nelson W. Aldrich, Benjamin Strong, Frank A. Vanderlip, John D. Rockefeller, etc., etc.
Paul M. Warburg (Daddy WARbucks) was an immigrant from Germany and a partner in the banking firm of Kuhn, Loeb & Co. He represented the German Central Bank (Reichsbank) and the Rothschilds and Warburgs in Europe.
Montagu Norman was the head of the Bank of England during the re-birth of the U.S. Bank. He worked closely with Benjamin Strong and was the British liaison in the re-creation of the monster.
Morgan was the American representative of the Rothschilds and the Jesuit controlled Bank of England in America.
Aldrich was the Republican whip in the Senate, chairman of the National Monetary Commission and father-in-law to John. D. Rockefeller.
Strong was head of J.P. Morgan's Bankers Trust Co.
The Rockefeller name is synonymous with money and banking. Rockefeller worked closely with J.P. Morgan and Daddy WARbucks to bring about the Federal Reserve System. His son, Nelson Aldrich Rockefeller, while Governor of New York State, was the agent behind the building of the Twin Towers in New York City.
Finally, on Dec. 23, 1913, the Federal Reserve Act was signed into law by President Woodrow Wilson. This was the monster that President Jackson had slain come to life again. No sooner was the Bank re-chartered than WWI began. The Federal Reserve Bank lent money to both sides. They financed the Russian Revolution and the overthrow of the Czar. Economic cycles of boom and bust followed the manipulations of the currency by the Bank. The Bank caused the Great Depression and financed Hitler in Germany and the Fascists in Japan.
The Bank instituted the Income Tax which was modeled on the Pope's slave tax during the Dark Ages.
The tender mercies of the wicked are cruel....President Jackson's portrait is on this Federal Reserve Bank $20 dollar bill. If he came back to earth today, the first thing he would do is abolish this monster.
If the 2nd bank of the U.S. was unspeakably corrupt, the 3rd Bank was even worse. This Bank financed the rise of Hitler in Germany and was responsible for the financing of the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia.
The U.S. Bank Today.
The printing presses of the U.S. Bank are running night and day pouring billions of dollars into the economy in order to keep the fiat system afloat. In the 6000 years of world history, no fiat currency has ever survived. By 1870, the U.S. was the largest producer of silver in the world and we had FREE COINAGE, meaning anybody with silver or gold could take it to the U.S. Mint and have it coined into money.
Many other nations of the world were on a bimetallic system too. These included, India, China, Japan, Mexico and most of the South American Republics. The MONEY POWER pushed the world off the bimetallic system onto the gold standard. Today, not one single country is on a gold standard due to the manipulations of the gold cartel.
Some Highlights of U.S. Financial History.
Date Event
1787 U.S. Constitution is ratified granting Congress alone the right to COIN money - not to print it. Only gold and silver were considered REAL money!!
1791 1st. U.S. Bank is chartered.
1811 Charter of U.S. Bank expires.
1812 War with Great Britain over the lapsed charter. The MONEY POWER tries to get the New England States to leave the Union.
1816 2nd Bank of the U.S. is chartered.
1832 President Jackson vetoes charter of 2nd Bank.
1860 Civil War begins. Defeated MONEY POWER successful in getting 13 States to leave the Union.
1862 Congress passes Banking Act authorizing the printing of paper money (greenbacks) to finance the war. This was supposed to be an emergency measure only until the war was over. All the provisions of the Banking Act were to expire in 20 years.
1873 Silver is demonetized. Free coinage of silver is ended. U.S. goes on gold standard.
1882 Banking Act expires but is renewed for another 20 years.
1901 President McKinley is assassinated by MONEY POWER and Roosevelt becomes President.
1902 Banking Act which gave the U.S. paper money was supposed to expire this year. Due to the murder of President McKinley, the banking laws and paper money system was continued.
1910 Postal Savings Bank is inaugurated.
1910 Secret meeting on Jekyll Island, Georgia, to charter 3rd U.S. Bank.
1913 Monster reborn. President Wilson signs bill authorizing the creation of 3rd U.S. Bank.
1917 President Wilson destroys Postal Savings Bank by refusing to lift ceiling on deposits.
1929 Great Depression begins due to manipulation of economy by U.S. Bank.
1933 Possession of gold is outlawed. U.S. citizens forbidden to own gold by order of President Roosevelt.
1960 Goldfinger begins to steal U.S. gold reserves from Fort Knox.
1971 U.S. is completely off the gold standard. Foreign holders of dollars are promised U.S. land as collateral instead of gold.
1990 Fall of the Soviet Union. U.S. gold reserves start to move to European Central Bank.
Since the time of Pope Constantine, and especially since the blessed Reformation, Satan has sought to dominate Civil Governments by means of the MONEY POWER. St. Paul said this to the ROMAN Christians:
"Let EVERY soul be subject to the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves DAMNATION. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil......" (Romans 16:1-2).
Roman Emperor Piux IX in his Syllabus of Errors said that it is an ERROR to say that the Government is above the "church."
"Kings and princes are not only exempt from the jurisdiction of the Church, but are superior to the Church in deciding questions of jurisdiction. -- Damnatio "Multiplices inter," June 10, 1851. "
As the end of time approaches, the Antichrist is using the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank, the European Central Bank and the Vatican Bank to finance the Last Great Inquisition and bring the entire world under the Papacy.
Day of Infamy, August 15, 1971.
August 15, 1971, is a day that will live in infamy. That was the day that Standard Oil controlled President Richard Nixon assassinated the DOLLAR. He took the dollar off the gold standard and paved the way for the ruin of the country.
In pagan Rome, August 15 was the big day for the devotees of Venus or the Queen of Heaven otherwise known as the Egyptian Isis or Hathor the cow goddess. Roman pagans believed that Venus was taken up alive into heaven and crowned Queen of heaven. Papal Rome substituted Mary (the humble mother of Jesus) for Venus and continued to observe their pagan holiday. Now they call it the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary!!
Venus or the mother goddess was called Isis or Hathor in Egypt and Diana of the Ephesians in Asia Minor.
August 15, 1534 was also the day that Ignatius LIEola founded the deadly Jesuit order.
Rome steals U.S. lands!!
After this date, foreign holders of U.S. currency could not redeem their dollars in gold . . . so the vast lands of the Western U.S. were promised as collateral instead of gold.
Judas Iscariot was a perfect type of the papacy at the end of the world....Judas betrayed his Lord for 2 things: MONEY and LAND.

Of course everybody knows that Fort Knox, Kentucky, is like the United States of America — impregnable from the outside. So if anybody wants to penetrate that fortress and steal the gold the thief has to come from within!!
By 1950, the U.S. Government owned almost half of all the world's gold supply and the dollar was as good as gold. Now it is ALL gone . . . shipped off to Swiss and German Banks and credited to the account of the Vatican Bank!!
During World War II, Fort Knox was modified to allow easy access to the MAIN STORAGE VAULT. Beginning in 1961, gold began to flow out and was taken to the Federal Reserve Vaults in New York City Federal Reserve Building at 33 LIBERTY St.
33 LIBERTY St. (the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel) in downtown New York City (2 blocks from Wall St.) is the home of the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank. All the stolen gold was taken here and stored in the basement. It was used to finance the Vietnam War, the Cold War, Star Wars, Iraqi War, Serbian War, illegal immigration, drug traffic, abortion clinics etc.,etc.
Origin of the U.S. gold supply.
In the year of our Lord 1579, Sir Francis Drake, sailing in his ship The Golden Hind, landed on the Western shore of North America and claimed that land for Queen Elizabeth I. Drake called the land Nova Albion. Sir Francis Drake was a fearless soldier/sailor and a devout Protestant Christian. There were NO Incas or Mexicans there at that time. 269 years later the heirs of Protestant England finally took possession of the land
Gold was discovered in California the very year the Mexican-American war of 1846-1848 ended. California was annexed to the United States following that war. For centuries before its annexation, the Vatican had missions all over the State and they knew all about the location of the gold by torturing the Indians to make them reveal the locations of the mother lode. Monks tortured the Indians to make them reveal the location of the gold.
Cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, Santa Barbara, San Jose, etc., etc,. were begun as "missions" — not to tell the Indians the "good news" of the Gospel — but as slaving centers to collect the gold and ship it to the Vatican.
The monks used the Indians as slave laborers to mine the gold and ship it back to the Vatican. At that time, the Papal States were besieged on all sides and they desperately needed the gold to hire mercenaries to fight General Garibaldi.
Rome has insatiable lust for gold.
Go all the way back to the time of Julius Caesar and you will find the same unchanging feature of Rome namely a LUST FOR GOLD.
The gold-rape of the New World began with Christopher Columbus, Francisco Pizarro, and Hernando Cortez. Together these men killed millions of peaceful Indians to gratify their lust for gold.
These three men had ONE thing in common: They all had an insatiable lust for gold and they all had the EVIL EYE:
"He that hasteneth to be rich hath an evil eye, and considereth not that poverty shall come upon him" (Proverbs 28:22).
Despite the vast quantity of gold stolen from the Indians by the Conquistadors, Spain became a very poor country within a century of the theft.
This is the one unchanging characteristic of the 4th wild beast. St. Paul describes her in vivid terms:
"For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows" (I Timothy 6:10).
Stolen gold financed the Spanish Inquisition!!
The vast hoard of gold stolen from the Indians of the New World was used by the Spanish Inquisition to fight the Reformation in the Old World. This included the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre, the Invincible Spanish Armada, the 30 Years' War, the Gunpowder Plot etc., etc.
In the year 1588, the invincible Spanish Armada, financed by stolen gold, set sail to conquer Protestant England. Raging storms helped Sir Francis Drake send it to the bottom of the sea.
The annexation of California stopped this gold train dead in its tracks. Rome never forgave the United States and was determined to get the gold back. Here is how she pulled it off: Rome began her 100 Years' War on the United States with the assassination of President McKinley by a Jesuit assassin in 1901.
Theodore Roosevelt succeeded President McKinley and was the first of what we call the Imperial Presidents. His Attorney General, Charles Bonaparte, founded the Bureau of Inquisition later called the Federal Bureau of Inquisition.
President Taft was assured of re-election in 1912 but Roosevelt "threw his hat into the ring" and ran against him thus guaranteeing the election of Democrat Woodrow Wilson.
Woodrow Wilson succeeded President Taft. This man was a real tool of the Jesuits. He signed the Federal Reserve Act on Dec. 23, 1913. This Act was the brainchild of Paul Warburg, a German immigrant. It created a private central bank independent of Congress. Even though it was called FEDERAL Reserve it had nothing to do with the Federal Government being a tool of Wall St. and the New York Bankers.
In 1917, Wilson vetoed legislation that would have lifted the ceiling on the Postal Savings Bank. In the same year, he got the U.S. involved in World War I.
Paul Warburg (WARbucks) immigrated from Germany in 1902. He is known as the "Father of the Federal Reserve Bank." Wilson appointed him a member of the Federal Reserve Board. His brother, Max Warburg, was chief of the secret police in Germany during World War I.

Copy of the Act establishing the Federal Reserve Banks.
The writing above says:
"To provide for the establishment of Federal reserve banks......and for other purposes"
The other purposes include: financing wars, creating revolutions, devaluing currencies, creating depressions, causing inflation and ....stealing the gold reserves of the United States!!
This man was the 5th cousin of Theodore Roosevelt and Assistant Secretary of the Navy during the Wilson Administration. He knew that the surest way to destroy a Republic was through entangling alliances and foreign wars.
President Roosevelt confiscated the people's gold supply in 1934 under the Gold Reserve Act. In other words, it was illegal for the citizens of the land of the free to own GOLD. All the gold that was collected at that time was stored in Fort Knox.
Now that Rome's boys had stolen all the gold from the people, the next task was to get it out of the country. Since 1971, when the U.S. Government refused to back the dollar with gold, vast quantities of gold have been taken from Fort Knox and deposited in European banks. Nobody is allowed access to the gold supply and they refuse to submit to an AUDIT by an INDEPENDENT Auditing Company.

Hers is a quote from a gold market watch website called Zeal.com:
"In a gold lease transaction, a central bank loans gold out to a high-quality borrower, usually called a "bullion bank." The central bank physically delivers real physical gold from its vaults to the bullion bank, creating a gold loan. The central bank then gets to keep the gold on its books as an asset, because the loan is contractually supposed to be paid back in the future, and fee simple title never technically changes on the fungible gold. The end result is the central banks can dump gold and depress the gold price while at the same time maintaining the fiction that the gold is on hand in their vaults to back their fiat currency experiments."
"Official" U.S. gold reserves as of May 2001 are about 8000 tonnes. Total amount of gold leased out is 15,000 tonnes. Where did all the gold come from??
Quoting again from the Zeal website:
"Estimates of the total amount of gold leased run from 5,000 tonnes from the anti-gold partisans to 16,000 tonnes from pro-gold factions. After all of our research, we certainly believe that number is on the high end of the scale. If, for example, 15,000 tonnes of central bank gold has been flooding the global gold market in the last decade, that would explain much of the drop in the gold price. This is the equivalent of six YEARS worth of TOTAL world gold production being dumped on the open gold markets. Natural economics laws dictate that when a wave of artificial marginal supply temporarily overwhelms natural demand, prices plummet."
Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee: Exchange Stabilization Fund/Bundesbank Gold Swap Operation Exposed
Source: Business Wire
Publication date: 2001-04-23

DALLAS--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 23, 2001--The Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee will reveal proof of the suppression of the gold price by the U.S. and German governments and bullion banks at the GATA African Gold Summit on May 10, 2001, in Durban, South Africa.
Attending will be government officials from South Africa and other African gold-producing countries, representatives of South Africa's National Union of Mineworkers, major gold producers, and the world press.
For more than two years GATA has claimed that the gold market has been manipulated lower by a faction of the U.S. government and a cartel of bullion banks to the detriment of mostly poor gold-producing nations.
One of the speakers at the Durban conference, GATA consultant Reginald H. Howe, has brought suit in U.S. District Court in Boston, against participants in the scheme. The defendants are: the Bank for International Settlements; Alan Greenspan, chairman of the Board of Governors of the U.S. Federal Reserve System and a director of the BIS; William J. McDonough, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and a director of the BIS; five major bullion banks, J.P. Morgan & Co., Chase Manhattan Corp., Citigroup Inc., Goldman Sachs Group Inc., and Deutsche Bank; and Lawrence H. Summers, former secretary of the treasury, who by law exercised control over the U.S. Exchange Stabilization Fund (ESF), subject only to approval by the president.
On April 19, 2001, Reg Howe presented the following to the court. It is posted at  http://www.gata.org/lawsuit.html.
"The Department of Justice's memorandum on behalf of the Secretary of the Treasury's motion to dismiss asserts and re-emphasizes the secretary's contention 'that in fact the ESF has no holdings of gold and has not traded in gold or gold derivatives since 1978.'
"The plaintiff has recently discovered a highly relevant statement in the transcript of the Federal Open Market Committee's meeting on January 31, 1995. Responding to a question by then Fed Governor Lawrence Lindsey about the ESF's legal authority to engage in a financial rescue package for Mexico, J. Virgil Mattingly, the Fed's general counsel, stated:
"'It's pretty clear that these ESF operations are authorized. I don't think there is a legal problem in terms of the authority. The statute (31 U.S.C. s. 5302) is very broadly worded in terms of words like 'credit' -- it has covered things like the gold swaps -- and it confers broad authority.'"
James Turk, who also will speak at the Durban conference, revealed the following in a recent commentary, "Behind Closed Doors," which also can be read at  http://www.gata.org/lawsuit.html.:
"The Treasury Department has changed the designation of nearly 1,700 tonnes of inventoried gold at the U.S. Mint's facility in West Point, N.Y., which is approximately 21 percent of the total U.S. gold reserve, from 'Gold Bullion Reserve' to 'Custodial Gold.'
"The August 2000 Status Report on U.S. Treasury-Owned gold stored at West Point has a designation of 'Gold Bullion Reserve.' But the September 2000 and subsequent status reports inexplicably designate this same gold that is stored at the U.S. Mint at West Point as 'Custodial Gold.'
"This change in the descriptive label for nearly 1,700 tonnes of gold at West Point from 'Gold Bullion Reserve' to 'Custodial Gold' was purposeful. It happened for a reason. This conclusion is all the more plausible because the Treasury did not change the classification from 'Gold Bullion Reserve' to 'Custodial Gold' to describe the gold stored in Fort Knox or at the U.S. Mint at Denver."
Turk goes on to establish "that the ESF has 'gold swaps' with the Bundesbank. According to Turk, "It therefore does not require much conjecture to add one supposition to the equation by concluding that the gold at West Point has been swapped with gold owned by the Bundesbank, thereby necessitating its reclassification from 'Gold Bullion Reserve' to 'Custodial Gold.' The Treasury Department wanted to make gold available to some bullion banks."
"We now know what has happened. The Bundesbank has loaned 1,700 tonnes, half its 3,400 tonnes reserve; the other 1,700 tonnes were swapped for gold in the U.S. reserves, requiring the change in the West Point vault from 'Gold Bullion Reserve' to 'Custodial Gold.'
"In other words, the Bundesbank's vault is empty because half its gold is stored at West Point, not Europe, and the other half has been loaned out."
Further evidence of the validity of the GATA/Turk claims come from the Bundesbank itself at  http://www.bundesbank.de/ezb/de/publications/pdf/statintreserves.pdf
On Page 37 on the PDF file, some numerical examples of how the accounting for gold reserves is done are given. Example 3 states:
"3. 20 Dec. 1999: 'A' undertakes a gold swap with the United States Federal Reserve in which 'A' provides the Federal Reserve with 1,000 ounces of gold in exchange for USD 300,000, in currency. The transaction will be reversed on 20 January 1999, at the spot price of the gold prevailing in the market at that moment."
GATA chairman Bill Murphy says: "The New York Federal Reserve is an agent for the Exchange Stabilization Fund, and while these numbers are small, it is clearly more evidence of a substantial ESF/Bundesbank operation that James Turk refers to.
"This is most troubling, since both Mr. Greenspan directly and Mr. Summers indirectly have asserted that neither the Federal Reserve nor the secretary of the treasury acting through the ESF has authority to manipulate dollar gold prices. In a letter to Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman dated January 19, 2000, Greenspan stated that transactions by the Federal Reserve "aimed at manipulating the price of gold or otherwise interfering in the free trade of gold, would be wholly inappropriate." Similarly, officials who worked under Secretary Summers, though not Summers himself, denied any interventions in the gold market by the ESF and have made those assertions in dozens of letters to congressmen and to inquiring individuals all over the world."
Murphy continues: "What is so disturbing is that a few bullion banks and the ESF have made a State Department decision that a privileged few in the financial world count, while the economies and hundreds of millions of citizens of the poor gold-producing countries in Africa do not. The ESF operation has suppressed the price of gold hundreds of dollars below its natural equilibrium price and deprived the natural resource-rich sub-Saharan African countries of desperately needed money to fight crime, disease, and unemployment.
"In the end this gold market collusion will make Watergate look like child's play, as it impugns the proposal by the Clinton administration to sell the gold of the International Monetary Fund in the name of helping poor countries. It also may affect the governments of Britain, Germany, and Switzerland in regard to the motives of their recent gold sales and lending."
Publication date: 2001-04-23
Β© 2001, YellowBrix, Inc.
President Jackson's Veto Message Regarding the Bank of the United States; July 10, 1832
WASHINGTON, July 10, 1832.
To the Senate.
The bill " to modify and continue " the act entitled "An act to incorporate the subscribers to the Bank of the United States " was presented to me on the 4th July instant. Having considered it with that solemn regard to the principles of the Constitution which the day was calculated to inspire, and come to the conclusion that it ought not to become a law, I herewith return it to the Senate, in which it originated, with my objections.
A bank of the United States is in many respects convenient for the Government and useful to the people. Entertaining this opinion, and deeply impressed with the belief that some of the powers and privileges possessed by the existing bank are unauthorized by the Constitution, subversive of the rights of the States, and dangerous to the liberties of the people, I felt it my duty at an early period of my Administration to call the attention of Congress to the practicability of organizing an institution combining all its advantages and obviating these objections. I sincerely regret that in the act before me I can perceive none of those modifications of the bank charter which are necessary, in my opinion, to make it compatible with justice, with sound policy, or with the Constitution of our country.
The present corporate body, denominated the president, directors, and company of the Bank of the United States, will have existed at the time this act is intended to take effect twenty years. It enjoys an exclusive privilege of banking under the authority of the General Government, a monopoly of its favor and support, and, as a necessary consequence, almost a monopoly of the foreign and domestic exchange. The powers, privileges, and favors bestowed upon it in the original charter, by increasing the value of the stock far above its par value, operated as a gratuity of many millions to the stockholders.
An apology may be found for the failure to guard against this result in the consideration that the effect of the original act of incorporation could not be certainly foreseen at the time of its passage. The act before me proposes another gratuity to the holders of the same stock, and in many cases to the same men, of at least seven millions more. This donation finds no apology in any uncertainty as to the effect of the act. On all hands it is conceded that its passage will increase at least so or 30 per cent more the market price of the stock, subject to the payment of the annuity of $200,000 per year secured by the act, thus adding in a moment one-fourth to its par value. It is not our own citizens only who are to receive the bounty of our Government. More than eight millions of the stock of this bank are held by foreigners. By this act the American Republic proposes virtually to make them a present of some millions of dollars. For these gratuities to foreigners and to some of our own opulent citizens the act secures no equivalent whatever. They are the certain gains of the present stockholders under the operation of this act, after making full allowance for the payment of the bonus.
Every monopoly and all exclusive privileges are granted at the expense of the public, which ought to receive a fair equivalent. The many millions which this act proposes to bestow on the stockholders of the existing bank must come directly or indirectly out of the earnings of the American people. It is due to them, therefore, if their Government sell monopolies and exclusive privileges, that they should at least exact for them as much as they are worth in open market. The value of the monopoly in this case may be correctly ascertained. The twenty-eight millions of stock would probably be at an advance of 50 per cent, and command in market at least $42,000,000, subject to the payment of the present bonus. The present value of the monopoly, therefore, is $17,000,000, and this the act proposes to sell for three millions, payable in fifteen annual installments of $200,000 each.
It is not conceivable how the present stockholders can have any claim to the special favor of the Government. The present corporation has enjoyed its monopoly during the period stipulated in the original contract. If we must have such a corporation, why should not the Government sell out the whole stock and thus secure to the people the full market value of the privileges granted? Why should not Congress create and sell twenty-eight millions of stock, incorporating the purchasers with all the powers and privileges secured in this act and putting the premium upon the sales into the Treasury?
But this act does not permit competition in the purchase of this monopoly. It seems to be predicated on the erroneous idea that the present stockholders have a prescriptive right not only to the favor but to the bounty of Government. It appears that more than a fourth part of the stock is held by foreigners and the residue is held by a few hundred of our own citizens, chiefly of the richest class. For their benefit does this act exclude the whole American people from competition in the purchase of this monopoly and dispose of it for many millions less than it is worth. This seems the less excusable because some of our citizens not now stockholders petitioned that the door of competition might be opened, and offered to take a charter on terms much more favorable to the Government and country.
But this proposition, although made by men whose aggregate wealth is believed to be equal to all the private stock in the existing bank, has been set aside, and the bounty of our Government is proposed to be again bestowed on the few who have been fortunate enough to secure the stock and at this moment wield the power of the existing institution. I can not perceive the justice or policy of this course. If our Government must sell monopolies, it would seem to be its duty to take nothing less than their full value, and if gratuities must be made once in fifteen or twenty years let them not be bestowed on the subjects of a foreign government nor upon a designated and favored class of men in our own country. It is but justice and good policy, as far as the nature of the case will admit, to confine our favors to our own fellow-citizens, and let each in his turn enjoy an opportunity to profit by our bounty. In the bearings of the act before me upon these points I find ample reasons why it should not become a law.
It has been urged as an argument in favor of rechartering the present bank that the calling in its loans will produce great embarrassment and distress. The time allowed to close its concerns is ample, and if it has been well managed its pressure will be light, and heavy only in case its management has been bad. If, therefore, it shall produce distress, the fault will be its own, and it would furnish a reason against renewing a power which has been so obviously abused. But will there ever be a time when this reason will be less powerful? To acknowledge its force is to admit that the bank ought to be perpetual, and as a consequence the present stockholders and those inheriting their rights as successors be established a privileged order, clothed both with great political power and enjoying immense pecuniary advantages from their connection with the Government.
The modifications of the existing charter proposed by this act are not such, in my view, as make it consistent with the rights of the States or the liberties of the people. The qualification of the right of the bank to hold real estate, the limitation of its power to establish branches, and the power reserved to Congress to forbid the circulation of small notes are restrictions comparatively of little value or importance. All the objectionable principles of the existing corporation, and most of its odious features, are retained without alleviation.
The fourth section provides " that the notes or bills of the said corporation, although the same be, on the faces thereof, respectively made payable at one place only, shall nevertheless be received by the said corporation at the bank or at any of the offices of discount and deposit thereof if tendered in liquidation or payment of any balance or balances due to said corporation or to such office of discount and deposit from any other incorporated bank." This provision secures to the State banks a legal privilege in the Bank of the United States which is withheld from all private citizens. If a State bank in Philadelphia owe the Bank of the United States and have notes issued by the St. Louis branch, it can pay the debt with those notes, but if a merchant, mechanic, or other private citizen be in like circumstances he can not by law pay his debt with those notes, but must sell them at a discount or send them to St. Louis to be cashed. This boon conceded to the State banks, though not unjust in itself, is most odious because it does not measure out equal justice to the high and the low, the rich and the poor. To the extent of its practical effect it is a bond of union among the banking establishments of the nation, erecting them into an interest separate from that of the people, and its necessary tendency is to unite the Bank of the United States and the State banks in any measure which may be thought conducive to their common interest.
The ninth section of the act recognizes principles of worse tendency than any provision of the present charter.
It enacts that " the cashier of the bank shall annually report to the Secretary of the Treasury the names of all stockholders who are not resident citizens of the United States, and on the application of the treasurer of any State shall make out and transmit to such treasurer a list of stockholders residing in or citizens of such State, with the amount of stock owned by each." Although this provision, taken in connection with a decision of the Supreme Court, surrenders, by its silence, the right of the States to tax the banking institutions created by this corporation under the name of branches throughout the Union, it is evidently intended to be construed as a concession of their right to tax that portion of the stock which may be held by their own citizens and residents. In this light, if the act becomes a law, it will be understood by the States, who will probably proceed to levy a tax equal to that paid upon the stock of banks incorporated by themselves. In some States that tax is now I per cent, either on the capital or on the shares, and that may be assumed as the amount which all citizen or resident stockholders would be taxed under the operation of this act. As it is only the stock held in the States and not that employed within them which would be subject to taxation, and as the names of foreign stockholders are not to be reported to the treasurers of the States, it is obvious that the stock held by them will be exempt from this burden. Their annual profits will therefore be I per cent more than the citizen stockholders, and as the annual dividends of the bank may be safely estimated at 7 per cent, the stock will be worth 10 or 15 per cent more to foreigners than to citizens of the United States. To appreciate the effects which this state of things will produce, we must take a brief review of the operations and present condition of the Bank of the United States.
By documents submitted to Congress at the present session it appears that on the 1st of January, 1832, of the twenty-eight millions of private stock in the corporation, $8,405,500 were held by foreigners, mostly of Great Britain. The amount of stock held in the nine Western and Southwestern States is $140,200, and in the four Southern States is $5,623,100, and in the Middle and Eastern States is about $13,522,000. The profits of the bank in 1831, as shown in a statement to Congress, were about $3,455,598; of this there accrued in the nine western States about $1,640,048; in the four Southern States about $352,507, and in the Middle and Eastern States about $1,463,041. As little stock is held in the West, it is obvious that the debt of the people in that section to the bank is principally a debt to the Eastern and foreign stockholders; that the interest they pay upon it is carried into the Eastern States and into Europe, and that it is a burden upon their industry and a drain of their currency, which no country can bear without inconvenience and occasional distress. To meet this burden and equalize the exchange operations of the bank, the amount of specie drawn from those States through its branches within the last two years, as shown by its official reports, was about $6,000,000. More than half a million of this amount does not stop in the Eastern States, but passes on to Europe to pay the dividends of the foreign stockholders. In the principle of taxation recognized by this act the Western States find no adequate compensation for this perpetual burden on their industry and drain of their currency. The branch bank at Mobile made last year $95,140, yet under the provisions of this act the State of Alabama can raise no revenue from these profitable operations, because not a share of the stock is held by any of her citizens. Mississippi and Missouri are in the same condition in relation to the branches at Natchez and St. Louis, and such, in a greater or less degree, is the condition of every Western State. The tendency of the plan of taxation which this act proposes will be to place the whole United States in the same relation to foreign countries which the Western States now bear to the Eastern. When by a tax on resident stockholders the stock of this bank is made worth 10 or 15 per cent more to foreigners than to residents, most of it will inevitably leave the country.
Thus will this provision in its practical effect deprive the Eastern as well as the Southern and Western States of the means of raising a revenue from the extension of business and great profits of this institution. It will make the American people debtors to aliens in nearly the whole amount due to this bank, and send across the Atlantic from two to five millions of specie every year to pay the bank dividends.
In another of its bearings this provision is fraught with danger. Of the twenty-five directors of this bank five are chosen by the Government and twenty by the citizen stockholders. From all voice in these elections the foreign stockholders are excluded by the charter. In proportion, therefore, as the stock is transferred to foreign holders the extent of suffrage in the choice of directors is curtailed. Already is almost a third of the stock in foreign hands and not represented in elections. It is constantly passing out of the country, and this act will accelerate its departure. The entire control of the institution would necessarily fall into the hands of a few citizen stockholders, and the ease with which the object would be accomplished would be a temptation to designing men to secure that control in their own hands by monopolizing the remaining stock. There is danger that a president and directors would then be able to elect themselves from year to year, and without responsibility or control manage the whole concerns of the bank during the existence of its charter. It is easy to conceive that great evils to our country and its institutions millet flow from such a concentration of power in the hands of a few men irresponsible to the people.
Is there no danger to our liberty and independence in a bank that in its nature has so little to bind it to our country? The president of the bank has told us that most of the State banks exist by its forbearance. Should its influence become concentered, as it may under the operation of such an act as this, in the hands of a self-elected directory whose interests are identified with those of the foreign stockholders, will there not be cause to tremble for the purity of our elections in peace and for the independence of our country in war? Their power would be great whenever they might choose to exert it; but if this monopoly were regularly renewed every fifteen or twenty years on terms proposed by themselves, they might seldom in peace put forth their strength to influence elections or control the affairs of the nation. But if any private citizen or public functionary should interpose to curtail its powers or prevent a renewal of its privileges, it can not be doubted that he would be made to feel its influence.
Should the stock of the bank principally pass into the hands of the subjects of a foreign country, and we should unfortunately become involved in a war with that country, what would be our condition? Of the course which would be pursued by a bank almost wholly owned by the subjects of a foreign power, and managed by those whose interests, if not affections, would run in the same direction there can be no doubt. All its operations within would be in aid of the hostile fleets and armies without. Controlling our currency, receiving our public moneys, and holding thousands of our citizens in dependence, it would be more formidable and dangerous than the naval and military power of the enemy.
If we must have a bank with private stockholders, every consideration of sound policy and every impulse of American feeling admonishes that it should be purely American. Its stockholders should be composed exclusively of our own citizens, who at least ought to be friendly to our Government and willing to support it in times of difficulty and danger. So abundant is domestic capital that competition in subscribing for the stock of local banks has recently led almost to riots. To a bank exclusively of American stockholders, possessing the powers and privileges granted by this act, subscriptions for $200,000,000 could be readily obtained. Instead of sending abroad the stock of the bank in which the Government must deposit its funds and on which it must rely to sustain its credit in times of emergency, it would rather seem to be expedient to prohibit its sale to aliens under penalty of absolute forfeiture.
It is maintained by the advocates of the bank that its constitutionality in all its features ought to be considered as settled by precedent and by the decision of the Supreme Court. To this conclusion I can not assent. Mere precedent is a dangerous source of authority, and should not be regarded as deciding questions of constitutional power except where the acquiescence of the people and the States can be considered as well settled. So far from this being the case on this subject, an argument against the bank might be based on precedent. One Congress, in 1791, decided in favor of a bank; another, in 1811, decided against it. One Congress, in 1815, decided against a bank; another, in 1816, decided in its favor. Prior to the present Congress, therefore, the precedents drawn from that source were equal. If we resort to the States, the expressions of legislative, judicial, and executive opinions against the bank have been probably to those in its favor as 4 to 1. There is nothing in precedent, therefore, which, if its authority were admitted, ought to weigh in favor of the act before me.
If the opinion of the Supreme Court covered the whole ground of this act, it ought not to control the coordinate authorities of this Government. The Congress, the Executive, and the Court must each for itself be guided by its own opinion of the Constitution. Each public officer who takes an oath to support the Constitution swears that he will support it as he understands it, and not as it is understood by others. It is as much the duty of the House of Representatives, of the Senate, and of the President to decide upon the constitutionality of any bill or resolution which may be presented to them for passage or approval as it is of the supreme judges when it may be brought before them for judicial decision. The opinion of the judges has no more authority over Congress than the opinion of Congress has over the judges, and on that point the President is independent of both. The authority of the Supreme Court must not, therefore, be permitted to control the Congress or the Executive when acting in their legislative capacities, but to have only such influence as the force of their reasoning may deserve.
But in the case relied upon the Supreme Court have not decided that all the features of this corporation are compatible with the Constitution. It is true that the court have said that the law incorporating the bank is a constitutional exercise of power by Congress; but taking into view the whole opinion of the court and the reasoning by which they have come to that conclusion, I understand them to have decided that inasmuch as a bank is an appropriate means for carrying into effect the enumerated powers of the General Government, therefore the law incorporating it is in accordance with that provision of the Constitution which declares that Congress shall have power " to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying those powers into execution. " Having satisfied themselves that the word "necessary" in the Constitution means needful," "requisite," "essential," "conducive to," and that "a bank" is a convenient, a useful, and essential instrument in the prosecution of the Government's "fiscal operations," they conclude that to "use one must be within the discretion of Congress " and that " the act to incorporate the Bank of the United States is a law made in pursuance of the Constitution;" "but, " say they, "where the law is not prohibited and is really calculated to effect any of the objects intrusted to the Government, to undertake here to inquire into the degree of its necessity would be to pass the line which circumscribes the judicial department and to tread on legislative ground."
The principle here affirmed is that the "degree of its necessity," involving all the details of a banking institution, is a question exclusively for legislative consideration. A bank is constitutional, but it is the province of the Legislature to determine whether this or that particular power, privilege, or exemption is "necessary and proper" to enable the bank to discharge its duties to the Government, and from their decision there is no appeal to the courts of justice. Under the decision of the Supreme Court, therefore, it is the exclusive province of Congress and the President to decide whether the particular features of this act are necessary and proper in order to enable the bank to perform conveniently and efficiently the public duties assigned to it as a fiscal agent, and therefore constitutional, or unnecessary and improper, and therefore unconstitutional.
Without commenting on the general principle affirmed by the Supreme Court, let us examine the details of this act in accordance with the rule of legislative action which they have laid down. It will be found that many of the powers and privileges conferred on it can not be supposed necessary for the purpose for which it is proposed to be created, and are not, therefore, means necessary to attain the end in view, and consequently not justified by the Constitution.
The original act of incorporation, section 2I, enacts "that no other bank shall be established by any future law of the United States during the continuance of the corporation hereby created, for which the faith of the United States is hereby pledged: Provided, Congress may renew existing charters for banks within the District of Columbia not increasing the capital thereof, and may also establish any other bank or banks in said District with capitals not exceeding in the whole $6,000,000 if they shall deem it expedient." This provision is continued in force by the act before me fifteen years from the ad of March, 1836.
If Congress possessed the power to establish one bank, they had power to establish more than one if in their opinion two or more banks had been " necessary " to facilitate the execution of the powers delegated to them in the Constitution. If they possessed the power to establish a second bank, it was a power derived from the Constitution to be exercised from time to time, and at any time when the interests of the country or the emergencies of the Government might make it expedient. It was possessed by one Congress as well as another, and by all Congresses alike, and alike at every session. But the Congress of 1816 have taken it away from their successors for twenty years, and the Congress of 1832 proposes to abolish it for fifteen years more. It can not be "necessary" or "proper" for Congress to barter away or divest themselves of any of the powers-vested in them by the Constitution to be exercised for the public good. It is not " necessary " to the efficiency of the bank, nor is it "proper'' in relation to themselves and their successors. They may properly use the discretion vested in them, but they may not limit the discretion of their successors. This restriction on themselves and grant of a monopoly to the bank is therefore unconstitutional.
In another point of view this provision is a palpable attempt to amend the Constitution by an act of legislation. The Constitution declares that "the Congress shall have power to exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever" over the District of Columbia. Its constitutional power, therefore, to establish banks in the District of Columbia and increase their capital at will is unlimited and uncontrollable by any other power than that which gave authority to the Constitution. Yet this act declares that Congress shall not increase the capital of existing banks, nor create other banks with capitals exceeding in the whole $6,000,000. The Constitution declares that Congress shall have power to exercise exclusive legislation over this District "in all cases whatsoever," and this act declares they shall not. Which is the supreme law of the land? This provision can not be "necessary" or "proper" or constitutional unless the absurdity be admitted that whenever it be "necessary and proper " in the opinion of Congress they have a right to barter away one portion of the powers vested in them by the Constitution as a means of executing the rest.
On two subjects only does the Constitution recognize in Congress the power to grant exclusive privileges or monopolies. It declares that "Congress shall have power to promote the progress of science and useful arts by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries." Out of this express delegation of power have grown our laws of patents and copyrights. As the Constitution expressly delegates to Congress the power to grant exclusive privileges in these cases as the means of executing the substantive power " to promote the progress of science and useful arts," it is consistent with the fair rules of construction to conclude that such a power was not intended to be granted as a means of accomplishing any other end. On every other subject which comes within the scope of Congressional power there is an ever-living discretion in the use of proper means, which can not be restricted or abolished without an amendment of the Constitution. Every act of Congress, therefore, which attempts by grants of monopolies or sale of exclusive privileges for a limited time, or a time without limit, to restrict or extinguish its own discretion in the choice of means to execute its delegated powers is equivalent to a legislative amendment of the Constitution, and palpably unconstitutional.
This act authorizes and encourages transfers of its stock to foreigners and grants them an exemption from all State and national taxation. So far from being "necessary and proper" that the bank should possess this power to make it a safe and efficient agent of the Government in its fiscal operations, it is calculated to convert the Bank of the United States into a foreign bank, to impoverish our people in time of peace, to disseminate a foreign influence through every section of the Republic, and in war to endanger our independence.
The several States reserved the power at the formation of the Constitution to regulate and control titles and transfers of real property, and most, if not all, of them have laws disqualifying aliens from acquiring or holding lands within their limits. But this act, in disregard of the undoubted right of the States to prescribe such disqualifications, gives to aliens stockholders in this bank an interest and title, as members of the corporation, to all the real property it may acquire within any of the States of this Union. This privilege granted to aliens is not "necessary" to enable the bank to perform its public duties, nor in any sense "proper," because it is vitally subversive of the rights of the States.
The Government of the United States have no constitutional power to purchase lands within the States except "for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings," and even for these objects only "by the consent of the legislature of the State in which the same shall be." By making themselves stockholders in the bank and granting to the corporation the power to purchase lands for other purposes they assume a power not granted in the Constitution and grant to others what they do not themselves possess. It is not necessary to the receiving, safe-keeping, or transmission of the funds of the Government that the bank should possess this power, and it is not proper that Congress should thus enlarge the powers delegated to them in the Constitution.
The old Bank of the United States possessed a capital of only $11,000,000, which was found fully sufficient to enable it with dispatch and safety to perform all the functions required of it by the Government. The capital of the present bank is $35,000,000-at least twenty-four more than experience has proved to be necessary to enable a bank to perform its public functions. The public debt which existed during the period of the old bank and on the establishment of the new has been nearly paid off, and our revenue will soon be reduced. This increase of capital is therefore not for public but for private purposes.
The Government is the only "proper" judge where its agents should reside and keep their offices, because it best knows where their presence will be "necessary." It can not, therefore, be "necessary" or "proper" to authorize the bank to locate branches where it pleases to perform the public service, without consulting the Government, and contrary to its will. The principle laid down by the Supreme Court concedes that Congress can not establish a bank for purposes of private speculation and gain, but only as a means of executing the delegated powers of the General Government. By the same principle a branch bank can not constitutionally be established for other than public purposes. The power which this act gives to establish two branches in any State, without the injunction or request of the Government and for other than public purposes, is not "necessary" to the due execution of the powers delegated to Congress.
The bonus which is exacted from the bank is a confession upon the face of the act that the powers granted by it are greater than are "necessary" to its character of a fiscal agent. The Government does not tax its officers and agents for the privilege of serving it. The bonus of a million and a half required by the original charter and that of three millions proposed by this act are not exacted for the privilege of giving "the necessary facilities for transferring the public funds from place to place within the United States or the Territories thereof, and for distributing the same in payment of the public creditors without charging commission or claiming allowance on account of the difference of exchange," as required by the act of incorporation, but for something more beneficial to the stockholders. The original act declares that it (the bonus) is granted " in consideration of the exclusive privileges and benefits conferred by this act upon the said bank, " and the act before me declares it to be "in consideration of the exclusive benefits and privileges continued by this act to the said corporation for fifteen years, as aforesaid." It is therefore for "exclusive privileges and benefits" conferred for their own use and emolument, and not for the advantage of the Government, that a bonus is exacted. These surplus powers for which the bank is required to pay can not surely be "necessary" to make it the fiscal agent of the Treasury. If they were, the exaction of a bonus for them would not be " proper."
It is maintained by some that the bank is a means of executing the constitutional power "to coin money and regulate the value thereof." Congress have established a mint to coin money and passed laws to regulate the value thereof. The money so coined, with its value so regulated, and such foreign coins as Congress may adopt are the only currency known to the Constitution. But if they have other power to regulate the currency, it was conferred to be exercised by themselves, and not to be transferred to a corporation. If the bank be established for that purpose, with a charter unalterable without its consent, Congress have parted with their power for a term of years, during which the Constitution is a dead letter. It is neither necessary nor proper to transfer its legislative power to such a bank, and therefore unconstitutional.
By its silence, considered in connection with the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of McCulloch against the State of Maryland, this act takes from the States the power to tax a portion of the banking business carried on within their limits, in subversion of one of the strongest barriers which secured them against Federal encroachments. Banking, like farming, manufacturing, or any other occupation or profession, is a business, the right to follow which is not originally derived from the laws. Every citizen and every company of citizens in all of our States possessed the right until the State legislatures deemed it good policy to prohibit private banking by law. If the prohibitory State laws were now repealed, every citizen would again possess the right. The State banks are a qualified restoration of the right which has been taken away by the laws against banking, guarded by such provisions and limitations as in the opinion of the State legislatures the public interest requires. These corporations, unless there be an exemption in their charter, are, like private bankers and banking companies, subject to State taxation. The manner in which these taxes shall be laid depends wholly on legislative discretion. It may be upon the bank, upon the stock, upon the profits, or in any other mode which the sovereign power shall will.
Upon the formation of the Constitution the States guarded their taxing power with peculiar jealousy. They surrendered it only as it regards imports and exports. In relation to every other object within their jurisdiction, whether persons, property, business, or professions, it was secured in as ample a manner as it was before possessed. All persons, though United States officers, are liable to a poll tax by the States within which they reside. The lands of the United States are liable to the usual land tax, except in the new States, from whom agreements that they will not tax unsold lands are exacted when they are admitted into the Union. Horses, wagons, any beasts or vehicles, tools, or property belonging to private citizens, though employed in the service of the United States, are subject to State taxation. Every private business, whether carried on by an officer of the General Government or not, whether it be mixed with public concerns or not, even if it be carried on by the Government of the United States itself, separately or in partnership, falls within the scope of the taxing power of the State. Nothing comes more fully within it than banks and the business of banking, by whomsoever instituted and carried on. Over this whole subject-matter it is just as absolute, unlimited, and uncontrollable as if the Constitution had never been adopted, because in the formation of that instrument it was reserved without qualification.
The principle is conceded that the States can not rightfully tax the operations of the General Government. They can not tax the money of the Government deposited in the State banks, nor the agency of those banks in remitting it; but will any man maintain that their mere selection to perform this public service for the General Government would exempt the State banks and their ordinary business from State taxation? Had the United States, instead of establishing a bank at Philadelphia, employed a private banker to keep and transmit their funds, would it have deprived Pennsylvania of the right to tax his bank and his usual banking operations? It will not be pretended. Upon what principal, then, are the banking establishments of the Bank of the United States and their usual banking operations to be exempted from taxation ? It is not their public agency or the deposits of the Government which the States claim a right to tax, but their banks and their banking powers, instituted and exercised within State jurisdiction for their private emolument-those powers and privileges for which they pay a bonus, and which the States tax in their own banks. The exercise of these powers within a State, no matter by whom or under what authority, whether by private citizens in their original right, by corporate bodies created by the States, by foreigners or the agents of foreign governments located within their limits, forms a legitimate object of State taxation. From this and like sources, from the persons, property, and business that are found residing, located, or carried on under their jurisdiction, must the States, since the surrender of their right to raise a revenue from imports and exports, draw all the money necessary for the support of their governments and the maintenance of their independence. There is no more appropriate subject of taxation than banks, banking, and bank stocks, and none to which the States ought more pertinaciously to cling.
It can not be necessary to the character of the bank as a fiscal agent of the Government that its private business should be exempted from that taxation to which all the State banks are liable, nor can I conceive it "proper" that the substantive and most essential powers reserved by the States shall be thus attacked and annihilated as a means of executing the powers delegated to the General Government. It may be safely assumed that none of those sages who had an agency in forming or adopting our Constitution ever imagined that any portion of the taxing power of the States not prohibited to them nor delegated to Congress was to be swept away and annihilated as a means of executing certain powers delegated to Congress.
If our power over means is so absolute that the Supreme Court will not call in question the constitutionality of an act of Congress the subject of which "is not prohibited, and is really calculated to effect any of the objects intrusted to the Government," although, as in the case before me, it takes away powers expressly granted to Congress and rights scrupulously reserved to the States, it becomes us to proceed in our legislation with the utmost caution. Though not directly, our own powers and the rights of the States may be indirectly legislated away in the use of means to execute substantive powers. We may not enact that Congress shall not have the power of exclusive legislation over the District of Columbia, but we may pledge the faith of the United States that as a means of executing other powers it shall not be exercised for twenty years or forever. We may not pass an act prohibiting the States to tax the banking business carried on within their limits, but we may, as a means of executing our powers over other objects, place that business in the hands of our agents and then declare it exempt from State taxation in their hands. Thus may our own powers and the rights of the States, which we can not directly curtail or invade, be frittered away and extinguished in the use of means employed by us to execute other powers. That a bank of the United States, competent to all the duties which may be required by the Government, might be so organized as not to infringe on our own delegated powers or the reserved rights of the States I do not entertain a doubt. Had the Executive been called upon to furnish the project of such an institution, the duty would have been cheerfully performed. In the absence of such a call it was obviously proper that he should confine himself to pointing out those prominent features in the act presented which in his opinion make it incompatible with the Constitution and sound policy. A general discussion will now take place, eliciting new light and settling important principles; and a new Congress, elected in the midst of such discussion, and furnishing an equal representation of the people according to the last census, will bear to the Capitol the verdict of public opinion, and, I doubt not, bring this important question to a satisfactory result.
Under such circumstances the bank comes forward and asks a renewal of its charter for a term of fifteen years upon conditions which not only operate as a gratuity to the stockholders of many millions of dollars, but will sanction any abuses and legalize any encroachments.
Suspicions are entertained and charges are made of gross abuse and violation of its charter. An investigation unwillingly conceded and so restricted in time as necessarily to make it incomplete and unsatisfactory discloses enough to excite suspicion and alarm. In the practices of the principal bank partially unveiled, in the absence of important witnesses, and in numerous charges confidently made and as yet wholly uninvestigated there was enough to induce a majority of the committee of investigation-a committee which was selected from the most able and honorable members of the House of Representatives-to recommend a suspension of further action upon the bill and a prosecution of the inquiry. As the charter had yet four years to run, and as a renewal now was not necessary to the successful prosecution of its business, it was to have been expected that the bank itself, conscious of its purity and proud of its character, would have withdrawn its application for the present, and demanded the severest scrutiny into all its transactions. In their declining to do so there seems to be an additional reason why the functionaries of the Government should proceed with less haste and more caution in the rene\val of their monopoly.
The bank is professedly established as an agent of the executive branch of the Government, and its constitutionality is maintained on that ground. Neither upon the propriety of present action nor upon the provisions of this act was the Executive consulted. It has had no opportunity to say that it neither needs nor wants an agent clothed with such powers and favored by such exemptions. There is nothing in its legitimate functions which makes it necessary or proper. Whatever interest or influence, whether public or private, has given birth to this act, it can not be found either in the wishes or necessities of the executive department, by which present action is deemed premature, and the powers conferred upon its agent not only unnecessary, but dangerous to the Government and country.
It is to be regretted that the rich and powerful too often bend the acts of government to their selfish purposes. Distinctions in society will always exist under every just government. Equality of talents, of education, or of wealth can not be produced by human institutions. In the full enjoyment of the gifts of Heaven and the fruits of superior industry, economy, and virtue, every man is equally entitled to protection by law; but when the laws undertake to add to these natural and just advantages artificial distinctions, to grant titles, gratuities, and exclusive privileges, to make the rich richer and the potent more powerful, the humble members of society-the farmers, mechanics, and laborers-who have neither the time nor the means of securing like favors to themselves, have a right to complain of the injustice of their Government. There are no necessary evils in government. Its evils exist only in its abuses. If it would confine itself to equal protection, and, as Heaven does its rains, shower its favors 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 a wide and unnecessary departure from these just principles.
Nor is our Government to be maintained or our Union preserved by invasions of the rights and powers of the several States. In thus attempting to make our General Government strong we make it weak. Its true strength consists in leaving individuals and States as much as possible to themselves-in making itself felt, not in its power, but in its beneficence; not in its control, but in its protection; not in binding the States more closely to the center, but leaving each to move unobstructed in its proper orbit.
Experience should teach us wisdom. Most of the difficulties our Government now encounters and most of the dangers which impend over our Union have sprung from an abandonment of the legitimate objects of Government by our national legislation, and the adoption of such principles as are embodied in this act. Many of our rich men have not been content with equal protection and equal benefits, but have besought us to make them richer by act of Congress. By attempting to gratify their desires we have in the results of our legislation arrayed section against section, interest against interest, and man against man, in a fearful commotion which threatens to shake the foundations of our Union. It is time to pause in our career to review our principles, and if possible revive that devoted patriotism and spirit of compromise which distinguished the sages of the Revolution and the fathers of our Union. If we can not at once, in justice to interests vested under improvident legislation, make our Government what it ought to be, we can at least take a stand against all new grants of monopolies and exclusive privileges, against any prostitution of our Government to the advancement of the few at the expense of the many, and in favor of compromise and gradual reform in our code of laws and system of political economy.
I have now done my duty to my country. If sustained by my fellow citizens, I shall be grateful and happy; if not, I shall find in the motives which impel me ample grounds for contentment and peace. In the difficulties which surround us and the dangers which threaten our institutions there is cause for neither dismay nor alarm. For relief and deliverance let us firmly rely on that kind Providence which I am sure watches with peculiar care over the destinies of our Republic, and on the intelligence and wisdom of our countrymen. Through His abundant goodness and heir patriotic devotion our liberty and Union will be preserved.
Doc of 37...
About Fort Knox Gold:  http://www.fgmr.com/right2know.htm
In the 1970's a very courageous gentleman named Edward Durrell claimed that
substantially all of the US Gold Reserve being stored at Ft. Knox was gone.
Only 1,000 tonnes or so of the 8,500 tonnes supposedly being stored there
remained. The rest had been secretly taken from Ft. Knox and shipped to
London in 1967 and early 1968 for sale by President Johnson in an ill-fated
attempt to keep the price of Gold at $35 per ounce.
First, about Fort Knox. You know, the Fort Knox Gold Scandal is just like
the Watergate Scandal in one respect: There is a desperate cover-up going on
right now just as happened with Watergate. The Fort Knox Gold Scandal
cover-up really passed the point of no return last September when the United
States Treasury perpetrated the Fort Knox gold inspection hoax in an attempt
to discredit my charges that there's no gold in Fort Knox because it had all
been illegally removed. Since that time the Government has been getting in
deeper and deeper and deeper, involving more and more people in all sorts of
maneuvers to try to keep the lid on. For example, when the Congressmen and
newsmen visited Fort Knox last September, news stories promised everybody
that the visit would be followed up by an audit of the Fort Knox gold by the
General Accounting Office, but what they actually did was just a very
superficial exercise just to make the record look good, and the group of 15
men that did it had only two (2) General Accounting Office representatives
on it. All the rest were from the Treasury itself--in other words, the fox
went into the henhouse to count our chickens for us.
It may come as a shock to some, but the U.S. has very little so-called
"U.S. government" gold bullion in Fort Knox. A brave outspoken journalist,
Tom Valentine, in the 1970s, exposed as a fraud that there was
world-trade-quality gold at Fort Knox. All they have left are poor quality,
orangish-looking, melted down coin metal from the seizure in 1934, of gold
coins from America's common people. [The American aristocracy, warned in
advance, shipped THEIR gold out of the U.S.] The U.S. governmentt gold is
gone. Why? Because it was shipped, under the supervision of a ply-able U.S.
General, to the private central octopus called the Bank of England, in 1968,
to stem a run on that bank which had somehow lost all their own gold.]
The organization chaired by Alan Greenspan is a coalition of private
international banks, that does not answer to the United States Government.
And there is no precious metal warehoused in Fort Knox or elsewhere that
backs the money that they issue.
Large shipment of gold leaves Fort Knox, public doesn't know that their
national gold 'reserves' are being secretly depleted by one-world national
socialist agents working in U.S. government. Gold at Fort Knox replaced with
gold-plated lead bars, making it the biggest heist in history. Rockefellers
involved. James MacDonald becomes critical of Air Force and the CIA.
Throughout the 20th century this movement toward a one world government has
been marching on. This is not new or recent. In his book Critical Path
Buckminster Fuller gives a very impressive sweep of the 20th century, about
the large corporations and their agents and the lawyers who basically
control the country far more than the people understand. He talked about how
all the gold was removed from Fort Knox by the 1960's.
Where did it go?
It went to the banks. They own the country. Fuller called the CIA,
"capitalism's invisible army."
We have a Constitution and our Bill of Rights (the first 10 amendments)
that makes us free. Right? Then visit:
 http://www.trimonline.org/  http://www.trimonline.org/  link to www.getusout.org
can.com  http://www.givemeliberty.org/
 link to www.jbs.org
Then take a look at these sites:  http://www.dixierising.com/
 link to www.dixienet.org
 link to www.southerncaucus.org
 link to www.southern-style.com

10. References
1. Lord Rothschild. The Shadow of a Great Man. London: 1982, p.6.
2. Wilson, Derek. Rothschild The Wealth and Power of a Dynasty. NY: Charles Schribner's Sons,
p. 101. Source of quote given in the book.
3. Armstrong, George. Rothschild Money Trust. CPA reprint of 1940 ed., pp.66-88. Also in this
vein read Mullins, Eustice. The World Order. pp. 31-33 and other sources too.
4. Darms, Anton. The Delusion of British-Israelism. N.Y.: Loizeaux Brothers, pp. 186-187.
5. Darms, op. cit., plus there are numerous other accounts of how Israel was started with British
help, and one has to simply see who did it and their Rothschild connections.
6. As quoted in Sampson, Anthony. The Money Lenders. Middlesex, Eng.: Penguin Books, Ltd.,
1985, p.37.
7. Encyclopaedia Judaica, p. 696.
8. Mohr, Gordon. The Hidden Power Behind Freemasonry. Burnsville, MN: Weisman Pub., 1990,
p. 154.
8a. Various high-ranking Satanists that the power of God has pulled out of Satanism have said
they were eyewitnesses to Satan appearing at the Rothschilds. What they witnessed when Satan
showed up at the Rothschilds was that Satan appeared as an extremely beautiful man, except his
hoofs would be cloven. He would wear a black tuxedo to gamble and play cards (winnings were
sexual victims) and a white tuxedo when coming only to socialize.
9. An excellently researched book by a Christian journalist of Jewish ancestry is The Six-Pointed
Star by O.J. Graham. New Puritan Library, 1984. This book covers the satanic/magic history of
the Seal of Solomon before its modern Jewish use. The book shows how the symbol was not a
Jewish symbol until recent times.
10. Goldberg, M. Hirsch. The Jewish Connection. NY: Stein & Day, 1976, p.197.
11. Koestler, Arthur. The Thirteenth Tribe. NY: Random House, 1976, pp. 136-137.
12. The Satanic star is refered to in Acts 7:43, in Amos 5:25-26. "The shield carried by King
David.. .was traditionally believed to be engraved either with the name of God or the Menorah,
or Psalm 67." Siegel, Richard and Carl Rheins. "Metamophoses of a Tree; 10 Jewish Symbols
and Their Meanings," Jewish 44 Almanac. New York: Bantam Books, 1980, p. 515.
13. Hall, Manly P., 33°. Masonic, Hermetic, Qabbalistic & Rosicrucian Symbolical Philosophy.
l7ed., L.A.,CA: The Philosophical Research Soc., 1971, p. CXLV.
14. WT Dec. 1891, pp.170-71 See also WTR p.1342. C.T. Russell's letter was sent by him from
Palestine in Aug., 1891 to Rothschild.
15. Taylor, Samuel W. Rocky Mountain Empire The Later-Day Saints Today. NY: Macmillan
Pub. Co., Inc., 1978, p.66.
16. Read Wilson, Derek. Rothschild, The Wealth and Power of a Dynasty. NY: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1988.
17. Mullins, The World Order, p. 11.
18. Wilson, op. cit., pp. 338-339.
19. ibid., p.338
20. The Reign of the House of Rothschild, p. 405.
21. Muhlstein, Anka. Baron James, The Rise of the French Rothschilds. NY: The Vendome Press,
(n.d.-c.1980) .
22. Baigent, Leigh, Lincoln. Holy Blood, Holy Grail. pp. 190-199.
23. Various references. For instance, Armstrong, The Rothschild Trust, p. 196, "That is the
present objective of Jeroboam Rothschild and his secret Elders of Zion."
24. Wilson, Derek. op. cit., p. 45.
25. William Still writes, "In 1782, the headquarters of illuminized Freemasonry was moved to
Frankfurt, the stronghold of German finance, and controlled by the Rothschilds." Still, The New
World Order, p. 82.
26. Muhlstein, Anka. Baron James, The Rise of the French Rothschilds. 'p.47. She describes how
their private courier system was faster than the regular mail.
27. Corti, Count Egon Caesar. (trans. from German by B.& B. Lunn). The Rise Of The House
Of Rothschild. Boston: Western Is., 1972, p.278 cf. pp. 386-389.
28. Miller, Edith Star. Occult Theocracy. chap on Carbonarism, pp. 427-438 is a start in learning
its importance.
29. Mullins, op. cit., p.2.
30. di Gargano, Michael. Irish and English Freemasons and their Foreign Brothers, 1878, p. 62.
31. Bruell, Geschichte, p. 24 as quoted by Katz, Jacob. Jews and Freemasons in Europe 1723- 1939. (trans. by L. Oschry) Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
University Press, 1970, pp.61, 248
32. Mullins, op. cit. p. 3.
33. Muhlstein, op. cit. p. 125
34. Carroll Quigley's book was very enlightening on the New World Order except that it leaves
out the Catholic Church and the Jesuits' participation, at a time that their participation was
increasing dramatically. In other words, Quigley's book must be taken with a grain of salt, it
would be a mistake to believe it to be infallible or unbiased.
35. Le Sueur, Gorden (Rhode's confidential secretary). Cecil Rhodes The Man and His Work.
London: John Murray, 1913, p. 10.
36. Aydelotte, Frank (co-fndr CFR and Amer. Sec. to Rhodes Trustees). American Rhodes
Scholarships. "The model for this proposed secret society was the Society of Jesus, though he
mentions also the Masons."
37. Allen, Gary. Nixon's Palace Guard. Boston: Western Islands, 1971, p. 9. cf. Quigley. Tragedy and Hope.
38. Martin, Rose. Fabian Freeway. Boston: Western Islands, 1966.
39. Wilson, Derek. Rothschild The Wealth and Power of a Dynasty, p. 101. The source of the quote is given in the book.
40. Mullins, Eustice. The Curse of Canaan, p.125.
41. Mullins, Eustice. The World Order, p.5.
42. Friesel, Evyatar. Atlas of Modern Jewish History. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990.
43. ibid.
44. Mohr, op. cit. p. 118.
45. Read Mullins, The World Order.
46. Still, op. cit. p. 136 quoting Griffin, op. cit. p. 37. See also Mullins, op. cit., p. 11.
47. Wilson, op. cit., p. 92.
48. pamphlet published by The American Defense Society Inc., 154 Nassau St., NY.
49. Peace Militant. NY: The New History Foundation.
50. Griffin, Des. Descent into Slavery. S. Pasadena, CA: Emissary Publications, 1980, p. 52.
51. England Under the Heel of the Jew. London, 1918, pp 60-2.
52. Confidential interview with those who were recently in the illuminati hierarchy.
53. Smith, Gary. Land of the ZOG. Portland, OR: VuePoint, 1989, p.58.
54. Katz, Jacob. Jews and Freemasons in Europe 1723-1939. Cambridge, Mass. Harvard University Press, 1970, p.60.
55. ibid, p.92
Corti, Count Egon Caesar. THE RISE OF THE HOUSE OF ROTHSCHILD. Boston, Los Angeles: Western Islands, 1972 (copyright 1928 by Cosmopolitan
Books Corporation).
Graham, OJ. THE SIX-POINTED STAR. Fletcher, NC: New Puritan Ubrary, 1984.
Springmeier, Fritz. BE WISE AS SERPENTS. Portland, OR.: Privately published, 1991.
Cowles, Virginia. THE ROTHSCHILDS: A FAMILY OF FORTUNE. New York.: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1973
Morton, Frederic. THE ROTHSCHILDS: A FAMILY PORTRAIT. New York.: Collier Books, 1961, introduction and epilogue 1991.
Miller, Edith Starr. OCCULT THEOCRASY. Los Angeles, CA. 1933
Epperson, Ralph A. THE UNSEEN HAND. Tucson, AR.: Publius Press, 1985
Cowles, Virginia. THE ROTHSCHILDS: A FAMILY FORTUNE. New York: Alfred A Knopf, Inc., 1973
Sampson, Anthony. THE MONEY LENDERS. New York: Penguin Books, 1983
Morton, Frederic. THE ROTHSCHILDS: A FAMILY PORTRAIT. New York: Collier Books, 1991
Wechsberg, Joseph. THE MERCHANT BANKERS. New York: Pocket Books, 1968
Still, William. NEW WORLD ORDER. Lafayette, Louisiana: Huntington House Publishers, 1990
Mullins, Eustace. THE WORLD ORDER. Boring, OR: CPA Book Publisher, 1985
The New Rulers of the World by John Pilger
 link to www.amazon.com
 link to www.amazon.com
 link to www.amazon.com

The Immaculate Deception: The Bush Crime Family Exposed by Russell S. Bowen
 link to www.amazon.com
• Dark Alliance: The CIA, the Contras, and the Crack Cocaine Explosion by Gary Webb, Maxine Waters (Paperback)
• The Mafia, CIA and George Bush by Pete Brewton, Peter Brewton (Hardcover)
• The Best Democracy Money Can Buy: The Truth About Corporate Cons, Globalization and High-Finance Fraudsters by Greg Palast (Paperback)

The War on Freedom: How and Why America was Attacked, September 11, 2001
 link to www.amazon.com

The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve by G. Edward Griffin
 link to www.amazon.com

The Secrets of the Federal Reserve by Eustace Mullins
 link to www.amazon.com

 link to www.amazon.com

The Case Against the Fed by Murray Newton Rothbard
 link to www.amazon.com

The Shadows of Power: The Council on Foreign Relations and the American Decline by James Perloff
 link to www.amazon.com

The Illuminati
by Larry Burkett
Average Customer Rating:

Rule by Secrecy: The Hidden History That Connects the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons, and the Great Pyramids
by Jim Marrs (Author)
Average Customer Rating:

Books at Amazon on Mossad Operations
 link to www.amazon.com

By Way of Deception
by Victor Ostrovsky (Paperback)
Avg. Customer Rating:
Editions: Paperback |

Lion of Judah
by Victor Ostrovsky
Avg. Customer Rating:
Editions: Hardcover | All Editions

The Other Side of Deception: A Rogue Agent Exposes the Mossad's Secret Agenda
by Victor Ostrovsky, Theodore Bikel (Narrator)
Avg. Customer Rating:
Editions: Audio Cassette | All Editions

Black Ghosts
by Victor Ostrovsky (Perfect Paperback - March 2001)
Avg. Customer Rating:

The Other Side of Deception
by Victor Ostrovsky (Audio Cassette)
Avg. Customer Rating:


Paper Money of the United States, Robert Friedberg, The Coin and Currency Insitute, Inc [102 Linwood Plaza, Fort Lee, NJ 07024], 10th Edition, 1978
Standard Handbook of Modern United States Paper Money, Chuck O'Donnell, Krause Publications [700 E. State St., Iola, WI 54990], 7th Edition, 1982
Monetary Policy in the United States, by Richard H. Timberlake, The University of Chicago Press, 1993
Money Mischief, Episodes in Monetary History, Milton Friedman, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1992
A Monetary History of the United States, 1867-1960, Milton Friedman & Anna Jacobson Schwartz, Princeton University Press, 1963, 1990
Ted Susu-Mago  http://eliminatemortgages.com/ (541) 488-2711

homepage: homepage: http://groups.msn.com/TotalTruthSciences/messages.msnw

Good God 23.Jun.2003 01:27


That was a long article. I didn't read nearly any of it, I admit. I was too frustrated by the numerous oversimplifications.

For example -

"Today banks are allowed to loan out at least ten times the amount they actually are holding, so while you wonder how they get rich charging you 11% interest, it's not 11% a year they make on that amount but actually 110%."

That's a gross simplification of what's going on. Your words imply that the bank is loaning out 1000% of the DEPOSITED amount. That is not the case. The bank is loaning out 90% of the deposited amount -- which is 900% of the HELD amount, which is close to what you said.

Therefore, if you deposit $1,000 in a bank, the bank will turn around and loan out $900. The bank is then receiving whatever interest rate -- let's say 10% -- on $900. At this point, the bank is NOT getting 100% interest. It is getting 10%.

Now, the theory goes that since most people deposit their money in banks, whoever received that loan will then turn around and give it to someone else who will deposit it in the bank. That bank then receives a deposit of $900 and they too turn around and loan out $810. (And so the cycle goes).

But my main problem with the article is the same problem I have with all anti-capital arguments: It assumes there is no value in loaning capital.

The argument makes sense when you take just a cursory look at the issue, but when you delve a bit deeper you see the err. The banker is not selling "money" anymore than he is selling a widget. Much like insurance, he's selling risk.

The anti-capital arguments make much sense for David Copperfield and his father, but little sense in the modern western societies. In the United States today, it is not a crime to default on a loan. Anyone is free to do it. If I had the credit to do so, I could venture to the bank tomorrow, take out an unsecured $50,000 loan and run off to the Bunny Ranch in Las Vegas and have a hell of a time. After paying for those happy hours spent in a woman's arms, I could come home without any risk of imprisonment or bodily harm. The bank would be out $50,000.

I'd certainly be forced to declare Chapter 7 bankruptcy, and the bank would take me to court to liquidate any posessions I might have (outside exempt items, like health aids), to recoup their losses. But if I didn't have any posessions, I wouldn't have to work off the loan in a labor camp. I'd be off scott free. (Except for a destroyed credit rating).

Now, it's obviously unlikely that I'd have a credit rating positive enough that a bank would loan me $50,000 unsecured -- especially if I didn't have any posessions of worth. (Okay, actually in the above scenario, any future wages I earned may be garnished, since spending all the money on prostitutes would probably be considered "willful" and "mallicious" misuse of the loan. But I couldn't be forced to work off the loan.) The point remains, all the same.

Capital has served us well. Yes, the system is built upon trust and is vulnerable to panic. But as Mr. Ford said, thanks to the less than informed public, that's rarely a problem.

Oh no! Not trading with interest! 23.Jun.2003 04:28

analog kid analogkid@nukevet.com

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

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

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

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

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

Oh no! Not trading with interest!

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

Ya commie putz.

hey analog kid 23.Jun.2003 21:26


Are you remotely religious, "analog kid?" If you are, then you'd know every religion is against usury, and for good reason.

Usury makes the rich richer and the poor poorer. Is that cool with you? If so, then you must be rich - and you have nothing to worry about...

...until the revolution.

If you can't live cooperatively with the other humans, then you are living in competition with them. Your loss, chump. Dostoevsky watched his father, a wealthy upper-class landowner, die in a very peculiar way. The serfs that he worked to death (literally) had family that were still very much alive. And pissed. They forced vodka down Daddy Dostoevsky's throat. Enough to kill him. They never thought that the serfs would EVER rebel. But they did. And they were sorry. But it was too late. Fucking OOPS.

If you can't play nicely with others, the others will not play nicely with you. Call it karma. Capitalism kills, kid.

To James; your stupid sex industry/loan default scenario proves nothing except that yes, you would be fucked if you defaulted on a loan. You would end up paying back every penny AND THEN SOME.

And before we go around worshipping the golden word of Henry Ford, let's take a deeper look at that fuck. He kept a little shrine to Adolf Hitler and spoke glowingly of him, since they shared a powerful anti-Jewish hatred. And you're QUOTING the guy?

You Guys totally missed the points of this expose 27.Jun.2003 04:28

Alexander James ajsij@yahoo.com

Dear Zionists Illuminatis, stop hiding behind the veil of anti-semitism. Zionists have betrayed truthful Jews and peoples of all other faiths (other than Satanics) by hiding behind Jews. My post is exposing the Zionists Illuminatis Freemason Jesuit Brotherhood Central Banking System that is ripping us all by having the power to create money out of nothing, lending that fiat money to the taxpayers at interest, plus lending 9 times that money using fractional banking. Zionists hide behind a Jewish Front, Freemasons hide behind a Protestant front, Jesuits hide behind a Roman Catholic front, they are all Satanic Illuminatis led by the Rothschild Dynasty who control the private Bank of England, the private Federal Reserve System, private HSBC Bank, major news media (Ruppert Murdoch just bought another media giant), etc.

If you're too lazy to read, then listen to Dr. Edward Griffin's speech at the following link:  http://www.eliminatemortgages.com/creature.rm

 link to groups.msn.com