The Sassoon Family: aka “The “Rothschilds of the East”

Picture

There once was a wealthy “person of the Jewish faith” named David Sassoon — who, like his father, had served as treasurer to the pashas (governors) of Ottoman-ruled Baghdad (in modern day Iraq). Eventually, the people and a new pasha turned against the Jewish money manipulators (surprise surprise). In the early 1830’s — as the result of a corruption scandal — David and his brother Joseph left “anti-Semitic” Baghdad to seek new scams in new lands.

Joseph Sassoon settled in the city of Aleppo (modern day Syria) where he established a merchant house. Later on, his business interests spread to Alexandria, Thessaloniki, and Athens. The business empire included a shipping company and a money exchange house. His five sons later branched out in different directions.

But it was David — who led the community’s exodus to Bombay (now known as Mumbai, India) — that established the branch of the Sassoon Family which was to rank among the wealthiest and most respected and influential dynasties in the world. David Sassoon and his eight sons profited handsomely from several different types of businesses. They made a fortune in textiles; but the trade which really raked in the shekels for the new “Indians” later dubbed “the Rothschilds of the East” was in selling opium, aka narcotics, aka “dope” in China.

Picture
The ancestors of the Jewish Sassoon Family had been expelled from the Iberian Peninsula (Spain / Portugal) 300 years before David had been born. The Ottoman Turkish Empire welcomed the banished Jews. But when the Sassoons became embroiled in a corruption scandal, it was time for David and Joseph to pack up and leave again — this time, for India and Syria respectively. 
Picture
David Sassoon later founded Sassoon — a mighty financial and political operation which later expanded to the trafficking of opium to China.
Picture
Massive synagogue in Mumbai, India — built by the Sassoon Crime Family.
Picture
There are still 4,000 Jews and 10 synagogues in Mumbai.
Picture
The massive tomb of the famously ostentatious Drug Lord, David Sassoon — in India.

THE FIRST OPIUM WAR (1839-1842)

The First Opium War was fought between the United Kingdom and the Qing dynasty of China, mainly over the trade in opium. The privately owned British East India Company, (cough cough, Rothschild, cough cough) had been growing opium in India and smuggling it into China illegally. The influx of narcotics reversed the trade surplus which China had enjoyed while creating millions of opium addicts. Understandably, Chinese officials were not pleased about the British India-China opium trade.

In 1839, the Emperor instructed viceroy Lin Zexu to stop the trade. To that end, Lin wrote a letter to British Queen Victoria appealing to her moral responsibility to stop the opium trade. Little did the viceroy know that by that time, Queen Victoria was already just a figurehead. It was Rothschild and his ilk that ruled Britannia. There was no response to the letter.

Picture
Coat of Arms for the private company / military force — The British East India Company 
Picture
The trade routes from India to China.
Picture
There’s a LOT of shekels in dope!

Finally, Lin resorted to force by confiscating all supplies and ordering a blockade of foreign ships and confiscation of their cargoes of opium. The British Rothschild government responded by dispatching its sophisticated heavy gunboats to defeat those of the Chinese. The Chinese were forced to sign the Treaty of Nanking in 1842 — which granted treaty ports to foreign merchants, imposed reparations, and ceded Hong Kong Island to the British Empire.

Thanks to that unjust war, by the 1840s, Sassoon and sons came to dominate the opium trade between India and China. Branching out from Bombay, the drug smuggling low-lives established operations in some of the Chinese port cities which the British now controlled — Shanghai, Hong Kong and Canton. In time, Shanghai would become notorious for its opium use, prostitution and other vices. The dope, and the shekels, were really flowing now!

Picture
French political cartoon from 1840 depicts an Englishman ordering the emperor to buy opium as a dead Chinaman lays on the floor. The caption reads: “We want you to poison yourself completely because we need to buy a lot of tea in order to digest our beef.”
Picture
Another cartoon: Englishman pouring opium down a Chinaman’s throat. 
Picture
British gunboats gave the British an advantage — hence the term “gunboat diplomacy.”
Picture
The terms of the Treaty of Nanking humiliated and weakened China for many decades — but it pleased the Sassoon gangsters.

THE SECOND OPIUM WAR (1856-1860)

Resentment over the humiliating Treaty of Nanjing and continued concern over the hated opium trade that was, by this time, completely dominated by the Sassoons, caused the Chinese to again rise up against British (Rothschild) imperialism. Again, the British (this time joined by Rothschild France) — would be victorious.

The 2nd Opium War resulted in the Treaty of Tientsin in 1858, which was even more unjust and humiliating than the previous treaty. The Treaty:

  • Imposed reparations upon China for the expenses of the recent war.
  • Ten more ports were forced open to European control
  • The opium trade was legalized
  • China was forced to admit foreign traders and missionaries

Both in the short term and in the long run, these events were very bad for once-prosperous China; but very good for the drug-dealing Sassoons and the money-lending / stock-owning Rothschilds.

Picture
Another war — same result –followed by a cruel treaty foreshadowing the Versailles Treaty by which UK & France would ruin innocent Germany 60 years later.

THE SASSOONS BECOME “ENGLISHMEN”

As easily as David had gone from being an “Arab” to an “Indian,” so too did his son Abdullah (born in Baghdad) transition from “Indian” to being an ‘Englishman.” He simply changed his first name to Albert, moved to London, and was granted the title of “Baronette.” The son of David — also a drug dealer — was now “Sir” Albert Sassoon.

“Sir” Albert’s title passed on to his son, “Sir” Edward Sassoon. The 2nd Baronette became most noteworthy for serving as a member of the British Parliament and marrying Aline Caroline de Rothschild — the granddaughter of “nobleman” James de Rothschild(Paris branch) and great granddaughter of Rothschild patriarch Mayer Amschel. She was known as, “Lady Sassoon.” The Sassoons and the Rothschilds — a marriage of money-grubbing families from hell. The titled couple spawned “Sir” Philip Sassoon, 3rd Baronet — who also held a seat in Parliament.

From the late 1800’s until 1903, Rachel Beer(a Sassoon), also owned two influential newspapers — The Sunday Times and The Observer — both left-leaning, of course.

Picture
David
Picture
Edward
Picture
Phillip

Patriarch David spawned three generations of “English” Barons / politicians which took the Sassoons into the 20th Century. Edward, the 2nd Baronet, married a Rothschild.

Other Sassoon cousins made their mark in business and “philanthropy” — which is how elite criminals buy influence and status — and some ended up in New York. Unlike the undying influence of the Rothschilds, the Sassoons, though still with us, fizzled about 50 years ago.

But the evil deeds inflicted upon 19th Century China by “the West” (cough cough) are still remembered as what the Chinese refer to as “the Century of Humiliation.” As it was with the African slave trade and the Iraq war, elite Jews do the oppressing — and “white westerners” get the full historical blame. The Italian-based American poet Ezra Pound — who ended up being wrongly arrested and then committed to an American insane asylum for 7 years after World War II — best summed up this dynamic during a wartime radio address aimed at Britain:

Picture
Picture

“It is an outrage that any nice young man from the suburbs should be expected to die for Victor Sassoon. It is an outrage that any drunken footman’s byblow (bastard child) should be asked to die for Sassoon. You cannot touch a sore or a shame in your empire but you find a Mond, a Sassoon, or a Goldsmid. You have no race left in your government.”

Picture
Picture
Sassoon’s legacy of doped-up Chinamen lasted into the 20th Century. 
Picture
The Chinese remember the humiliation — but do they know about the Sassoons?

SUMMER MONTHS OF 1939

HITLER ATTEMPTS TO PEACEFULLY RESOLVE DISPUTE OVER DANZIG & THE ‘POLISH CORRIDOR’
(Stolen from Germany after World War I)

Picture
BERLIN THINKS DOOR IS LEFT OPEN TO PEACEFUL SOLUTION”
The August 28th headline of the Hitler-hating New York Times confirmed that Hitler sought to avoid war with Britain & France.

The “free city” of Danzig is 95% German. Along with its surrounding German area of East Prussia, Danzig was isolated from the German mainland by the harsh post-World War I treaties. Formerly German territory now belongs to Poland, cutting right through the Prussian/Pomeranian region of Germany. As had been the case with Germans stranded in Czechoslovakia, the Germans in Poland (those not expelled in 1919) are a persecuted minority. Hitler tries to solve the problem of the “Polish Corridor” peacefully. He proposes that the people living in Danzig, and the “corridor” be permitted to vote in a referendum to decide their status. If the region returns to German sovereignty, Poland will be given a 1 mile wide path, running through Germany to the Baltic Sea so that it would not be landlocked.  

The Poles consider Hitler’s solution, but behind the scenes, Poland is urged by FDR to not make any deals with Germany. When it becomes apparent to Hitler that Poland will not allow a referendum, he then proposes another solution – international control of the formerly German regions. This sensible offer is also ignored. The Globalists intend to use foolish Poland as the match which ignites World War II.

Picture
Germans stranded in the stolen ‘corridor’ and the “free city” of Danzig were abused, mass murdered and denied the right to self-determination.

AUGUST 25, 1939
BRITAIN & POLAND AGREE TO A MILITARY ALLIANCE

The Polish-British Common Defense Pact contains promises of British military assistance in the event that Poland is attacked by another European country. This builds upon a previous agreement (March 1939) between the two countries, and also France, by specifically committing to military action in the event of an attack.

With this agreement, powerful Zionist-Globalist forces in the UK have now trapped the reluctant Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, as well as France and Poland. All that is left to do now is for Polish-Jewish border thugs to deliberately provoke Germany into action and get the ball rolling.

Picture
Picture
The British-Polish Common Defense past was forced upon Neville Chamberlain.
Picture

Unjustly labeled by historians as an “appeaser”, Chamberlain had to be maneuvered into war by powerful factions above and around him.

QUOTE TO REMEMBER

“Chamberlain (speaking off the record to Ambassador Joseph Kennedy while playing golf) stated that America and the world Jews had forced England into the war.”

-The Forrestal Diaries ed. Millis, Cassell 1952  p129

AUGUST 31, 1939
THE GLEIWITZ (and other) BORDER ATTACKS / JEWISH-POLISH GUERILLAS ATTACK GERMAN RADIO STATION

Overestimating their strength, underestimating German strength, and believing that France and the UK would now be forced to back them, Polish-Jewish terrorists cross the border and attack a German radio station in Silesia, Germany. It is actually the latest in a string of deliberate border instigations against Germany.

The “Poles” then broadcast a message (in Polish) urging others to take up arms and start attacking Germans. German police quickly arrive and retake the station, killing one of the Red terrorists. Jewish Red terrorists, their Polish government protectors, and their Globalist-Zionist masters have picked a fight with Germany! 

Modern historians claim that the Gleiwitz incident was staged by Germans dressed as Polish terrorists. But as is the case with the Reichstag Fire conspiracy theory, they offer no evidence, (beyond a forced “confession” obtained after the war) to support this theory – a theory that ignores the outrageous and repeated pattern of provocations and murder directed at Hitler’s Germany at the Germans of “Polish Prussia” ever since 1933, the numerous border incidents, and also Hitler’s sincere attempts to negotiate a fair resolution to the Corridor and Danzig controversies.

Picture

Picture

Soon after broadcasting a call to kill Germans, Polish-Jewish partisans, with the blessing of the Polish government, kicked off the war between Poland and Germany.

QUOTE TO REMEMBER

“I lived in Germany during the 1980s when many people who lived during the war were still alive. I sought out anyone who lived near Poland in 1939 and was lucky enough to meet several people. One was a customs official who said it was so bad on the border they were armed and also had grenades in their office ready for attacks. Another told me his farm animals were often stolen by Polish (Jewish?) terrorists. Another told of his niece being raped by a Pole (Jew?) who crossed the border. He told me in 1940 they caught the man and showed me a copy of the death order signed by Heydrich, in which he ordered the man put to death.

 This is just one of many stories told to me by German civilians who witnessed these border incursions just like had happened in 1919-1928. One thing many people fail to see is that Poland openly attacked Germany right after World War I, which led to many border battles. Once Germany started pressing Poland to work out a solution to the corridor, the attacks started again. .And one thing that is clear to me is that Germany did not make up these attacks.”  

— 
– G.H.  Ohio, USA 

Hitler has had about all he could take from Poland!

Picture
Picture
September 1, 1939: Game on! Germany invades aggressor Poland — as the western Fake News falsely blames Germany for starting the war. The Poles are abandoned by their western “allies” as the Germans advance rapidly.
Picture
Picture
September 3, “Bloody Sunday.” 
— Red Jewish terrorists rape, torture and massacre 3000+ German civilians in the town of Bromberg, Poland. The western press ignores German pleas to come and have a look at what Poland had allowed to happen to German civilians.
Picture
Picture
September 3, As had been plotted for years, UK & France declare war upon Germany (but send no help to Poland).

SEPTEMBER 17, 1939
SOVIET UNION INVADES POLAND FROM THE EAST / ALLIES SAY NOTHING!

With the Polish army being routed by the advancing Germans in the west, Stalin cleverly decides to break the Soviet-Polish Non Aggression Pact of 1932. Poland is stabbed in the back as Soviet forces pour in from the east. The advancing Reds carry out massacres, the most infamous being the Katyn Forest Massacre in which 10,000 Polish Army officers are shot in the head. 

Other than the pre-Versailles Treaty German areas which Germany will reclaim, the Soviets will take all of Poland. In a shocking double-standard, the anti-German Globo-Zio press, FDR, France & the UK remain oddly silent about this brutal Soviet aggression.

Poland appeals to Britain for help, citing the Poland-British Defense Pact just signed a few weeks ago! The Polish ambassador in London contacts the British Foreign Office pointing out that clause 1(b) of the agreement, which concerned an “aggression by a European power” on Poland, should apply to the Soviet invasion. The UK Foreign Secretary responds with hostility, stating that it was Britain’s decision whether to declare war on the Soviet Union!

The truth is, the Allies don’t give a rat’s ass about Poland, and never did. They only used its foolish ultra-nationalist leaders to instigate Hitler so that they could have their war.  The horror that Poland will suffer under Soviet occupation is Poland’s problem, not Britain’s!

Picture
Picture
The Jewish-Bolshevik-led Soviet NKVD executed 10,000 Polish Army officers at Katyn Forest. They would later try to blame it on the Germans.

SEPTEMBER 17, 1939
GERMANY HAS DEFEATED POLAND / DANZIG AND WESTERN PRUSSIA REUNITED WITH GERMANY

Within a few weeks — and at a cost of 30,000 dead German troops — the German-Polish War is already over. Hitler receives a hero’s welcome upon his arrival in liberated Danzig. He addresses the Danzig crowd:

“No power on earth would have borne this condition as long as Germany. I do not know what England would have said about a similar peace solution (Versailles) at its expense or how America or France would have accepted it.

I attempted to find a tolerable solution – even for this problem. I submitted this attempt to the Polish rulers in the form of verbal proposals. .You know these proposals. They were more than moderate. I do not know what mental condition the Polish Government was in when it refused these proposals. …….As an answer, Poland gave the order for the first mobilization. Thereupon wild terror was initiated, and my request to the Polish Foreign Minister to visit me in Berlin once more to discuss these questions was refused. Instead of going to Berlin, he went to London.”

Picture
Picture
Hitler receives a hero’s welcome in Danzig
.

OCTOBER 1939 – MAY 1940
HITLER PLEADS FOR PEACE WITH BRITAIN & FRANCE

The German-Polish War has ended quickly. There is nothing that the Allies can do help their Polish puppet. The French actually invade Germany on September 7th, advancing 8 km before stopping.  The quiet period between the end of the Polish war until May 1940, is dubbed by a US Senator as “The Phony War.”   

During this time, Hitler pleads for the Allies to withdraw their war declarations. Towards France he declares: .“I have always expressed to France my desire to bury forever our ancient enmity and bring together these two nations, both of which have such glorious pasts.” 

To the British, Hitler says: “I have devoted no less effort to the achievement of Anglo-German friendship. At no time and in no place have I ever acted contrary to British interests….Why should this war in the West be fought?”

Hitler’s pleas for peace are ignored as the allies amass 600,000 troops in Northern France! Plans are openly discussed to advance eastward upon Germany, via Belgium and Holland, as well as establishing operations in neutral Norway and Denmark, with or without their consent.

Picture
Picture
Picture
As Hitler continues to plead for peace, the British government deploys its army and frightens its people with idiotic pleas to war gas masks.

And so it begins…

Left Threatens Post Election Violence

Trip gabriel

NY Times: This Is Democrats’ Doomsday Scenario for Election Night By Trip Gabriel

What if early results in swing states on Nov. 3 show President Trump ahead, and he declares victory before heavily Democratic mail-in votes, which he has falsely linked with fraud, are fully counted?

Rosa Brooks

Washington Post: What’s the Worse that Could Happen? The Election will Likely Spark Violence and a Constitutional Crisis By Rosa Brooks

In every scenario except a Biden landslide, our simulation ended catastrophically

David Freedman

Newsweek: How Trump Could Turn the Most Challenging Election Since the Civil War into an Unprecedented Disaster By David H. Freedman

Early on in the 1972 classic film, The Godfather, there was a scene in which Tom Hagen, the “consigliere” (counselor) of the Corleone Family, demonstrated the art of openly threatening someone without actually saying so directly. Consigliere Hagen (played by Robert Duvall) threatened a movie producer named Woltz in a manner so subtle that even many Godfather aficionados miss it.

From the script:

WOLTZ 

All right, start talking.

TOM

Uh, I was sent by a friend of Johnny Fontane’s — His friend is my client, who’d give his undying friendship to Mr. Woltz, if Mr. Woltz would grant us a small — favor.

WOLTZ

Woltz is listening.

TOM

Give Johnny the part in that new war film you’re starting next week.

WOLTZ (laughs, then)

And ah, what favor would ah your friend ah grant Mr. Woltz?

TOM

You’re gonna have some union problems; my client could make them disappear.

WOLTZ

Are you trying to muscle me?

TOM

Absolutely not.

WOLTZ

Now listen to me, you smooth-talking son-of-a-bitch! Let me lay it on the line for you and your boss, whoever he is. Johnny Fontane will never get that movie! I don’t care how many – dago guinea WOP greaseball gumbahs come out of the woodwork!

What Hagen actually did in that scene was, under the guise of “looking out for Woltz,” threatened the producer with a labor strike! Woltz was no fool; which explains why he became so angry. He understood that the real message was: “Do what we say or we will go to war with you.” Woltz, at first, refused to comply. A bloody horse’s head placed in his bed soon changed his tune.

“Mr. Woltz — I have not threatened you.”

Now, turning our attention to the Globalist / Jewish Mafia, we can better interpret some of the similarly thuggish threats and “warnings” that have been emanating from prominent Demonrats such as Big Mike Obongo: (here) — Creepy Pedo Joe Biden: (here) — Whore Harris: (here) — and now — as evidenced by the ominously provocative headlines about a “doomsday scenario” & “violence” & “disaster” & “catastrophe” & “a constitutional crisis” referenced above —  those notorious flagship vessels of Judea’s Piranha Press — the New York Slimes and Washington Compost, and also Newsweek. The “color revolution” message is clear. Get rid of Donald Trump on November 3rd or there will be hell to pay!

These barely veiled threats, we believe, tie back nicely to several “crumbs” which the Trump / Q Anon team posted between October 31 – November 2 of 2017. The meaning of those Q posts wasn’t exactly clear back then, but as Q has often said since: “Future proves past” — which means that certain early scenes in this “movie” (aka “the plan”) are really part of the middle or ending of the story. Let’s explore some of these mysterious 2017 posts and see how the de-codes make sense today.

1. Big Mike (or an impostor, or a “deep fake” video): “If you think things cannot possibly get worse, trust me, they can; and they will if we don’t make a change in this election. If we have any hope of ending this chaos, we have got to vote for Joe Biden like our lives depend on it.” // 2. Creepy Redo Biden: “Does anyone believe there will be less violence in America if Donald Trump is re-elected?”  // 3. Whore Harris (or an impostor, or a “deep fake” video): “But they (the protests) are not gonna stop. They’re not gonna stop. They’re not – this is a movement, I’m telling you. They’re not gonna stop….. and everyone beware, because they’re not gonna stop. They’re not gonna stop before election day in November, and they’re not gonna stop after election day. And that should be – everyone should take note of that.” 

Post 22  October 31, 2017: Who controls the NG? Why was the NG recently activated in select cities within the US? Can the NG work in coordination w/ the marines?

Analysis: NG = National Guard – which, when activated during a national emergency, can be controlled by Trump and could indeed coordinate with the marines.

Post 24  November 1, 2017: Any person making statements they will not be seeking re-election was put in submission. For the betterment of the country not all will be prosecuted and all will do as told. You will see more of this occur (not normal yet disregarded) and even on the D side.

Analysis: After this prediction was made, an astonishing number — “record numbers” according to all media accounts — of Republican Congressmen (including House Speaker Paul Ryan) resigned in advance of both the 2018 mid-term elections and the upcoming 2020 elections (2018 here) and (2020 here). Most of them were anti-Trumpers. On the “D side” – similar “submissions” would explain why the Demonrats appear to be comically self-destructing. Is the self-destruction of the D’s a deliberate “plea deal” consequence of this submission to Sheriff Trump? I believe so.

Post 24 (continued): Do conditions need to be satisfied to authorize? (NG) What former President used the military to save the republic and what occurred exactly?

Analysis: A national emergency has to be declared – which is what Trump did in response to Stupid-19.

Post 24 (continued)

The masses tend to panic in such situations. No war. No civil unrest. Clean and swift.

Analysis: When the hammer drops, it will be clean and swift. Many now believe that many Deep Staters have already been arrested.

Post 26  November 1, 2017: Think about it logically. The only way is the military. Fully controlled. Save & spread (once 11.3 verifies as 1st marker).

Analysis: 11.3 is a very important sign. Did it really stand for the letters K.C. – after indicted Deep State lawyer, Kevin Cline Smith? Or does it refer to November 3rd, 2020 – the “marker” to kick-off the military action?

Post 34  November 1, 2017: My fellow Americans, over the course of the next several days you will undoubtedly realize that we are taking back our great country (the land of the free) from the evil tyrants that wish to do us harm and destroy the last remaining refuge of shining light. On POTUS’ order, we have initiated certain fail-safes that shall safeguard the public from the primary fallout which is slated to occur 11.3 upon the arrest announcement of Mr. Podesta (actionable 11.4). Confirmation (to the public) of what is occurring will then be revealed and will not be openly accepted. Public riots are being organized in serious numbers in an effort to prevent the arrest and capture of more senior public officials.

Analysis: There goes that date of 11.3 again – accompanied by a prediction of some unrest related to “fallout.”

Post 34 (continued): On POTUS’ order, a state of temporary military control will be actioned and special ops carried out.

Analysis: This fits in with the Left’s current threats to trigger violence immediately after Election Day (11.3)

1. Paul the Rat Ryan did everything he could to obstruct and undermine Donald Trump. Q Anon & Friends have since forced him to resign. When Trump took office in January 2017, there were 241 Republicans in the House. Since then, 115 of them (48%) have been “whacked” by Trump — having either retired, resigned, been defeated, or are retiring after 2020. // 2. Under cover of Stupid-19 — a Globalist scamdemic which Trump and the Patriots knew was coming in advance — emergency presidential powers over the National Guard and military have already been granted to Trump. Q Anon foresaw the need for this power-grab three years ago.

Post 34 (continued): Rest assured, the safety and well-being of every man, woman, and child of this country is being exhausted in full. However, the atmosphere within the country will unfortunately be divided as so many have fallen for the corrupt and evil narrative that has long been broadcast.

Analysis: It will get ugly, but the patriots are in control.

Post 34 (continued: We will be initiating the Emergency Broadcast System during this time in an effort to provide a direct message (avoiding the fake news) to all citizens.

Analysis: This is the only way to totally bypass Fake News and speak to ALL Americans. The Globalist press has already expressed concern about Trump’s control over the Emergency Broadcast System (here) – which includes TV, radio, and I Phones — and reported that the system was tested on cellphones for the very first time in 2018. (here)

Post 34 (continued): Organizations and/or people that wish to do us harm during this time will be met with swift fury – certain laws have been pre-lifted to provide our great military the necessary authority to handle and conduct these operations (at home and abroad).

Analysis: These laws were not “pre-lifted” in 2017, when this post was issued – but during the fog of Stupid-19 – which the patriots already knew was coming.

Post 36 November 1, 2017: If Trump failed, if we failed, and HRC assumed control, we as Patriots were prepared to do the unthinkable (this was leaked internally and kept the delegate recount scam and BO from declaring fraud). Dig deeper – missing critical points to paint the full picture. There is simply no other way than to use the military. It’s that corrupt and dirty.

Analysis: This leaked threat of direct military intervention –“the unthinkable” –explains why Killary meekly backed-down from demanding a “recount” that some had been urging her to pursue (here) as well as why the post-election delegate tampering effort (here) also fizzled out. Wow! The generals and admirals really do have our backs!

Post 44 November 2, 2017: Before POTUS departs on Friday he will be sending an important message via Twitter.

Analysis: The trigger-tweet from Trump has been mentioned several times over the years, and is an important article-of-faith among A followers

Post 55 November 2, 2017: Look to Twitter: Exactly this: “My fellow Americans, the Storm is upon us…….”

Analysis: The post election code-word from Trump – to be tweeted after the Communists explode in red rage (as the Slimes and Compost now confirm) — as the activated NG and Marines make their “clean and swift” move while Trump activates the Emergency System. Notice how the 2017 dates for these posts — though from three years ago –precisely precede 11.3 — another known Q Anon tactic.

To you weakened Deep State Reds in the suites and in the Military Intelligence-infiltrated streets — Go ahead and follow through on your implied stated threats to stir up mayhem on 11.3 and usher in a violent “constitutional crisis.”  Do your worst! Trump’s trap was set for you a long time ago.

11.3

?

1. According to Q Anon posts from 2017, when the time comes, the president will bypass the media with Emergency Alert Systems (which Trump later tested in 2018) // 2. Does 11.3 mean that the “storm” events will kick off on Election Day (November 3)??? // 3. “The calm before THE STORM.”

Q Anon posted an image of Q fans posing in front of the Guantanamo Bay Naval Station — which contains a prison camp that Trump has spent a lot of money building up for some reason (here)

Debunking A Century of War Lies

images (3)

In the modern age of democracy and volunteer armies, a pretense for war is required to rally the nation around the flag and motivate the public to fight. That is why every major conflict is now accompanied by its own particular bodyguard of lies. From false flag attacks to dehumanization of the “enemy,” here are all the examples you’ll need to help debunk a century of war lies.

If, as the old adage has it, the first casualty of war is the truth, then it follows that the first battle of any war is won by lies.

Lies have always been used to sell war to a public that would otherwise be leery about sending their sons off to fight and die on foreign soil. In times long past, this was easy enough to accomplish. A proclamation by a king or queen was enough to set the machinery of war in motion. But in the modern age of democracy and volunteer armies, a pretense for war is required to rally the nation around the flag and motivate the public to fight.

That is why every major conflict is now accompanied by its own particular bodyguard of lies. From false flag attacks to dehumanization of the “enemy,” here are all the examples you’ll need to help debunk a century of war lies.

download

WWI

In 1915, the RMS Lusitania, a British ocean liner en route from New York to Liverpool, was sunk by a German U-boat 11 miles off the coast of Ireland. The ship’s sinking, which resulted in the death of 128 of the 139 Americans aboard, became a symbol of German evil and helped psychologically prepare the US public for their country’s eventual entry into WWI. But every facet of the story of the Lusitania as it has been presented to the public was a deliberate lie or a lie by omission.

The boat was not a purely civilian vessel carrying 3,813 40-pound (unrefrigerated) containers of “cheese” and 696 containers of “butter,” as the official manifest held, but guncotton, in keeping with the shipment’s stated destination: the Royal Navy’s Weapons Testing Establishment.

It was not sunk by the German torpedo boat but by secondary explosions from the munitions the ship was (illegally) carrying.

It was not the victim of a cowardly German surprise attack (the German Embassy placed a warning notice about the Lusitania in 50 American newspapers right next to Cunard’s own listings).

And the American ambassador to England at the time, Walter Hines Page, wrote to his son five days before the ship was sunk, asking: “If a British liner full of American passengers be blown up, what will Uncle Sam do? That’s what’s going to happen.”

So what did the official cover-up of the incident conclude? That the dastardly Germans had waged a perfidious sneak attack on an innocent peace boat, of course. And the rest, as they say, is history.

download (2)

WWII

A little over two decades later, America’s entry into WWII came when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor in December 1941, killing over 2,400 American servicemen and civilians. But far from an unprovoked sneak attack, as the official government-approved history would have you believe, Pearl Harbor is best understood as a conspiracy to motivate the American public for war by first provoking and then allowing a Japanese strike on American targets.

This is not even a controversial idea; it was commonly understood and discussed by many in the Roosevelt administration at the time. Henry Stimson, the US Secretary of War, noted in his diary that just the week before the attack President Roosevelt had told him “we were likely to be attacked perhaps (as soon as) next Monday” and then solicited Stimson’s advice on “how we should maneuver them [the Japanese] into the position of firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to ourselves.” Around the same time, Roosevelt sent a message to all military commanders stating that “The United States desires that Japan commit the first overt act.”

So how did FDR and his administration provoke the Japanese into attacking?

In late 1940, Roosevelt ordered the United States Fleet to be relocated from San Pedro to Pearl Harbor. The order incensed Admiral James Richardson, Commander-in-Chief of the US Fleet, who complained bitterly to FDR about the nonsensical decision: It left the fleet open to attack from every direction, it created a 2,000-mile-long supply chain that was vulnerable to disruption, and it packed the ships in together at Pearl Harbor, where they would be sitting ducks in the event of a bombing or torpedo raid. FDR, unable to counter these objections, went ahead with the plan and relieved Richardson of his command.

Then in June 1941, Secretary of the Interior Harold Ickes wrote a memo advising FDR to embargo Japanese oil in order to goad them into war: “There might develop from the embargoing of oil to Japan such a situation as would make it, not only possible but easy, to get into this war in an effective way.” Roosevelt followed through weeks later with an order seizing Japanese assets in America and effectively preventing Japan from purchasing much-needed American oil, which at that time accounted for four-fifths of Japanese oil imports.

The provocations had their intended effect, and the Americans listened in on Japanese war preparations via radio. They received warnings of an imminent attack from diplomatic officials and military attachés. The attack was even predicted by the Honolulu Advertiser days before it happened. But all of these warnings were ignored. Even today, nearly 80 years after the events, new documents and memos continue to be found showing more warnings that Roosevelt and his administration deliberately ignored in the run-up to the attack.

FDR got his wish. The Japanese attack was successful: 2,400 Americans died, and the nation, outraged, responded by rallying around the flag and jumping enthusiastically into war.

But the Japanese themselves were no innocents when it came to lying their way into war. Ten years before Pearl Harbor, in 1931, Japan was looking for a pretext to invade Manchuria. On September 18th of that year, a lieutenant in the Imperial Japanese Army detonated a small amount of TNT along a Japanese-owned railway in the Manchurian city of Mukden. The act was blamed on Chinese dissidents and used to justify the invasion and occupation of Manchuria. When the lie was later exposed, Japan was diplomatically shunned and forced to withdraw from the League of Nations.

download (3)

The Korean War

The League of Nations fell apart precisely for its inability to prevent World War II. Its successor organization, the United Nations, engaged in its own war lies shortly after its creation to ensure that it would not meet the same fate.

The Korean War, waged under the UN flag and sold to the public as a virtuous mission to save the South from the North’s communist aggression, was on its face a war that should never have happened. The division of Korea into North and South was not the organic decision of the Korean people, but a plan that originated in an article in 1944 in Foreign Affairs, the journal of the Council on Foreign Relations, which suggested dividing the country up and putting its administration in the hands of the Allies, including the Soviets. When the newly-founded UN put that plan into action in 1945, Korea was arbitrarily divided along the 38th parallel, with the US administering the South and the Soviet Union administering the North.

Neither was the war itself the organic result of decisions taken by the Korean people. In 1949, Owen Lattimore, a member of the Carnegie and Rockefeller-funded Institute for Pacific Relations and an advisor to the State Department on East Asian issues, wrote: “The thing to do is let South Korea fall, but not to let it look as if we pushed it.” In a speech at the National Press Club the following year, Secretary of State Dean Acheson placed Korea outside of the US’ “defensive perimeter of the Pacific,” stating that any attack that took place outside of that perimeter would have to be dealt with “under the Charter of the United Nations.” Taking this as a green light, the North Koreans, heavily fortified and equipped with Soviet military aid, invaded the South.

The war began on June 27, 1950, when the UN Security Council passed a resolution calling for members to provide military assistance “to restore international peace and security in the area.” The Soviet Union, being a veto-wielding member of the Council, could have vetoed the resolution and prevented the UN from engaging in the war, but they abstained from the vote altogether.

When General MacArthur, leading the UN forces, managed to repel the North right to the Chinese border, he was prevented from completing the mission by Truman, who would not authorize any operations north of the Soviet-held 38th parallel unless there was no chance of confrontation with either Chinese or Soviet forces. MacArthur, shocked by this development, wrote in a letter years later: “Such a limitation upon the utilization of available military force to repel an enemy attack has no precedent either in our own history or, so far as I know, in the history of the world. [. . .] To me it clearly foreshadowed the tragic situation which has since developed and left me with a sense of shock I had never before experienced in a long life crammed with explosive reactions and momentous hazards.”

In the end, the bloody Korean conflict ended not with a peace deal but a ceasefire. Not with the reunification of the Korean peninsula but with the establishment of a demilitarized zone to keep them separated. Nearly three million civilians died during the fighting, and the country was torn to pieces, all in the name of a military action under the UN flag that should never have escalated into war in the first place.

images (1)

The Vietnam War

In August of 1964, President Johnson was preoccupied in finding an excuse to justify a formal escalation of American military involvement in Vietnam. That excuse came on August 2nd when the USS Maddox, a destroyer supposedly on a peaceful mission in international waters, reported a surprise attack from North Vietnamese torpedo boats in the Gulf of Tonkin. Just two days later it reported another attack. Johnson responded by launching retaliatory strikes and signing the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, thus formally launching the Vietnam War.

Years later, it was revealed that the story of the Maddox, too, had been a tissue of lies. The Maddox was not peacefully drifting near Vietnamese waters, minding its own business; it was part of a covert electronic warfare campaign assisting the South Vietnamese in launching attacks on the North. It had not been attacked out of the blue on August 2nd, as originally reported, but in fact had fired first. And, as even the NSA’s own internal publication, made available to the public for the first time 40 years after the incident, concluded, the second attack on August 4th had never taken place at all.

But these were mere details, and, just like the facts about the Lusitania and Pearl Harbor, these details were suppressed long enough for the event to have its intended effect: rallying the public for war.

images (2)

The Six-Day War

The Six-Day War in 1967 between Israel and Egypt, Syria and Jordan is yet another example of a war which was justified for reasons that were later exposed as lies.

When Israel launched an attack on Egypt’s airfields on the morning of June 5th, they initially claimed that it was a defensive strike and that Egypt had struck first. But this was an easily proven lie, and the claim was quickly dropped.

Next they claimed that the attack was “preemptive self defense” and that Egypt and its Arab allies had been preparing to strike Israel. But multiple Israeli officials, including Yitzhak Rabin, later admitted that Egypt had not been preparing a war, or even interested in one.

And then, in the most outrageous incident of all, Israel attempted to get America involved in the war by attacking the USS Liberty, a US technical research ship collecting electronic intelligence just outside Egypt’s territorial waters at the time of the war. The attack, carried out by Israeli fighter jets and torpedo boats, was relentless. The Liberty was strafed and torpedoed repeatedly, with the crew sending distress messages and even hoisting a large American flag so there could be no doubt as to their identity.

The Israeli attack was finally called off an hour and a half into the assault. Israel, caught in a blatant attempt to sink an American ship, offered an “apology” for “mistaking” the identity of the vessel. But it was no mistake. In 2007 the NSA declassified intercepts confirming that the Israelis knew they were attacking an American ship, not an Egyptian ship as their cover story has maintained.

Even mainstream historians now characterize Israel’s attack on the Liberty as “a daring ploy by Israel to fake an Egyptian attack on the American spy ship, and thereby provide America with a reason to officially enter the war against Egypt.” But the incident was soon memory-holed, and to this day the Six-Day War is portrayed as an act of “preemptive self defense” by the valiant Israelis against the dastardly Arab aggressors.

download (4)

Gulf War 1

By the 1990s, the post-Vietnam public was growing increasingly wary of calls for war in far-flung corners of the world in countries many had never heard of. And so it was that in 1990, when the politicians and their deep state controllers required the American public to be motivated to wage war against Iraq for its invasion of Kuwait, they hired a literal PR firm to sell an even more brazen set of lies to Joe Sixpack and Jane Soccermom.

The most famous of these lies revolved around Nayirah, a “young Kuwaiti girl” who sparked international headlines for her shocking testimony before the Congressional Human Rights Caucus in October 1990. In a tear-stained speech she told a harrowing story of the horrors she witnessed being committed by Iraqi soldiers at a Kuwaiti hospital where she was volunteering.

NAYIRAH: I volunteered at the Aladein hospital with 12 other women who wanted to help as well. I was the youngest volunteer. The other women were from 20 to 30 years old. While I was there, I saw the Iraqi soldiers come into the hospital with guns. They took the babies out of the incubators . . . took the incubators and left the children to die on the cold floor!

SOURCE: Human Rights Violations in Kuwait

It is difficult today to understand just how important this testimony was in setting the tone of the debate about whether America should commit military forces to defend Kuwait. It was reported breathlessly on the evening news, and it was repeated by President Bush on not one or two occasions, but six separate times in the lead up to war.

GEORGE H. W. BUSH: . . . babies pulled from incubators and scattered like firewood across the floor…

SOURCE: Nayirah Episode of 60 Minutes

GEORGE H. W. BUSH: . . . and they had kids in incubators, and they were thrown out of the incubators so that Kuwait could be systematically dismantled.

SOURCE: To Sell A War – Gulf War Propaganda (1992)

Then, when the Gulf War Resolution was making its way through the House, the incubator story was raised in Congress:

REP. HENRY HYDE: Now is the time to check the aggression of this ruthless dictator whose troops have bayoneted pregnant women and have ripped babies from their incubators in Kuwait.

SOURCE: To Sell A War – Gulf War Propaganda (1992)

And then again in the Senate. The vote passed and combat operations formally began in January 1991.

The only problem? “Nayirah” was not some anonymous Kuwaiti girl, but, as a subsequent CBC investigation discovered, she was Nayirah Al-Sabah, daughter of Saud Al-Sabah, the Kuwaiti Ambassador to the United States. Her testimony had been written for her by Hill & Knowlton, a PR agency hired by the Kuwaiti government-supported astroturf organization, the “Citizens For A Free Kuwait,” to help sell the Gulf War. And the “Congressional Human Rights Caucus” that held the hearing where Nayirah gave her testimony? It was later found to be a Hill & Knowlton front itself.

download (5)

Gulf War II

As everyone knows by now, the second Gulf War, in 2003, was also built on lies. We all remember the lies about Saddam’s WMDs and the way that story was sold to the public by Colin Powell at the UN. But this time the media took the driver seat in the campaign to sell the war to the public.

The New York Times led the way with Judith Miller‘s now-infamous reporting on the Iraqi WMD story, now known to have been based on false information from untrustworthy sources, but the rest of the media quickly fell into line, with the NBC Nightly News asking “what precise threat Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction pose to America” and Time debating whether Hussein was “making a good-faith effort to disarm Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction.” Reports about chemical weapons stashes were reported on before they were confirmed, although headlines boldly asserted their existence as indisputable fact. And any media personality that showed skepticism about the claims being made—even wildly popular ones like Phil Donahue, host of MSNBC’s then highest-rated program—were summarily removed from the air.

PHIL DONOHUE: Scott Ritter is here and so is Ambassador . . .

BILL MOYERS: You had Scott Ritter, former weapons inspector, who was saying that if we invade, it will be a historic blunder.

DONOHUE: Yes. You didn’t have him alone. He had to be there with someone else who supported the war. In other words, you couldn’t have Scott Ritter alone. You could have Richard Perle alone.

MOYERS: You could have the conservative.

DONOHUE: You could have the supporters of the President alone. And they would say why this war is important. You couldn’t have a dissenter alone. Our producers were instructed to feature two conservatives for every liberal.

MOYERS: You’re kidding.

DONOHUE: No this is absolutely true.

MOYERS: Instructed from above?

DONOHUE: Yes.

SOURCE: Bill Moyers Journal APRIL 25, 2007: “Buying the War”

We now know that in fact the stockpiles did not exist and the administration premeditatedly lied the country into yet another war, but the most intense opposition the Bush administration ever received over this documented war crime was some polite correction on the Sunday political talk show circuit.

DONALD RUMSFELD: You and a few other critics are the only people I’ve heard use the phrase “immediate threat.” I didn’t. The president didn’t. And it’s become kind of folklore that that’s what’s happened. The president went—

BOB SCHIEFFER: You’re saying that nobody in the administration said that—

RUMSFELD: I can’t speak for nobody— . . . and everybody in the Administration and say nobody said that.

SCHIEFFER: The Vice-President didn’t say that?

RUMSFELD: If you have any citations I’d like to see them.

THOMAS FRIEDMAN: “Some have argued that the nu—” this is you speaking “some have argued that the nuclear threat from Iraq is not imminent, that Saddam is at least five to seven years away from having nuclear weapons. I would not be so certain.”

RUMSFELD: Mm-hmm.

FRIEDMAN: That’s close to “imminent.”

RUMSFELD: Well, I’ve tried to be precise and I’ve tried to be accurate. Sometimes—

FRIEDMAN: “No terror state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people and the stability of the world than the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iran.”

RUMSFELD: Mm-hmm.

download (6)

The Libya Intervention

The WMD story blew up in the neocons’ face shortly after the war, but by that time they had already succeeded in their plan to reshape the Middle East. But for the would-be controllers of public opinion, a valuable lesson was learned: “Human rights” and “protecting the innocent” is a more effective lie to sell to the public to motivate them for war. So when it came time to sell the war on Libya to the public, the UN-backed, NATO-led aggressors once again donned the cloak of “human rights” by turning to none other than the UN’s Human Rights Council.

The process that launched the intervention was begun by a coalition of 70 non-governmental organizations, which issued a joint letter urging the UN to suspend Libya from the Human Rights Council and for the Security Council to invoke the so-called “responsibility to protect” principle in protecting the Libyan people from alleged atrocities being committed by the Libyan government.

In a special session on the issue on February 25th, 2011, the UN Human Rights Council adopted a resolution affirming the NGOs’ recommendations. The resolution was adopted without a vote.

The Security Council immediately passed resolutions 1970 and 1973, authorizing the establishment of a “no-fly zone on Libyan military aviation” for the “protection of civilians” and the “delivery of humanitarian assistance.” Three days later, using the resolution as its justification, the US, UK and France began bombing the population of Libya.

Meanwhile, the International Criminal Court’s Chief Prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, began working on the legal basis for the invasion. He drafted the request for the Court’s judges to issue an arrest warrant for Gaddafi for crimes against humanity. Although NATO forces were already engaged in an invasion of the country on the basis of undocumented allegations by a group of NGOs, Moreno-Ocampo’s request was not issued until May 16th.

On June 28th, the day after the judges agreed to issue the warrant, Moreno-Ocampo participated in a press conference in which one reporter asked about the evidence that Gaddafi had ever engaged in the atrocities he was accused of.

LUIS MORENO-OCAMPO: I advise you to read the application of the prosecutor’s office. Many pages. I think it was 77 pages. We describe in detail the facts. Most of it is public and the judges also decided on the evidence. So of course we are prosecutors and judges, so we rely on facts, so we prove the crimes. That’s what we did.

Although the document that Moreno-Ocampo urges the public to read to understand the evidence of Gaddafi’s crimes is indeed public, and is 77 pages long, the version made available to the public has been heavily redacted. In fact, of the 77 pages, 54 of them have been redacted, comprising the entire section of the document dealing with the evidence for the charges themselves.

The most sickening part of this war lie is just how obvious it was. No one involved in this charade cared about the well-being of the Libyan people. Not the press, not the politicians, not the ICC prosecutors. And as a result, today, seven years after the destruction of Libya at the hands of the United Nations-sanctioned NATO “saviours,” open-air slave markets are running in the country that the human rights crusaders once pretended to care about.

Conclusion

False flags. Provocateur conflicts. Fake news and fake human rights crusades. Throughout the last century, a host of methods have been employed to keep the public playing the military-industrial complex’s game. And over that century, the blood of untold millions has flowed as a direct result of these war lies.

Truth is the first casualty of war, as they say. But if we desire peace, then we must confront the liars with our knowledge of these war lies. And armed with this truth, the public finally stands a chance of stopping the next war before the warmongers can conjure it into existence.

Century of Enslavement: The History of The Federal Reserve

 

 

Part One: The Origins of the Fed

The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the Government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson.” — FDR letter to Colonel Edward House, Nov. 21, 1933

All our lives we’ve been told that economics is boring. It’s dull. It’s not worth the time it takes to understand it. And all our lives, we’ve been lied to.

War. Poverty. Revolution. They all hinge on economics. And economics all rests on one key concept: money.

Money. It is the economic water in which we live our lives. We even call it “currency”; it flows around us, carries us in its wake. Drowns those who are not careful.

We use it every day in nearly every transaction we conduct. We spend our lives working for it, worrying about it, saving it, spending it, pinching it. It defines our social status. It compromises our morals. People are willing to fight, die, and kill for it.

But what is it? Where does it come from? How is it created? Who controls it? It is a remarkable fact that, given its central importance in our lives, not one person in a hundred could answer such basic questions about money as these.

Interviewer: So if you were planning a family, you’d want to know where babies come from. And this is a lot about banking. So let me ask you: Where does money come from?

Interviewee 1: Where does the money come from? The government prints it. It’s printed off.

Interviewer: How is new money created?

Interviewee 2: By labor. People work and produce wealth, and the money is supposed to match that wealth.

Interviewee: Where does money come from?

Interviewee 3: Well, I have a pretty different outlook on money. It actually comes from, like, trees, right?

SOURCEOccupy Vancouver answers “Where does money come from?”

But why is this? How could we be so ignorant about a topic of such importance? “Where does money come from?” is a basic, childlike question. So why is our only response the childlike answer, meant as a joke: “It grows on trees”?

Such a profound state of ignorance could not come about naturally. From the time we are children, we are curious about the world and eager to learn about the way it works. And what could lead to a better understanding of the way the world works than a knowledge of money, its creation and destruction? Yet discussion of this topic is fastidiously avoided in our school years and ignored in our daily life. Our monetary ignorance is artificial, a smokescreen that has been erected on purpose and perpetrated with the help of complicated systems and insufferable economic jargon.

But it doesn’t take an economist to understand the importance of money. Deep down we all know that the wars, the poverty, the violence we see around us hinges on this question of money. It seems like a thousand-piece jigsaw puzzle just waiting to be solved. And it is.

The puzzle pieces, taken together, create an image of the Federal Reserve, America’s central bank and the heart of the country’s banking system. Despite its central importance to the economy, relatively few have heard of it, and fewer still know what it is, despite the bank’s attempts at self-description:

Our economy runs on a complex system of exchange of goods and services in which money plays a key part. Coin, currency, savings, and checking accounts; the overall supply of money is managed by the Federal Reserve. Money is the medium through which economic exchanges take place, and money as a standard of value helps us to set prices for goods and services. The job of managing money—monetary policy—is to preserve the purchasing power of the dollar while ensuring that a sufficient amount of money is available to promote economic growth.

The Federal Reserve also promotes the safety and soundness of the institutions where we do our banking. It ensures that the mechanisms by which we make payments, whether by cash, cheque, or electronic means, operate smoothly and efficiently.

And in its fiscal role acts as the banker for the United States government.

Now these duties comprise the major responsibilities of our central bank.

SOURCEThe Fed: Our Nation’s Central Bank

But in order to understand the Federal Reserve, we must first understand its origins and context. We must deconstruct the puzzle.

The first piece of that puzzle lies here, in the White House. This is where the Federal Reserve Act, then known as the Currency Bill, was signed into law after passing the House and Senate in late December 1913.

The New York Times of Christmas Eve 1913, described the festive scene:

“The Christmas spirit pervaded the gathering. While the ceremony was a little less impressive than that of the signing of the Tariff act on Oct. 3 last in the same room, the spectators were much more enthusiastic and seized every occasion to applaud.”

There in the White House that fateful December evening, President Wilson signed away the last veneer of control over the American money supply to a cartel—a well-organized gang of crooks so successful, so cunning, so well-hidden that even now, a century later, few know of its existence, let alone the details of its operations. But those details have been openly admitted for decades.

Of course, just as we have been taught to find economics boring, we have been taught that this story is boring. This is the way the Federal Reserve itself tells it:

The United States was facing severe financial problems. At the turn of the century, most banks were issuing their own currency, called “bank notes.” The trouble was, currency that was good in one state was sometimes worthless in another. People began to lose confidence in their money, since it was only as sound as the bank that issued it. Fearful that their bank might go out of business, they rushed to exchange their bank notes for gold or silver. By attempting to do so, they created the Panic of 1907.

SOURCEWhere The Bankers Bank

During the panic, people streamed to the banks and demanded their deposits. The banks could not meet the demand; they simply did not have enough gold and silver coin available. Many banks went under. People lost millions of dollars, businesses suffered, unemployment rose, and the stability of our economic system was again threatened.

Well, this couldn’t go on. If the country was going to grow and prosper, some means would have to be found to achieve financial and economic stability.

To prevent financial panics like the one in 1907, President Woodrow Wilson signed The Federal Reserve Act into law in 1913.

SOURCEToo Much, Too Little

But this is history as told by the victors: a revisionist vision in which the creation of a central bank to control the nation’s money supply is merely a boring historical footnote, about as important as the invention of the zipper or an early 20th century hula-hoop craze. The truth is that the story of the secret banking conclave that gave birth to that Federal Reserve Act is as exciting and dramatic as any Hollywood screenplay or detective novel yarn, and all the more remarkable for the fact that it is all true.

We pick up the story, appropriately enough, under cover of darkness. It was the night of November 22, 1910, and a group of the richest and most powerful men in America were boarding a private rail car at an unassuming railroad station in Hoboken, New Jersey. The car, waiting with shades drawn to keep onlookers from seeing inside, belonged to Senator Nelson Aldrich, the father-in-law of billionaire heir to the Rockefeller dynasty, John D. Rockefeller, Jr. A central figure on the influential Senate Finance Committee, where he oversaw the nation’s monetary policy, Aldrich was referred to in the press as the “General Manager of the Nation.” Joining him that evening was his private secretary, Shelton, and a who’s who of the nation’s banking and financial elite: A. Piatt Andrew, the Assistant Treasury Secretary; Frank Vanderlip, President of the National City Bank of New York; Henry P. Davison, a senior partner of J.P. Morgan Company; Benjamin Strong, Jr., an associate of J.P. Morgan and President of Bankers Trust Co., and Paul Warburg, heir of the Warburg banking family and son-in-law of Solomon Loeb of the famed New York investment firm, Kuhn, Loeb & Company.

The men had been told to arrive one by one after sunset to attract as little attention as possible. Indeed, secrecy was so important to their mission that the group did not use anything but their first names throughout the journey so as to keep their true identities secret even from their own servants and wait staff. The movements of any one of them would have been reason enough to attract the attention of New York’s voracious press, especially in an era where banking and monetary reform was seen as a key issue for the future of the nation; a meeting of all of them, now that would surely have been the story of the century. And it was.

Their destination? The secluded Jekyll Island off the coast of Georgia, home to the prestigious Jekyll Island Club, whose members included the Morgans, Rockefellers, Warburgs, and Rothschilds. Their purpose? Davison told intrepid local newspaper reporters who had caught wind of the meeting that they were going duck hunting. But in reality, they were going to draft a reform of the nation’s banking industry in complete secrecy.

G. Edward Griffin, the author of the best-selling The Creature from Jekyll Island and a long-time Federal Reserve researcher, explains:

G. Edward Griffin: What happened is the banks decided that since there was going to be legislation anyway to control their industry, that they wouldn’t just sit back and wait and see what happened and cross their fingers that it would be OK. They decided to do what so many cartels do today: they decided to take the lead. And they would be the ones calling for regulations and reform.

They like the word “reform.” The American people are suckers for the word “reform.” You just put that into any corrupt piece of legislation, call it “reform” and people say “Oh, I’m all for ‘reform,’” and so they vote for it or accept it.

So that’s what they were doing. They decided, “We will ‘reform’ our own industry.” In other words, “We will create a cartel and we will give the cartel the power of government. We’ll take our cartel agreement so we can self-regulate to our advantage and we’ll call it ‘The Federal Reserve Act.’ And then we’ll take this cartel agreement to Washington and convince those idiots there to pass it into law.”

And that basically was the strategy. It was a brilliant strategy. Of course we see it happening all the time, certainly in our own day today we see the same thing happened in other cartelized industries. Right now we’re watching it unfold in the field of healthcare, but at that time it was banking, alright?

And so the banking cartel wrote their own rules and regulations, called it “The Federal Reserve Act,” got it passed into law, and it was very much to their liking because they wrote it. And in essence what they had created was a set of rules that made it possible for themselves to regulate their industry, but they went even beyond that. In fact, it’s clear to me when I was reading their letters and their conversation at the time, and the debates, that they never dreamed that Congress would go along and also give them the right to issue the nation’s money supply. Not only were they now going to regulate their own industry, which is what they started out as wanting to do, but they got this incredible gift that they didn’t dream would be given to them (although they were negotiating for it), and that was that Congress gave them the authority to issue the nation’s money. Congress gave away the sovereign right to issue the nation’s money to the private banks.

And so all of this was in The Federal Reserve Act, and the American people were joyous because they were told, and they were convinced, that this was finally a means of controlling this big creature from Jekyll Island.

SOURCEInterview with G. Edward Griffin

Amazingly enough, they were successful, not just in conspiring to write the legislation that would eventually become the Federal Reserve Act, but in keeping that conspiracy a secret from the public for decades. It was first reported on in 1916 by Bertie Charles Forbes, the financial writer who would later go on to found Forbes magazine, but it was never fully admitted until a full quarter-century later, when Frank Vanderlip wrote a casual admission of the meeting in the February 9, 1935, edition of The Saturday Evening Post:

“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.”

Over the course of their nine days of deliberation at the Jekyll Island Club, they devised a plan so overarching, so ambitious, that even they could scarcely imagine that it would ever be passed by Congress. As Vanderlip put it, “Discovery [of our plan], 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.”

So what, precisely, did this conclave of conspirators devise at their Jekyll Island meeting? A plan for a central banking system to be owned by the banks themselves, a system which would organize the nation’s banks into a private cartel that would have sole control over the money supply itself. At the end of their nine-day meeting, the bankers and financiers went back to their respective offices content in what they had accomplished. The details of the plan changed between its 1910 drafting and the eventual passage of the Federal Reserve Act, but the essential ideas were there.

But ultimately, this scene on Jekyll Island, too, is just one piece of a larger puzzle. And like any other puzzle piece, it has to be seen in its wider context for the bigger picture to become visible. To understand the other pieces of the puzzle and their importance in the creation of the Federal Reserve, we have to travel backward in time.

The story begins in late 17th century Europe. The Nine Years’ War is raging across the continent as Louis XIV of France finds himself pitted against much of the rest of the continent over his territorial and dynastic claims. King William III of England, devastated by a stunning naval defeat, commits his court to rebuilding the English navy. There’s only one problem: money. The government’s coffers have been exhausted by the waging of the war and William’s credit is drying up.

A Scottish banker, William Paterson, has a banker’s solution: a proposal “to form a company to lend a million pounds to the Government at six percent (plus 5,000 ‘management fee’) with the right of note issue.” By 1694, the idea has been slightly revised (a 1.2 million pound loan at 8 percent plus 4,000 for management expenses), but it goes ahead: The magnanimously titled Bank of England is created.

The name is a carefully constructed lie, designed to make the bank appear to be a government entity. But it is not. It is a private bank owned by private shareholders for their private profit with a charter from the king that allows them to print the public’s money out of thin air and lend it to the crown. What happens here at the birth of the Bank of England in 1694 is the creation of a template that will be repeated in country after country around the world: a privately controlled central bank lending money to the government at interest, money that it prints out of nothing. And the jewel in the crown for the international bankers that creates this system is the future economic powerhouse of the world, the United States.

In many important respects, the history of the United States is the history of the struggle of the American people against the bankers that wish to control their money. By the 1780s, with colonies still fighting for independence from the crown, the bankers will get their wish.

In 1781 the United States is in financial turmoil. The Continental, the paper currency issued by the Continental Congress to pay for the war, has collapsed from overissue and British counterfeiting. Desperate to find a way to finance the end stages of the war, Congress turns to Robert Morris, a wealthy shipping merchant who was investigated for war profiteering just two years earlier. Now, as “Superintendent of Finance” of the United States from 1781 to 1784, he is regarded as the most powerful man in America next to General Washington.

In his capacity as Superintendent of Finance, Morris argues for the creation of a privately-owned central bank deliberately modeled on the Bank of England that the colonies were supposedly fighting against. Congress, backed into a corner by war obligations and forced to do business with the bankers just like King William in the 1690s, acquiesces and charters the Bank of North America as the nation’s first central bank. And exactly as the Bank of England came into existence loaning the British crown 1.2 million pounds, the B.N.A. started business by loaning 1.2 million dollars to Congress.

By the end of the war, Morris has fallen out of political favor and the Bank of North America’s currency has failed to win over a skeptical public. The B.N.A. is downgraded from a national central bank to a private commercial bank chartered by the State of Pennsylvania.

But the bankers have not given up yet. Before the ink is even dry on the Constitution, a group led by Alexander Hamilton is already working on the next privately-owned central bank for the newly formed United States of America.

So brazen is Hamilton in the forwarding of this agenda that he makes no attempt to hide his aims or those of the banking interests he serves:

“A national debt, if it is not excessive, will be to us a national blessing,” he wrote in a letter to James Duane in 1781. “It will be a powerful cement of our Union. It will also create a necessity for keeping up taxation to a degree which, without being oppressive, will be a spur to industry.”

Opposition to Hamilton and his debt-based system for establishing the finances of the US is fierce. Led by Jefferson and Madison, the bankers and their system of debt-enslavement is called out for the force of destruction that it is. As Thomas Jefferson wrote:

“[T]he spirit of war and indictment, […] since the modern theory of the perpetuation of debt, has drenched the earth with blood, and crushed its inhabitants under burdens ever accumulating.”

Still, Hamilton proves victorious. The First Bank of the United States is chartered in 1791 and follows the pattern of the Bank of England and the Bank of North America almost exactly; a privately-owned central bank with the authority to loan money that it creates out of nothing to the government. In fact, it is the very same people behind the new bank as were behind the old Bank of North America. It was Alexander Hamilton, Robert Morris’ former aide, who first proposed Morris for the position of Financial Superintendent, and the director of the old Bank of North America, Thomas Willing, is brought in to serve as the first director of the First Bank of the United States. Meet the new banking bosses, same as the old banking bosses.

In the first five years of the bank’s existence, the US government borrows 8.2 million dollars from the bank and prices rise 72%. By 1795, when Hamilton leaves office, the incoming Treasury Secretary announces that the government needs even more money and sells off the government’s meager 20% share in the bank, making it a fully private corporation. Once again, the US economy is plundered while the private banking cartel laughs all the way to the bank that they created.

By the time the bank’s charter comes due for renewal in 1811, the tide has changed for the money interests behind the bank. Hamilton is dead, shot to death in a duel with Aaron Burr. The bank-supporting Federalist Party is out of power. The public are wary of foreign ownership of the central bank, and what’s more don’t see the point of a central bank in time of peace. Accordingly, the charter renewal is voted down in the Senate and the bank is closed in 1811.

Less than a year later, the US is once again at war with England. After two years of bitter struggle, the public debt of the US has nearly tripled, from $45.2 million to $119.2 million. With trade at a standstill, prices soaring, inflation rising and debt mounting, President Madison signs the charter for the creation of another central bank, the Second Bank of the United States, in 1816. Just like the two central banks before it, it is majority privately-owned and is granted the power to loan money that it creates out of thin air to the government.

The 20-year bank charter is due to expire in 1836, but President Jackson has already vowed to let it die prior to renewal. Believing that Jackson won’t risk his chance for reelection in 1832 on the issue, the bankers forward a bill to renew the bank’s charter in July of that year, four years ahead of schedule. Remarkably, Jackson vetoes the renewal charter and stakes his reelection on the people’s support of his move. In his veto message, Jackson writes in no uncertain terms about his opposition to the bank:

“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.[…]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.”

The people side with Jackson and he’s reelected on the back of his slogan, “Jackson and No Bank!” The President makes good on his pledge. In 1833 he announces that the government will stop using the bank and will pay off its debt. The bankers retaliate in 1834 by staging a financial crisis and attempting to pin the blame on Jackson, but it’s no use. On January 8, 1835, President Jackson succeeds in paying off the debt, and for the first and only time in its history the United States is free from the debt chain of the bankers. In 1836 the Second Bank of the United States’ charter expires and the bank loses its status as America’s central bank.

It is 77 years before the bankers can regain the jewel in their crown. But it is not for lack of trying. Immediately upon the death of the bank, the banking oligarchs in England react by contracting trade, removing capital from the US, demanding payment in hard currency for all exports, and tightening credit. This results in a financial crisis known as the Panic of 1837, and once again Jackson’s campaign to kill the bank is blamed for the crisis.

Throughout the late 19th century the United States is rocked by banking panics brought about by wild banking speculation and sharp contractions in credit. By the dawn of the 20th century, the bulk of the money in the American economy has been centralized in the hands of a small clique of industrial magnates, each with a near-monopoly on a sector of the economy. There are the Astors in real estate; the Carnegies and the Schwabs in steel; the Harrimans, Stanfords and Vanderbilts in railroads; the Mellons and the Rockefellers in oil. As all of these families start to consolidate their fortunes, they gravitate naturally to the banking sector. And in this capacity, they form a network of financial interests and institutions that centered largely around one man, banking scion and increasingly America’s informal central banker in the absence of a central bank, John Pierpont Morgan.

John Pierpont Morgan, or “Pierpont,” as he prefers to be called, is born in Hartford, Connecticut, in 1837 to Junius Spencer Morgan, a successful banker and financier. Morgan rides his father’s coattails into the banking business and by 1871 is partnered in his own firm, the firm that was eventually to become J.P. Morgan and Company.

It is Morgan who finances Cornelius Vanderbilt’s New York Central Railroad. It is Morgan who finances the launch of nearly every major corporation of the period, from AT&T to General Electric to General Motors to DuPont. It is Morgan who buys out Carnegie and creates the United States Steel Corporation, America’s first billion-dollar company. It is Morgan who brokers a deal with President Grover Cleveland to “save” the nation’s gold reserves by selling 62 million dollars worth of gold to the Treasury in return for government bonds. And it is Morgan who, in 1907, sets in motion the crisis that leads to the creation of the Federal Reserve.

That year, Morgan begins spreading rumors about the precarious finances of the Knickerbocker Trust Company, a Morgan competitor and one of the largest financial institutions in the United States at the time. The resulting crisis, dubbed the Panic of 1907, shakes the US financial system to its core. Morgan puts himself forward as a hero, boldly offering to help underwrite some of the faltering banks and brokerage houses to keep them from going under. After a bout of hand-wringing over the nation’s finances, a Congressional Committee is assembled to investigate the “money trust,” the bankers and financiers who brought the nation so close to financial ruin and who wield such power over the nation’s finances. The public follows the issue closely, and in the end a handful of bankers are identified as key players in the money trust’s operations, including Paul Warburg, Benjamin Strong, Jr., and J.P. Morgan.

Andrew Gavin Marshall, editor of The People’s Book Project, explains:

Andrew Gavin Marshall: At the beginning of the 20th century there was an investigation following the greatest of these financial panics, which was in 1907, and this investigation was on “the money trust.” It found that three banking interests–J.P. Morgan, National City Bank, and the City Bank of New York–basically controlled the entire financial system. Three banks. The public hatred toward these institutions was unprecedented. There was an overwhelming consensus in the country for establishing a central bank, but there were many different interests in pushing this and everyone had their own purpose behind advocating for a central bank.

So to represent most people, you had farmer interests, populists, progressives, who were advocating a central bank because they couldn’t take the recurring panics, but they wanted government control of the central bank. They wanted it to be exclusively under the public control because they despised and feared the New York banks as wielding too much influence, so for them a central bank would be a way to curb the power of these private financial interests.

On the other hand, those same financial interests were advocating for a central bank to serve as a source of stability for their control of the system, and also to act as a lender of last resort to them so they would never have to face collapse. But also, in order to exert more control through a central bank, the private New York banking community wanted a central bank under the exclusive control of them. There’s a shocker.

So you had all these various interests which converged. Of course, the most influential happened to be the New York financial houses which were more aligned with the European financial houses than they were with any other element in American society. The main individual behind the founding of the Federal Reserve was Paul Warburg, who was a partner with Kuhn, Loeb and Company, a European banking house. His brothers were prominent bankers in Germany at that time, and he had of course close connections with every major financial and industrial firm in the United States and most of those existing in Europe. And he was discussing all of these ideas with his fellow compatriots in advocating for a central bank. In 1910, Warburg got the support of a Senator named Nelson Aldrich, whose family later married into the Rockefeller family (again, I’m sure just a coincidence). Aldrich invited Warburg and a number of other bankers to a private, secret meeting on Jekyll Island just off the coast of Georgia where they met in 1910 to discuss the construction of a central bank in the United States, but one which would of course be owned by and serve the interests of the private bank. Aldrich then presented this in 1911 as the “Aldrich Plan” in the U.S. Congress, but it was actually voted out.

The public, suspicious of Senator Aldrich’s banking connections, ultimately reject the Jekyll Island cabal’s “Aldrich Plan.” The cabal does not give up, however. They simply revise and rename their plan, giving it a new public face, that of Representative Carter Glass and Senator Robert Owen.

In the end, the money trust that was behind the Panic of 1907 uses the public’s own outrage against them to complete their consolidation of control over the banking system. The newly retitled Federal Reserve Act is signed into law on December 23, 1913, and the Fed begins operations the next year.

Part Two: How the Scam Works

The study of money, above all other fields in economics, is one in which complexity is used to disguise truth or to evade truth, not to reveal it.” — John Kenneth Galbraith

So how does the Federal Reserve system work? What does it do? Who owns and controls it? These are the basic questions that would get to the heart of the fundamental question: “What is money?” And that is why the answers to these questions have been shrouded in impenetrable economic jargon.

Even the Federal Reserve’s own educational propaganda, which has an unusual tendency toward cutesy animation and talking down to its audience, has a difficult time summarizing the Fed’s mission and responsibilities. According to the Fed:

To achieve [its] goals, the Fed, then and now, combines centralized national authority through the Board of Governors with a healthy dose of regional independence through the reserve banks. A third entity, the Federal Open Market Committee, brings together the first two in setting the nation’s monetary policy.

SOURCEIn Plain English

Precisely what imaginary gaggle of schoolchildren is this economic gibberish aimed at?

The simple truth, hidden behind the sleight of hand of economic jargon and magisterial titles, is that a banking cartel has monopolized the most important item in our entire economy: money itself.

We are taught to think of money as the pieces of paper printed in government printing presses or coins minted by government mints. While this is partially true, in this day and age the actual notes and coins circulating in the economy represent only a tiny fraction of the money in existence. Over 90% of the money supply is in fact created by private banks as loans that are payable back to the banks at interest.

Although this simple fact is obscured by the wizards of Wall Street and gods of money who want to make the money creation process into some special art of alchemy carefully overseen by the government, the truth is not hidden from the public.

In December 1977, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York published another of its dumbed-down, cartoon-ridden information pamphlets for the general public, attempting to explain the functions of the Federal Reserve System. There in black and white they carefully explain the money creation process:

“Commercial banks create checkbook money whenever they grant a loan, simply by adding new deposit dollars to accounts on their books in exchange for a borrower’s IOU.[…]Banks create money by ‘monetizing’ the private debts of businesses and individuals. That is, they create amounts of money against the value of those IOUs.”

There it is, in plain English: The vast majority of money in the economy, the “checkbook” money in our accounts at the bank and that we use in our electronic transfers and digital payments, is created not by a government printing press, but by the bank itself. It is created out of thin air as debt, owed back to the bank that created it at interest. This means that bank loans are not money taken from other bank depositors, but new money simply conjured into existence and placed into your account. And the bank is able to create much more money than it has cash to back up those deposits.

The Fed claims to be the entity overseeing and backing up the banking industry. It was established, according to its own propaganda, to stabilize the system and prevent bank runs like the Panic of 1907 from happening again:

Throughout much of the 1800s, almost any organization that wanted could print its own money. As a result, many states, banks, and even one New York druggist, did just that. In fact at one time there were over 30,000 different varieties of currency in circulation. Imagine the confusion.

Not only were there multitudes of currencies, some were redeemable in gold and silver, others were backed by bonds issued by regional governments. It was not unusual for people to lose faith both in the value of their currency and in the entire financial system. With many people trying to withdraw their deposits at once, sometimes the banks didn’t have enough money on hand to pay their depositors. Then when the funds ran out the banks suspended payment temporarily and some even closed. People lost their entire savings. Sometimes regional economies suffered.

Obviously something had to be done. And in 1913, something was. In that year, President Woodrow Wilson signed into effect the Federal Reserve Act. This act created the Federal Reserve system to provide a safer and more stable monetary and banking system.

SOURCE: The Fed Today

If that was indeed its aim, it signally failed to do so in running up one of the greatest bubbles in American history to that point in the 1920s, just a decade after its creation. The popping of that bubble, of course, led directly into the Great Depression and one of the greatest periods of mass poverty in American history. Economists have long argued that the Fed itself was the cause of the depression by its complete mismanagement of the money supply. As former Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke admitted in a speech commemorating Fed critic Milton Friedman’s 90th birthday: “Regarding the Great Depression. You’re right, we did it. We’re very sorry. But thanks to you, we won’t do it again.”

“Price stability” is another cited tenet of the Federal Reserve’s mandate. But here, too, the Fed has completely failed to live up to its own standards:

Aside from the banking system, the Federal Reserve has another responsibility that’s probably even more important. It’s in charge of something called “monetary policy.” Basically, it means trying to keep prices stable to avoid inflation. Say you buy a CD today for $14. But what if next year the price of the CD jumped to $20 or $50, not because of a change in supply or demand, but because all prices were going up. That’s inflation.

There are a lot of different causes of inflation, but one of the most important is too much money. The Fed can adjust the money supply by injecting money into the system electronically, or by withdrawing money from the economy.

Think of it: the Federal Reserve has the ability to create money, or make it disappear. What’s most important is what happens as a result. Any time the supply of money is altered, the effects are felt throughout the economy.

The Fed’s methods have changed over time to take advantage of the latest computers and electronics, but its mission remains the same: to aim for stable prices, full employment and a growing economy.

SOURCE: Inside The Fed

100 years ago, in 1913, the Fed was created, and we’ve marked it with a vertical line there. Consumer prices now are about 30 times higher than they were when the Fed was created in 1913.

SOURCE: Bloomberg

Paper money, too, is the responsibility of the Federal Reserve. Hence the dollars in circulation are not Treasury notes, not bills of credit, but Federal Reserve Notes, debt-based notes backed up ultimately by the government’s own promise to pay, its “sovereign bonds” secured by the taxpayers themselves. At one time, the Federal Reserve Banks were legally required to keep large stockpiles of gold in reserve to back up these notes, but that requirement was abandoned and today the notes are backed up mostly by government securities. The Fed no longer keeps any actual gold on its books, but gold “certificates” issued by the treasury and valued not at the spot price of $1,300 per troy ounce, but an arbitrarily fixed “statutory price” of $42 2/9 per ounce.

Ron Paul: But I do have one question: During the crisis or at any time that you’re aware of, has the Federal Reserve or the Treasury participated in any gold swap arrangements?

Scott Alvarez: The Federal Reserve does not own any gold at all. We have not owned gold since 1934 so we have not engaged in any gold swaps.

Ron Paul: But it appears on your balance sheet that you hold gold.

Scott Alvarez: What appears on our balance sheet is gold certificates. When we turned in…before 1934, we did…the Federal Reserve did own gold. We turned that over by law to the Treasury and received in return for that gold certificates.

Ron Paul: If the Treasury entered into…because under the Exchange Stabilization Fund I would assume they probably have the legal authority to do it…they wouldn’t be able to do it then because you have the securities for essentially all the gold?

Scott Alvarez: No, we have no interest in the gold that is owned by the Treasury. We have simply an accounting document that is called “gold certificates” that represents the value at a statutory rate that we gave to the Treasury in 1934.

Ron Paul: And still measured at $42 an ounce which makes no sense whatsoever.

SOURCE: House Financial Services Subcommittee Hearings

Clearly, there is a discrepancy between what we are led to believe is motivating the Fed and what it actually does. To understand what the Fed is actually intended to do, it’s first important to understand that the Federal Reserve is not a bank, per se, but a system. This system codifies, institutionalizes, oversees, and undergirds a form of banking called fractional reserve banking, in which banks are allowed to lend out more money than they actually have in their vaults.

G. Edward Griffin: The process of decay and corruption starts with something called “fractional reserve banking.” That’s the technical name for it. And what that really means is that as the banking institution developed over several centuries, starting of course in Europe, it developed a practice of legalizing a certain dishonest accounting procedure.

In other words, in the very, very beginning (if you want to go all the way back), people would bring their gold or silver to the banks for safekeeping. And they said, “Give us a paper receipt, we don’t want to guard our silver and our gold, because people could come in in the middle of the night and they could kill us or threaten us and they’ll get our gold and silver, so we can ‘t really guard it, so we’ll take it to the bank and have them guard it and we just want a paper receipt. And we’ll take our receipt back and get our gold anytime we want.” So in the beginning money was receipt money. Then, instead of changing or exchanging the gold coins, they could exchange the receipts, and people would accept the receipts just as well as the gold, knowing that they could get gold. And so these paper receipts being circulated were in essence the very first examples of paper money.

Well, the banks learned early on in that game that here they were sitting on this pile of gold and all these paper receipts out there. People weren’t bringing in the receipts anymore, very few of them, maybe five percent, maybe seven percent of the people would bring in their paper receipts and ask for the gold. So they said, “Ah ha! Why don’t we just sort of give more receipts out then we have gold? They’ll never know because they only ask for, at the best, seven percent of it. So we can create more receipts for gold then we have. And we can collect interest on that because we’ll loan that into the economy. We’ll charge interest on this money that we don’t really have. And it’s a pretty good gimmick, don’t ya think?” And they go, “Well, yeah, of course.” And so that’s how fractional reserve banking started.

And now it’s institutionalized and they teach it in school. No one ever questions the integrity of it or the ethics of it. They say, “Well, that’s the way banking works, and isn’t it wonderful that we now have this flexible currency and we have prosperity” and all these sorts of things. So it all starts with this concept of fractional reserve banking.

The trouble with that is that it works most of the time. But every once and a while there are a few ripples that come along that are a little bit bigger than the other ripples. Maybe one of them is a wave. And more than seven percent will come in and ask for their gold. Maybe twenty percent or thirty percent. And well, now the banks are embarrassed because the fraud is exposed. They say, “Well, we don’t have your gold” “What do you mean you don’t have my gold!! I gave it to you and put it on deposit and you said you’d safeguard it.” “Well, we don’t have it, we loaned it out.” So then the word gets out and everyone and their uncle comes out and lines up for their gold. And of course they don’t have it, the banks are closed, and they have bank holidays. Banks are embarrassed, people lose their savings. You have these terrible banking crashes that were ricocheting all over the world prior to this time. And that is what caused the concern of the American people. They didn’t want that anymore. They wanted to put a stop to that.

And that was the whole purpose, supposedly, of the Federal Reserve System. Was to put a stop to that. But since the people who designed the plan to put a stop to it were the very ones who were doing it in the first place, you cannot be surprised that their solution was not a very good one so far as the American people were concerned. Their solution was to expand it. Not to control it, to expand it. See, prior to that time, this little game of fractional reserve banking was localized at the state level. Each state was doing its own little fractional reserve banking system. Each state, in essence, had its own Federal Reserve. Central banks were authorized by state law to do this sort of thing. And that was causing all this problem. So the Federal Reserve came along and said, “No no, we’re not going to do this at the state level anymore, because look at all the problem it’s causing. We’re going to consolidate it all together and we’re going to do it at the national level.”

SOURCEInterview with G. Edward Griffin

The key to the system, of course, is who controls this incredible power to “regulate” the economy by setting reserve requirements and targeting interest rates. The answer to this question, too, has been deliberately obscured.

The Federal Reserve System is a deliberately confusing mishmash of public and private interests, reserve banks, boards and committees, centralized in Washington and spread out across the United States.

Andrew Gavin Marshall: So you have the Federal Reserve Board in Washington appointed by the President. That’s the only part of this system that is directly dependent on the government for input that’s the “federal” part: that the government—the [US] President, specifically—gets to choose a few select governors. The twelve regional banks—the most influential of which is the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, which is essentially based in Wall Street to represent Wall Street—is a representative of the major Wall Street banks who own shares in the private, not federal, but private Federal Reserve Bank of New York. All of the other regional banks are also private banks. They vary according to how much influence they wield but the Kansas City Fed is influential, the St. Louis Fed, the Dallas Fed, but the New York Fed is really the center of this system and precisely because it represents the Wall Street banks who appoint the leadership of the New York Fed.

So the New York Fed has a lot of public power, but no public accountability or oversight. It does not answer to Congress the way that the chairman of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors does and even the chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, who is appointed by the President, does not answer to the President, does not answer to Congress. He goes to Congress to testify, but the policy that they set is independent. So they have no input from the government. The government can’t tell them what to do, legally speaking, and of course they don’t.

Rep. John Duncan: Do you think it would cause problems for the Fed or for the economy if that legislation was to pass?

Ben Bernanke: My concern about the legislation is that if the GAO is auditing not only the operational aspects of our programs and the details of the programs, but is making judgments about our policy decisions, that would effectively be a takeover of monetary policy by the Congress, a repudiation of the independence of the Federal Reserve, which would be highly destructive to the stability of the financial system, the dollar, and our national economic situation.

SOURCE: Bernanke Threatens Congress

The Federal Open Market Committee is responsible for setting interest rates. Now this committee, which is enormously powerful, has as its membership the Governor and Vice Chair of the Federal Reserve Board, but on the Federal Open Market Committee most of the membership is the presidents of the regional Federal Reserve Banks representing private interests. So they have significant input in setting the interest rates. Interest rates are not set by a public body, they’re set by private financial and corporate interests. And that’s whose interests they serve, of course.

The reason that the Federal Reserve goes to such great lengths to make its organizational structure as confusing as possible is to cover up the massive conflicts of interest that are at the heart of that system. The fact is that the Federal Reserve System is comprised of a Board of Governors, 12 regional banks, and an Open Market Committee. The privately-owned member banks of each Federal Reserve Bank vote on the majority of the Reserve Bank’s directors, and the directors vote on members to serve on the Federal Open Market Committee, which determines monetary policy. What’s more, Wall Street is given a prime seat at the table, with tradition holding that the president of the powerful New York Federal Reserve Bank be given the vice chairmanship of the FOMC and be made a permanent committee member. In effect, the private banks are the key determinants in the composition of the FOMC, which regulates the entire economy.

According to the Fed, “its monetary policy decisions do not have to be approved by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branches of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by the Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms.”

Or, in the words of Alan Greenspan: “The Federal Reserve is an independent agency, and that means there is no other agency of government that can overrule actions that we take.”

The Fed goes on in its self-mythologization to state that it is “not a private, profit-making institution.” This characterization is dishonest at best and an outright lie at worst.

The regional banks are themselves private corporations, as noted in a 1928 Supreme Court ruling: “Instrumentalities like the national banks or the federal reserve banks, in which there are private interests, are not departments of the government. They are private corporations in which the government has an interest.” This point is even admitted by the Federal Reserve’s own senior counsel.

Yvonne Mizusawa: Our regulations do specify overall terms for the lending, but the day to day operation of the banking activities are conducted by the Federal Reserve Banks. They are banks, and indeed they do lend…

Peter W. Hall: So they’re their own agency, then, essentially, in that regard.

Yvonne Mizusawa: They are not agencies, your honor, they are “persons” under FOIA. Each Federal Reserve Bank, the stock is owned by the member banks in the district, 100% privately held, they are private boards of directors. The majority of those boards are appointed by the independent banks, private banks in the district. They are not agencies.

SOURCE: Freedom of Information Cases

These private corporations issue shares that are held by the member banks that make up the system, making the banks the ultimate owners of the Federal Reserve Banks. Although the Fed’s profits are returned to the Treasury each year, the member banks’ shares of the Fed do earn them a 6% dividend. According to the Fed, the fixed nature of these returns mean that they are not being held for profit.

Despite the dishonest nature of this description, however, it is important to understand that the bankers who own the Federal Reserve indeed do not make their money from the Fed directly. Instead, the benefits are much less obvious, and much more insidious. The simplest way that this can be understood is that, as a century of history and the specific example of the last financial crisis shows, the Fed was used as a vehicle to bail out the very bankers who own the Fed banks in the most obvious example of fascistic collusion imaginable.

Michel Chossudovsky: A handful of financial institutions have enriched themselves as a result of institutional speculation on a large scale, as well as manipulation of the market. And secondly what they have done is that they have then gone to their governments and said, “Well, we are now in a very difficult situation and you need to lend us…you need to give us money so that we can retain the stability of the financial system.”

And who actually lends the money, or brokers the public debt? The same financial institutions that are the recipients of the bailout. And so what you have is a circular process. It’s a diabolical process. You’re lending money…no, you’re not lending money, you’re handing money to the large financial institutions, and then this is leading up to mounting public debt in the trillions. And then you say to the financial institutions, “We need to establish a new set of Treasury bills and government bonds, etc.,” which of course are sold to the public, but they are always brokered through the financial institutions, which establish their viability, and so on and so forth. And the financial institutions will probably buy part of this public debt so that in effect what the government is doing is financing its own indebtedness through the bailouts. It hands money to the banks, but to hand money to the banks, it becomes indebted to those same financial institutions, and then it says, “We now have to emit large amounts of public debt. Please can you help us?” And then the banks will say: “Well, your books are not quite in order.” And then the government will say: “Obviously they’re not in order because we’ve just handed you 1.4 trillion dollars of bailout money and we’re now in a very difficult situation. So we need to borrow money from the people who are in fact the recipients of the bailout.”

So this is really what we’re dealing with. We’re dealing with a circular process.

SOURCE: The Banker Bailouts

The 2008 crisis and subsequent bailouts are merely the latest and most brazen examples of the fundamental conflicts of interest at the heart of America’s privately-owned central banking system.

Beginning with the collapse of Lehman Brothers in September of that year, the Federal Reserve embarked on an unprecedented program of bailouts and special zero-interest lending facilities for the very banks that had caused the subprime meltdown in the first place. By the cartelization of the Federal Reserve structure, and thus not by accident, it was the very bank presidents who had overseen their banks’ lending practices that ended up in the director positions of the Federal Reserve Banks that voted on where to direct the trillions of dollars in bailout money. And unsurprisingly, they directed it toward their own banks.

A stunning 2011 Government Accountability Office report examined $16 trillion of bailout facilities extended by the Fed in the wake of the crisis and exposed numerous examples of blatant conflicts of interest. Jeffrey Immelt, chief executive of General Electric served as a director on the board of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York at the same time the Fed provided $16 billion in financing to General Electric. JP Morgan Chase Chief Executive Jamie Dimon, meanwhile, was also a member of the board of the New York Fed during the period that saw $391 billion in Fed emergency lending directed to his own bank. In all, Federal Reserve Board members were tied to $4 trillion in loans to their own banks. These funds were not simply used to keep these banks afloat, but actually to return these Fed-connected banks to a period of record profits in the same period that the average worker saw their real wages actually decrease and the economy on Main Street slow to a standstill.

Then Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke was confronted about these conflicts of interest by Senator Bernie Sanders upon the release of the GAO report in June 2012.

Ben Bernanke: Senator, you raised an important point, which is that this is not something the Federal Reserve created. This is in the statute. Congress in the Federal Reserve Act said, “This is the governance of the Federal Reserve.” And more specifically that bankers would be on the board…

Bernie Sanders: 6 out of 9.

Ben Bernanke: Sorry?

Bernie Sanders: 6 out of 9 in the regional banks are from the banking industry.

Ben Bernanke: That’s correct. And that is in the law. I’ll answer your question, though. The answer to your question is that Congress set this up, I think we’ve made it into something useful and valuable. We do get information from it. But if Congress wants to change it, of course we will work with you to find alternatives.

SOURCEConflicts at the Fed

Bernanke is completely right. These conflicts are in fact a part of the institution itself. A structural feature of the Federal Reserve that was baked into the Federal Reserve Act itself over 100 years ago by the bankers who conspired to cartelize the nation’s money supply. You could not ask for a more succinct reason why the Federal Reserve itself, this admitted cartel of banking interests, needs to be abolished…but you could get one.

Part Three: End the Fed

They who control the credit of a nation, direct the policy of Governments and hold in the hollow of their hands the destiny of the people.” — Reginald McKenna

We now know that for centuries the people of the United States have been at war with the international banking oligarchs. That war was lost, seemingly for good, in 1913, with the creation of the Federal Reserve. With the passage of the Federal Reserve Act, President Woodrow Wilson consigned the American population to a century in which the money supply itself has depended on the whims of the banking cabal. A century of booms and busts, bubbles and depressions, has led to a wholesale redistribution of wealth toward those at the very top of the system. At the bottom, the masses toil in relative poverty, single-income households becoming double-income households out of necessity, their quality of life being slowly eroded as the Federal Reserve Notes that pass for dollars are themselves devalued.

Worse yet, the fraud itself perpetuates Alexander Hamilton’s persistent myth that a national debt is necessary at all. The US is now locked into a system whereby the government issues bonds to generate the funds for their operations, bonds that are backed up by the taxation of the public’s own labor.

The perpetrators of this fraud, meanwhile, remain in the shadows, largely ignored by a general public that could instantly recognise the latest Hollywood heartthrob or pop idol, but have no clue what the head of Goldman Sachs or the New York Fed does, let alone who they are. This cabal bear allegiance to no nationality, no philosophy or creed, no code of ethics. They are not even motivated by greed, but power. The power that the control of the money supply inevitably brings with it.

It did not take long for this lust for power to rear its head. In 1921, just seven years after the Fed began operations, the same J.P. Morgan-connected banking elite that founded the Federal Reserve incorporated an organization called the Council on Foreign Relations with the goal of taking over the foreign policy apparatus of the United States, including the State Department. In this quest, it was remarkably successful. Although there are only about 4,000 members in the organization today, its membership has included 21 Secretaries of Defense, 18 Treasury Secretaries, 18 Secretaries of State, 16 CIA directors, and many other high-ranking government officials, military officers, business elite, and, of course, bankers. The first Director of the CFR was John W. Davis, J.P. Morgan’s personal lawyer and a millionaire in his own right.

Together with its sister organizations in Britain and elsewhere around the world, these groups would work together toward what they called a “New World Order” of total financial and political control directed by the bankers themselves. As Carroll Quigley, noted Georgetown historian and mentor of Bill Clinton, wrote in his 1966 work, Tragedy and Hope: A History of The World In Our Time:

“The powers of financial capitalism had [a] far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations.”

This is why the bankers and their partners in government and business conspired to bring about the 2008 crisis. Not for the pursuit of money, but power. In the same way the bankers used the Panic of 1907 to consolidate their control over the money supply, they hope to use the 2008 crisis and subsequent panics, which they themselves have created, to consolidate their political control.

The inevitable conclusion, one that flows necessarily from the true understanding of this situation, is that the Federal Reserve system needs to be consigned to the dustbin of history. After a century of enslavement, it is time for the American public to finally throw off the bankers’ debt chains.

Andrew Gavin Marshall: If there was ever a point in human history to start questioning alternatives, this would be it. And to think that where we are…and simply say, “Oh, well this is the best of our options,” how many of the best options lead to self-destruction? Doesn’t sound like a best option.

I think that with a world of seven billion people, we can probably come up with something better than a system in which a few thousand people benefit so much at the expense of everything else on this world and at the expense of the potential for the future of mankind. They’re leveraging our future, and so long as we accept this way of thinking, so long as we accept these institutions as having dominance, that’s the direction we’ll be going.

So I think reform is a good way to try and stall and to push back directly against the expanding and evolving power structures, but radical change is what’s really needed, and that has to be built from the bottom up. But I think that these two processes can and should go together in parallel.

If you’ve made it this far, congratulations. You are now better informed on the economic history of the United States and the truth about the Federal Reserve than 99% of the population. If you do nothing else, then just working to get those around you educated on this information alone will have a profound effect. Once they learn of the scam, many are motivated to do something about it, and they, in turn, inform others. This is the viral nature of suppressed truth, and it is the reason that more people are aware of and energized by the issue of the Federal Reserve and the nature of money than ever before.

Perhaps even more amazingly, this movement is spreading to other parts of the globe. Recognizing the interlocking nature of the modern global economy, and the international nature of the banking oligarchy, movements to abolish the Federal Reserve have sprung up in Europe, where protests against the cartelized central banking system are taking place in over 100 cities attracting 20,000 people on a weekly basis.

Lars Maehrholz: I started this movement because I realized that the Federal Reserve Act, in my opinion, is one of the worst laws in the whole world. So a private banking company is lending America the money, and in my opinion is not democratic anymore. The Federal Reserve tells the government what to do, and that’s the problem.

Luke Rudkowski: It’s a very big problem, especially in the U.S. Why is it a global issue, and why are people doing it here in Germany?

Lars Maehrholz: Because when you realize that this finance system, it’s a global system, you have to go really to the beginning of the system. And in my opinion, it’s also the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund and stuff like this, but at the beginning of all this is a law from 1913. Woodrow Wilson signed it, and this is the beginning of all this hardcore capitalism we are now suffering from. And the only way to stop this is maybe to break this law.

SOURCE: Establishment is Afraid of End The Fed Movement in Germany

But what if the burgeoning movement to End The Fed is successful? What system do people propose as the answer? There have been several proposals along different lines by various researchers. Some argue for a return to America’s colonial roots of debt-free money issued by state-run banks, pointing to the Bank of North Dakota as one already functioning, successful model of this approach.

Ellen Brown: We’ve had two banking systems ever since the 1860’s with the state bank system and the federal bank system, and the federal bank system are the big Wall Street banks particularly. They dominate the federal system. So, they’re taking over right now. In California we don’t even have any local banks where I am. We had two and I had accounts in both of them and now one of them is Chase Bank and the other is U.S. Bank. So they’re both big Wall Street banks now that have been taken over.

So it’s the local banks that have an interest in serving the local business. The big banks have no interest in making loans to local businesses; it’s too risky, why should they bother? They’ve got this virtually free money they can get from the Fed and from each other and it’s much more lucrative to them either to speculate in commodities or other thing abroad, or what works very well for them is to buy long-term government bonds at 3% because these have no capital requirement. The capital requirements for government bonds are zero. So they can buy all of those that they want. Whereas if they make loans for mortgages or they make loans to businesses then they have to worry about the capital requirement and as soon as they’ve used up all their capital—in other words eight dollars in capital will get you a hundred dollars of loans—then they can’t make any more loans they have to wait for thirty years for the loans to get paid off. So what they do if they do buy mortgages is sell them off too investors and so that’s the whole mortgage-backed security scam that we’ve seen. They had no motivation to make sure that these borrowers were actually sound borrowers; they just wanted to make a sale. So they sold the stuff to the unwary investors who might be somebody in Iceland or Sweden or pension funds. So that didn’t work out so well.

So a state bank partnering with the local banks can provide the capital. It can help them with capital. In North Dakota the state bank guarantees the loans of the local banks, allowing them to make much bigger loans than they could otherwise. The state bank provides liquidity to the small banks. That’s why the local banks aren’t making loans to small business right now, because they don’t know that they can get money from the other banks as needed. The way banking works is they make the loan first. I mean, if you have credit lines to many different businesses and if they all hit up their credit lines at once you are going to run out of money. So you don’t dare do that unless you know that you can get short-term loans from the other banks. And so what’s happening right now, even though there’s $1.6 trillion is excess reserves sitting on the books of the big banks, they’re not available to the little banks and the reason is because the Fed is paying 0.25% interest on those reserves. So the banks have no incentive to lend them to the little banks. Why let go of them when you can make just as much keeping them and then you still have your reserves and you can use them as collateral to buy bonds or something that’ll make you more money?

So the whole system is messed up and in North Dakota, the bank of North Dakota provides liquidity for these local banks.

SOURCEEllen Brown: Finance Capital vs. Public Banking

Others advocate a decentralized system of alternative and competing currencies that greatly reduce or even eliminate altogether the need for a central bank.

Paul Glover: Well, 22 years ago in Ithaca, New York I noticed there were a lot of people, friends particularly, that had skills and time that were not being employed or respected by the prevailing economy. While we had much desire to create things and trade them with each other and many services we could provide to each other, we didn’t have the money. So since I have a background in graphic design, journalism and arrogance I went to my computer and designed paper money for Ithaca, New York. I designed pretty colourful money with pictures of children, waterfalls and trolley cars denominated in hours of labor. One-hour note, half-hour, quarter, eight-hour notes and two-hour notes. I then began to issue to each of those pioneer traders who had agreed to being listed in the directory a specific starter amount, and the game began. An hour has been worth basically $10 U.S. dollars which at that time 20 years ago was double the minimum wage. People who usually expect more than $10 per hour of their service can charge multiple hours per hour but the denomination puts between us as residents of our community, that reminds us that we are fellow citizens, not merely winners or losers scrambling for dollars. It introduces us to each other on the basis of these skills and services that we have, that we are more proud to provide for each other than often is the case with a conventional job. Just the stuff we have to do to get the money to pay the bills.

So through that trading process, that more intimate scale process within the community, we’re more easily able to become friends and lovers and political allies.

James Corbett: It’s an inspiring story and tell people about how much money has circulated through this community. I mean, it’s important for people to understand just how successful this has been.

Paul Glover: Because we are not a computer system we don’t have a specific volume of trading recorded but by the grapevine, by phone surveys and over the years watching the money move we were able to guess very reliably that several million dollars equivalent of this money has transacted over those years. Making loans without charging interest up to $30,000 value, which is the fundamental monetary revolution in our system. Then as well, making grants of the money to over a hundred community organizations.

SOURCEAvoiding Economic Collapse: Complementary Currencies

Some argue for currencies whose mathematical nature prevent them from being merely conjured into existence whenever a federal government wants to wage another war of aggression or forge another link in the seemingly endless train of governmental tyranny and abuse.

Roger Ver: What people have to understand about bitcoin is that it’s a completely decentralized network. There’s no central server, there’s no controlling company, there’s no office, it’s just free software that anyone can download and start running on their computer anywhere in the world. And that the bitcoins themselves can be transferred to or from anyone, anywhere in the world and it’s impossible for any bank or government or entity to block you from sending or receiving those bitcoins. There’s a limited supply of those bitcoins, there will never ever be any more than 21 million bitcoins. So, like everything the price is set based on supply and demand. Because the supply of bitcoins is limited and the demand is increasing as more and more people start to use them and more and more websites start to accept them, the price of bitcoins in terms of dollars is going to have to increase, even a lot more than the $500 per bitcoin that it is today.

James Corbett: Are there any drawbacks at all to the idea of using a crypto-currency?

Roger Ver: If you’re part of the current power elite that can just print money at will to spend on whatever you feel like, then, yeah, the world switching over to bitcoin is probably not going to benefit you. But if you’re one of the normal people that aren’t working for the Federal Reserve or any central bank that’s printing money to pay to your friends and that sort of thing, then a bitcoin world is a wonderful thing for you.

SOURCE: How to Defund the System: Bitcoin vs. the Central Banksters

Sound money. Cryptocurrencies. State banks. LETS programs. Self-issued credit. These and many other solutions have all been proposed and many of them are in use in different localities today. Information on all of these ideas and how they are being applied in various parts of the world is widely available online today. The point is that the question of what money is and how it should be created is perhaps the single greatest question facing humanity as a whole, and yet it is one that has been almost completely eliminated from the national conversation…until recently.

For the first time in living memory, people are once again rallying around the monetary issue, and American politics stands on the threshold of a transformation almost unimaginable just two decades ago.

And so the rest of the story is now in our hands. Once we understand the scam that has taken place, the gradual consolidation of wealth and power in the hands of an elite few banking oligarchs and the growing impoverishment of the masses, all in the name of banking funny money created out of nothing and loaned to the public at interest, we can choose to get active or to do nothing at all.

For those who choose to get active, there are some steps that you can take to help change the course of this system:

1) Follow the links and resources from the transcript of this documentary at corbettreport.com/federalreserve to familiarize yourself with the history, the connections and the functions of the Federal Reserve system. If you can’t explain this material to yourself then you will never be able to teach it to others.

2) Begin reaching out to others to bring them up to speed on the issue. It can be as simple as broaching this conversation in the Monday morning water cooler talk or passing out a copy of this documentary or sending out links to this information to your email list. Insert this topic into your conversations. When people start talking about the national debt or the state of the economy or other political talking points, get them to question the roots of these issues, and why there is a national debt at all.

3) When you are able to find or create a group of like-minded people in your area who are engaged with the issue, start a study group on the issue and its solutions. The study group can help source alternative or complementary currencies in the local area, or, if none exist already, the group can form the basis for a community of local businesses and customers who are willing to start experimenting with ways to wean themselves off of the Federal Reserve notes.

4) Use the resources at corbettreport.com, including the Federal Reserve information flyer, or hold DVD screenings, to attract interest in your group and draw others into studying the true nature of the monetary system.

The work of building up an alternative to the current system can seem daunting, even at times overwhelming. But it’s important to keep in mind that the Federal Reserve System that seems so monolithic today has only been around for one century. Central banks have been defeated in America before and they can be defeated again.

The question of how we decide to change this system is not rhetorical; it will either be answered by an informed, engaged, active population working together to create viable alternatives and to dismantle the current system, or it will be answered by the same banking oligarchy that has been controlling the money supply, and indeed the lifeblood of the country, for generations.

Now, one century after the creation of the Federal Reserve System, we have a choice to make: whether the next century, like the one before it, will be a century of enslavement or, transformed by the actions and choices that we make in the light of this knowledge, a century of empowerment.

https://www.corbettreport.com/federalreserve/

 

The Ongoing WAR That We Aren’t Told About

 

There is a war going on right now. It’s not an obvious one with missiles or guns or bombs, so most people do not even know it is happening – it’s a war on consciousness.

Ultimately, the education system can be blamed for feeding us propaganda and forcing us to regurgitate it so we can “fit in” with the rest of society. I was never so great at “fitting in”…  and I really didn’t care.  I guess that helped me to be the rebel I am now.

Our public school systems are set up to get the students primed for economic slavery without ever offering courses in LIFE – things that they will actually use or anything that allows students to think creatively or freely.

In fact, if you trace the companies who print our children’s textbooks, you’ll find a Zionist agendabehind them all.

For example, George W. Bush’s grandfather, Prescott Bush, was arrested for funding both sides of World War II, yet we never learned this in school. Why? Because had we learned this, NEITHER Bush would have been elected president for having a traitor in their lineage. And having the Bushes in the White House was the Zionist’s plan to push their agenda.

We are taught Christopher Columbus “discovered” America — how do you “discover” something others have already found and been living on for hundreds of years? And yet, we never think to even question this. Why?

In all forms of education, there are still perpetual references to “fossil fuels” including at the college level. How ridiculous is this? Oil is abiotic, which means it replenishes itself, yet we are draining the planet of a lubricant that serves no other interests other than economic.

For example, in the late 1980’s, Stanley Meyer invented a car that could go from coast to coast in the United States on 21 gallons of water. He was offered $1 billion from the automobile industry for his invention but turned it down because he wanted this idea to go to the people.

Shortly afterwards, he was poisoned to death and the invention has been hidden from us ever since, yet our children are not learning about inventors such as Meyer in school, nor are they being encouraged to develop alternate fuel sources.

What about Nikola Tesla? Who learned about Tesla in school? Not me! I was taught that Edison was the one who discovered electricity. Edison was NOT the one who discovered electricity – Edison was the one who discovered how to make a PROFIT on electricity.

There are literally thousands of “out of place artifacts” that show how we have been here MUCH longer than the official story of both evolution and the bible, yet no high school or university will come near to approaching this topic because it would blow the lid off of all religions.

For example, in Illinois, a 200,000 year old bronze coin was found just outside Chillicothe, Illinois. According to the Illinois State Geological Survey, the deposits containing the coin are between 200,000 and 400,000 years old.

If our true history was revealed, it would cause every system of education to rewrite history and would make the professors teaching “history” look like idiots, so it’s much easier to suppress the truth than to admit they were wrong while killing “religion”, which, by the way, is just another form of scaring people into obeying and following specific agendas, as well.

It is blatantly obvious that religion has been teaching either half truths or full out lies, right from the start. According to the Christian bible, God created Adam and Eve and told them to be fruitful and multiply. Based under this premise, we would all be the products of incest.

There are four different blood types (A, B, AB and O) along with 2 different Rh values (positive and negative). It is literally IMPOSSIBLE to have 4 different blood types and 2 different Rh blood values all originating from two people, yet people happily accept this as the truth without ever questioning their human origins.

The bible goes back to approximately 6,000 years ago. Assuming God created everything at that point in time, then there shouldn’t be any fossils older than 6,000 years of age.

Another example would be Noah and his alleged gathering of every pair of animals on the planet. How did he gather animals that were not indigenous to the Middle East, such as polar bears, penguins and sea lions?

Most people have an equally hard time understanding that both religions AND governments will lie to you in order to fulfill an agenda.

In religion, look no further than several clergy members of the Roman Catholic Church who admitted that the fictitious hell does not exist.


The more you research, the more you think critically and the more you awaken – the more you’ll find that religion is in bed with the government as both are about controlling the masses through subservience, control, and conformity while neither encourage free thinking or questioning the official stories.

These are the types of things that resonate with me. And if you are reading this and thinking this author is sounding like an atheist conspiracy theorist, I would say to you… Do you see how you are resisting “common sense” things that are being brought forward?

Think about this feeling for just a moment… This “resistance” is the feeling you get when you would otherwise be outside of your comfort zone. People don’t like to think about things that make them feel uncomfortable. They don’t like to be overwhelmed.

They don’t want to think that their parents could have lied to them – (remember when you found out there was no Santa Claus?) People don’t want to think their clergy could lie to them, or that their government could do them harm – ON PURPOSE!

People don’t just wake up one day and decide to be a “conspiracy theorist” out of the blue. These people read, watch, study, research for hours, days, weeks, YEARS… and slowly, begin to come out of that comfort zone. They open their minds, their eyes, their ears… and slowly, that veil becomes thinner and thinner and the truth is finally seen clearly.

If you are not yet willing to open your mind and to think critically and put aside all the propaganda and things that were shoved down your throat and begin to ask logical questions, you are not ready. And it is not my job to FORCE you to do that.

When you are ready… when you can handle it… you will begin to see things as clearly as I do.  I simply ask questions. And then the things that make the most logical sense, and the things that have the most concrete evidence, and the things that I know in my own heart…  are what I believe.

That is the first steps toward winning this war. You must first UNDERSTAND what consciousness is. I urge you to research and figure it out. TURN OFF THE TV. It is called “programming” for a reason!

Reference: Victuruslibertas.com

Maurice Joly Plagiarized Protocols of Zion (Not Vice-Versa)

 

 

The assumption is that since Protocols appeared some 40 years after Dialogue, itplagiarized the earlier work. But the Protocols actually predated Dialogue and Joly borrowed from it. In other words, far from being an anti-Semitic ruse, the “Protocols of Zion” are authentic.

The Protocols are the basis of the New World Order which seeks to induct mankind into Satanism by “destroying every collective force not our own” (Protocols 16-4), namely race, religion, nation, and family. This is the explanation for the promotion of gender dysphoria (destroy marriage & family), migration & miscegenation (race) and globalism (nation.) Meanwhile, the church (religion) has been sabotaged and the word “God” banned from public discourse. 

by Henry Makow Ph.D.

It is forbidden to mention  the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” (1905) without the Disclaimer that, of course, they are a “forgery” of Maurice Joly’s “Dialogue in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu” (1864.)

The assumption is that since Protocols appeared some 40 years after Dialogue, it plagiarized the earlier work. But the Protocols actually predated Dialogue and Joly borrowed from it. In other words, far from being an anti-Semitic ruse, the Protocols of Zion are authentic [and most probably wrote by the Rothschilds].

I have already argued that the two documents are neither similar nor derivative, although they have some lines and words in common.

The Protocols of the Elders of Zion” is essentially a brilliant Master Plan for dispossession and tyranny, i.e. the New World Order. It is the key to understanding our present predicament. (This is not a condemnation of all Jews, only the nucleus of bankers and high-level Masons directing this diabolical war against the human race).

“Dialogue in Hell” was a veiled Masonic Jewish attack on Napoleon III, an example of how they championed liberalism to undermine the Old Order and usurp power, as described in the Protocols themselves. (The author of Protocols is contemptuous of liberalism and all egalitarian programs. They are just gimmicks to manipulate the masses).

KERRY BOLTON

Reading Kerry Bolton’s monograph “The Protocols of Zion In Context” (Renaissance Press, 2003) it became obvious that Joly was plagiarizing from The Protocols and not vice-versa.

Joly, a Jew whose real name was Joseph Levy, was a lifelong Mason and member of the “Lodge of Mizraim” where the Protocols document originated. He was the protege of Adolph Cremieux (Isaac Moise Cremieux 1796-1880) the head of the lodge, founder of the Alliance Israélite Universelle and a Minister in the Jewish-backed government of Leon Gambetta.

The plot is described in the Protocols as “centuries-old.” It most likely predates “Dialogue.” Joly was well versed in the Protocols and borrowed from it to flesh out the unpopular authoritarian position of Machiavelli, which he ascribed to Napoleon III.

Joly, who committed suicide in 1879, was in the habit of “borrowing.” He is accused of plagiarizing a popular novel by Eugene Sue, namely “Les Mystères du Paris.” (1845) Also, his work is predated by another of Cremieux’s proteges, Jacob Venedy,  entitled, “Machiavelli, Montesquieu, Rousseau.” (1850)

In 1884 Mme. Justine Glinka, the daughter of a Russian General living in Paris, hired Joseph Schorst, a member of Joly’s  Mizraim Lodge to obtain sensitive information.  For the sum of 2500 francs, Schorst provided Glinka with “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.” He was subsequently tracked down and murdered in Egypt.

The Tsarist government, already heavily infiltrated, sat on the document. Glinka subsequently gave it to a friend who passed it on to Professor Sergius A. Nilus, left, who published it for the first time in 1901.

After the Bolshevik Revolution, Nilus was arrested in Kiev in 1924, imprisoned and tortured. The President of the Court told him he had “done them incalculable harm in publishing the Protocols.” (“Waters Flowing Eastward” by Paquita de Shishmareff, 1999, pp.74-76.)

CONCLUSION

If your plan for World Domination leaked out, what would you do? Would you admit it? “You got me! My bad!”

No, you’d employ an army of ciphers to convince everyone the document is a hoax motivated by “prejudice” and “anti-Semitism.” They have executed this “damage control” perfectly, a measure of their power to deceive even in the presence of the truth.

This is the only Conspiracy that has prevailed in spite of the Blueprint being freely available. It demonstrates the credulity (or venality) of the intelligentsia and the masses.

They have colonized our minds first. We cannot name our oppressor for fear of being accused of “anti-Semitism.” It’s as though Black slaves working on cotton plantations were taught it was “racist” or “bigoted” to mention the White slave driver. Since the majority of Jews are ignorant of this plot, and are manipulated like everyone else, racism is a ploy to divert attention from a very dire problem.

The Illuminati (top-rung Masonic Jews and their non-Jewish allies) have distributed some wealth and power to the masses (liberalism, socialism) as a way of securing ultimate power for themselves. According to the Protocols, they will eventually withdraw these benefits once their “invisible government” is invincible. The “war on terror” should be seen in this context.

In my view, “Protocols Deniers” are complicit in this Conspiracy, which is responsible for most human suffering and will lead to a great deal more. As a Jew, I don’t want this responsibility on my head, or on other innocent Jews or Masons.

Jacob Schiff: The Most Powerful Man in U.S. History

jacobschiff

Jacob Schiff

A reader asks, “Luis, all roads eventually lead to the Rothschilds of Europe; but who do you think was the most powerful Jewish mogul in American history?”

Upon first thought, that almost seems like asking who the greatest baseball player of all time was. Was it Cobb? Wagner? Ruth? Gehrig? DiMaggio? Williams? Mays? Mantle? Bonds? (pre & post steroids) There are so many deserving candidates that it appears impossible to say with absolute certainty.

A strong case for the MVZ Award (Most Valuable Zionist) can be made for Paul Warburg, Bernard Baruch, Adolph Ochs, William Paley, Eugene Meyer, Arthur Hays Sulzberger, David Sarnoff, Jack Warner, Carl Laemmle, Henry Morganthau, George Soros, Henry Kissinger, Sumner Redstone, Michael Eisner and a few others. Just ‘Google’ each of those names and marvel at the power which the chosen ones have wielded over the last century. And although they weren’t Jews, the Rockefellers and Morgans were not lacking in political-economic muscle either.

But in the final analysis, the MVZ Award would have to go to the financier (money lender) Jacob Schiff – (with Baruch not far behind).

Jacob Schiff washed up upon America’s shores in 1865, shortly after the Civil War. During the 1700’s, his Schiff ancestors had actually shared a home with the legendary Rothschilds, in Frankfurt’s Jewish quarter.

Schiff went on to head the firm Kuhn, Loeb & Co. From his base in New York, he was the foremost Jewish leader from 1880 to 1920 in what is now referred to by Jewish-American historians as “The Schiff Era”. He served as the Director of many important corporations, including the National City Bank of New York, Equitable Life Assurance Society, Wells Fargo & Company, and the Union Pacific Railroad. Schiff, who made his fortune from interest bearing loans, was the main player behind the ‘Hebrew Free Loan Society’ in 1892; an organization which issued interest-free loans only to Jews (and is still in operation!)

Schiff’s descendants exercised some power and influence in their own right, though nothing like the Patriarch did. Schiff’s granddaughter, Dorothy Schiff, was the owner and Publisher of the New York Post for over 40 years. She once claimed to have “had a relationship” with Franklin D Roosevelt.

Karenna Gore-Schiff, the daughter of former Senator, almost US President, and Global Warming con man Al Gore, is married to Andrew Schiff, the great great grandson of Jacob.

1- The Rothschild-Schiff home (shared ownership, 1700’s) in Frankfurt Germany. 2- Dorothy Schiff – New York Press Queen 3- Kareena Gore marries into Zionist royalty as proud papa Al cashes-in on the Global Warming scam

It’s not merely that Schiff wielded enormous power, but rather the fact that his actions, more so than anyone else’s, fundamentally altered the course of American history. Schiff was really the first true Jewish Mega-Mogul of the whole United States (Judah Benjamin had previously run the confederacy). As the first, Schiff, more than anyone who followed him, was able to leverage his power into eternity. That is why the MVZ award must go to him.

Let us review Jacob Schiff’s impressive scorecard of destruction.

1897: SCHIFF THE TROJAN HORSE

Schiff’s most history-altering accomplishment would have to be the role of ‘Trojan Horse’ which he played in the late 1890’s. At a time when Jewish influence in America was relatively minor, and Jewish numbers were yet very small, it was Schiff’s cajoling of the outgoing U.S. President, and former New York Governor, Grover Cleveland (D) that prevented the massive wave of Jewish immigration to America from being shut down.

The Immigration Bill of 1897 would have required immigrants to pass a literacy test; something that Russian Jews would not have been able to do. After passing both Houses of Congress, Cleveland’s veto, induced by Schiff, saved the day for the incoming Communist and Zionist Jews of Russia.

Jewish historian Lawrence J Epstein writes:

“It is staggering to consider the alternative course American Jewish history would have taken had this measure passed.”

To which, your intrepid historian-author would like to respond, “and it is equally staggering to consider the alternative course AMERICAN history would have taken had the measure passed.”

Schiff’s role as Trojan Horse, above all other deeds, would be enough, in and of itself, to qualify him for the MVZ Award. But there’s more — a lot more!

1- Grover Cleveland’s parting gift to Schiff kept the floodgates of Jewish immigration wide open for 20 more years.

2- New Year’s card depicts wealthy American Jews beckoning European Jews to come on over.

1905: SCHIFF WEAKENS TSARIST RUSSIA

Schiff hated Christian Russia with a passion. He worked ceaselessly to overthrow the Romanov Dynasty and replace it with Jewish Reds / Communists. Toward that end, he personally financed, and sold bonds on behalf of, about 50% of the entire Japanese war effort during the Russo-Japanese War. As a result, the war ended with a Japanese victory. Russia’s loss was also facilitated by Schiff’s boy, President (and also a former New York Governor) Teddy Roosevelt, whose negotiating intervention clearly favored Japan over Russia.

* The left-wing Roosevelt became President after the conservative William McKinley was conveniently assassinated by a Red

For his role in securing victory for Japan, Schiff was personally awarded a medal, the Order of the Rising Sun, by the foolish Japanese Emperor. We say “foolish” because Schiff’s gang and their Roosevelt henchmen were, at the time, already plotting Japan’s ultimate demise; a process which started with Teddy’s escalating naval moves in the Pacific (Philippines, Midway, Guam, Pearl Harbor), and culminated with Franklin’s war and murderous Atomic bombs of 1945 (actually dropped under Truman 4 months after FDR’s death).

Schiff’s Jewish agents in Russia skillfully used the humiliating loss of the Russo-Japanese war as an occasion to launch a Communist revolution. The bloody Revolution of 1905 ultimately failed, but the Tsar’s regime was left considerably weakened. Many of the returning Russian POW’s came home brainwashed after Schiff had arranged for Communist propaganda to be given to them while in Japanese captivity. The final Bolshevik overthrow of Russia in 1917 will owe its success, in large part, to the damage done to Russia by the team of Jacob Schiff & Ted the Red Roosevelt on 1905.

Teddy Roosevelt’s anti-Russian ‘diplomacy’ and Jacob Schiff’s money (both seated from left) almost turned Russia into a Communist state in 1905.

1907 -1914: SCHIFF RUNS THE GALVESTON MOVEMENT

Not content with flooding the Northeast with future Communists, Progressives, and Zionists from Russia, Jacob Schiff founded and financed the ‘Galveston Movement’ – an effort to settle Russian-Jewish immigrants in the south and west of the United States. Schiff himself described the effort in an article he wrote in 1914. Schiff wrote:

“The committee placed itself promptly after its organization into communication with the Jewish Territorial Organization, of which Israel Zangwill is the head, and an arrangement was entered into between that organization and the Galveston Committee, under which the former undertook to make propaganda in Russia and Romania for acquainting intending emigrants with the advantages of going into the United States through Galveston (Texas), rather than to and through the overcrowded and congested North Atlantic ports.”

Instead of confining the arrival of Jews to just the New York, New England, Pennsylvania and New Jersey areas, Schiff’s clever scheme would facilitate the spread of the liberal/progressive plague to even the most conservative parts of the country. He knew exactly what he was doing!

Playwright and Jewish immigration enthusiast Israel Zangwill (on TIME cover) coined the phrase “Melting Pot’ to describe America. His Broadway play of that same name was attended and praised by Teddy Roosevelt. Zangwill worked on the Galveston Project with Schiff.

1909 / 1914: SCHIFF & FRIENDS CONTROL THE N.A.A.C.P.

The NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) is the most well-known Black American organization. What is not widely known is that its founders were ALL Zionist Marxists! Early Jewish co-founders included Julius Rosenwald, Lillian Wald, and Rabbi Emil Hirsch. A black Communist named W.E. Dubois was cleverly put up as the NAACP’s front man.

In 1914, Jacob Schiff became a Board member of the NAACP. With a giant like Schiff on board, the organization was now ready for the big time. Zionist money and influence has long dominated this “civil rights” organization, which did not elect a non-Jewish President until 1975!

By design, Schiff’s Jewish-controlled NAACP drew Blacks away from the positive influence of the Black-American conservative patriot Booker T. Washington, a dominant Black political leader who believed in America’s founding principles and sought to build bridges between Whites and Blacks.

The liberal Democrat NAACP represents the opposite of what the Republican Booker T stood for, which was self-reliance. NAACP is an anti- White Globalist Marxist tool that serves to divide Americans while herding radicalized Black voters (who they do not care about!) into the Leftist political camp. As a result, even today, 90-95% of Blacks blindly vote for Democrat candidates.

Without Schiff & friends, there would be no Barack Insane Obongo!

The openly Communist Black front man delivered the Black masses to his Jewish master.

1907: SCHIFF & FRIENDS SET STAGE FOR CREATION OF ‘THE FED’

The New York bankers had artificially inflated the stock market with easy loans. When lending was then tightened, the bubble burst. Stocks crashed 50% and bank runs followed. The Zionist NY Times and the Wall Street bankers used the Panic of 1907 to make a case for establishing a European style Central Bank (as Karl Marx envisioned).

Several years later, Senator Robert Owen of Oklahoma will accuse the Banksters of conspiracy: “The Panic was brought about by a deliberate conspiracy for the enrichment of those who engineered it.” JP Morgan, John D Rockefeller, Jacob Schiff, and Paul Warburg all declare that the lesson of The Panic is that the US needs a Central Bank.

Nine months before the planned crisis, Jacob Schiff warned in a speech to the Chamber of Commerce that “unless we have a central bank with control of credit resources, this country is going to undergo the most severe and far reaching money panic in its history”.

The following year, Schiff’s boy, Teddy Roosevelt appointed a “bipartisan” National Monetary Commission to study the causes of the Panic and make suggestions. The Chairman of the Commission was Senator Nelson Aldrich (whose daughter will one day be the mother of the 5 Rockefeller sons, David, John III, Nelson, Winthrop, & Lawrence)

Senator Owen was right. The Panic of 1907, so ‘prophetically’ predicted by Schiff just months earlier, was caused by the same gang that later proposed the privately owned Federal Reserve (Central Bank) as a solution.

1912: SCHIFF TAKES DOWN TAFT / INSTALLS WILSON

President William H. Taft proved to be a Constitutional Conservative, and not a big government “progressive” like his predecessor Teddy Roosevelt. But what really angered Jacob Schiff most of all was Taft’s refusal, told to Schiff in person, to dampen trade relations with Tsarist Russia. According to Henry Ford’s sources, Schiff and his entourage left the White House saying. “This means war.”

In order to oust the popular Republican Taft in 1912, Schiff and company recruited Teddy Roosevelt to run for President again, as a third party challenger. This maneuver split the Republican vote in two, allowing Democrat Woodrow Wilson to steal the Presidency. Wilson’s Jewish owned presidency would turn out to be disastrous for America, and the world (The Fed, World War I, Russian Revolution, Jewish foothold in Palestine, Depression of 1919-1920)

1912-election

Wilson – Roosevelt -Taft

Jacob Schiff was the chief engineer behind the three ring circus of 1912; a trick which ushered in the Wilson disaster.

“Jacob Schiff then came back to New York, (He was at that time head of The American Jewish Committee), and in my father’s home, in the presence of many prominent men, they decided to get rid of President Taft. They also made plans to get rid of the Republican Party and put in their own party and their own President.

They set up the National Democratic Headquarters at 200 Fifth Avenue and Henry Morgenthau Sr. was made chairman of the Finance Committee. I was made his assistant. I saw everything that went on because I handled all the books. Jacob Schiff and the Jews started looking around for a man to put up as President. They got Woodrow Wilson, a rascal who wasn’t worth the powder to blow him to hell!” – Benjamin Freedman

1913: SCHIFF’S BROTHER-IN-LAW TAKES CONTROL OF ‘THE FED’

Paul Warburg is widely considered to be the “Father of the Fed”. As its first New York City Branch Chairman, it was Warburg who ran the new counterfeiting, loan-sharking and market rigging operation, while an Anglo Saxon named Charles Hamlin provided the protective “Christian” cover as its nominal Chairman.

But in the grand power scheme of things, as powerful as Paul Warburg was, and came to be, Schiff still outranked him, at least in America. Schiff had already been well-established in New York for 37 years before Warburg had even arrived from Germany. Warburg settled in New York in 1902 as a partner in Kuhn, Loeb & Co., where he was junior to Schiff. Schiff was actually the Brother-in-Law to Warburg’s wife, Nina Loeb.

Recall that it was Schiff who called the Crash of 1907 in advance, as well as providing an idea for “solution” to such problems in the future. So if Paul Warburg is the “Father of the Fed”, then old Jake is the Grandfather.

Whereas in Schiff and Warburg’s day it was hidden, the Jewish control of the Fed is now out in the open / Chairman Greenspan / Bernanke / Yellen

1917: RED OCTOBER / THE BOLSHEVIK REVOLUTION

As was the case during the Russo-Japanese War of 1905, the chaos of World War I enabled the Communists (Bolsheviks) to stage another uprising in 1917. Leading the diabolical efforts was Jacob Schiff’s loyal agent, Leon Trotsky, freshly reestablished in Russia after having hidden in Brooklyn for the past decade. The Tsar had been forced to abdicate earlier that same year. The provisional government would then be overthrown by the Jewish-led Bolsheviks.

The following year, Schiff’s agents murdered the Tsar and his entire family. The reign of terror that the Soviets then ushered in would plague humanity for decades to come. Scores of millions would be murdered! And it could never have happened without the tireless leadership of Rothschild, Schiff and their Junior partners.

Soon after the Revolution, Schiff removed Russia (now the Soviet Union) from his “do-not-lend list.

The Bolshevik hit-men of the Rothschild-Schiff crime gang could never have done something so drastic as slaughtering the entire Royal Romanov family unless the New York-London Jewish ‘higher ups’ had given the approval.

#1 Globo-Zionist Gangster in US History

Jews Control The Jesuits

By Luis Torres

The first Jesuits were crypto‑Jews. Ignatius Loyola himself was a crypto‑Jew of the Occult Cabala. A crypto‑Jew is a Jew who converts to another religion and outwardly embraces the new religion, while secretly maintaining Jewish practices. As John Torell explains: “In 1491 San Ignacio de Loyola was born in the Basque province of Guipuzcoa, Spain. His parents were Marranos and at the time of his birth the family was very wealthy. As a young man he became a member of the Jewish Illuminati order in Spain. As a cover for his crypto Jewish activities, he became very active as a Roman Catholic. On May 20, 1521 Ignatius (as he was now called) was wounded in a battle, and became a semi‑cripple. Unable to succeed in the military and political arena, he started a quest for holiness and eventually ended up in Paris where he studied for the priesthood. In 1539 he had moved to Rome where he founded the “JESUIT ORDER,” which was to become the most vile, bloody and persecuting order in the Roman Catholic Church. In 1540, the current Pope Paul III approved the order. At Loyola’s death in 1556 there were more than 1000 members in the Jesuit order, located in a number of nations.”

Ignatius of Loyola’s secretary, Polanco, was of Jewish descent and was the only person present at Loyola’s deathbed. James Lainez, who succeeded Loyola as the second Jesuit General, was also of Jewish descent. Jews were attracted to the Jesuit order and joined in large numbers. Lacunza was no exception. He was a Jew, which explains why he introduced the eschatological teaching of a return to the Jewish animal sacrifices during the Millennium. (In a book titled The Coming of the Messiah in Glory and Majesty published in 1812, 11 years after the death of its author, Jesuit

Emanuel de Lacunza who, wrote under the fictitious pen name of a purportedly converted Jew, Rabbi Juan Josaphat Ben Ezra, in order to conceal his identity and to make his writings more palatable to the Protestant readers. He promoted the writings of sixteenth century Jesuit priest Francisco Ribera, developing a futuristic perspective which restricted the prophetic fulfillments in the book of Revelation to the end of the world). Lacunza also wrote that during a millennium after the tribulation the Jewish animal sacrifices would be reinstated along with the Eucharist (the mass) of the Catholic Church. Lacunza has followed after Jewish fables and replaced the commandments of God with the commandments of men. That doctrine gives the Jews primacy in God’s plan and relegates Christians to a prophetic parenthetical to be supplanted by the Jews during the thousand year earthly reign of Christ.

Anyone who has been involved in “truth seeking” for some time now is sure to have come across the people who will try to convince you that the Jesuit Order (aka Society of Jesus) are really at the top of this worldwide crime network. These people will relentlessly and tirelessly attempt to fill your head with ideas that the Jesuits of Rome really run the show from behind the scenes and that everything else is “disinformation”. This theory seems to have become more popular and far reaching on the internet and you will see more and more people parroting this stuff loud and clear to anyone who will naively listen. I am going to show you that not only is this theory complete bunk nonsense that is popular primarily among crazies, nut jobs, Jews, and Jew defenders, but that the Jesuits are actually crypto-Jews. So even if this ridiculous theory were true, it would still mean that the Jews are and always have been behind this global criminal cabal.

Who Promotes this Theory and Why?

First let us discuss the very people who promote this nonsense and analyze them to see if it gives us any indications of what their motives might be. The biggest and most popular promoter of this stuff is a guy named Eric John Phelps who wrote a pathetic book called Vatican Assassins in which he makes a series of superfluously unsubstantiated claims alleging that the Vatican & the Jesuits run the world and is behind everything from JFK assassination to 9/11. This book is pretty much a 99.99% made up lie.

Lying Scum

Eric Jon Phelps

literally makes things up as he goes along and has no sources to back any of his claims up. Unsurprisingly he was taken to school in a debate vs. Michael Collins Piper, author of the great book Final Judgment. Eric Phelps has a ridiculously palpable connection that clearly illustrates why he promotes this garbage. On his website under the donations section it asks for all money orders to be sent to the address of LOWVEHM Inc., the company he runs. Now if you go to the LOWVEHM website you will quickly see that it is a diamond and jewels company that receives its diamonds wholesale straight from Tel Aviv, Israel! So the guy’s income is dependent on Israeli Blood Diamonds and he blames the Jesuits for everything. Need I say any more? I shouldn’t have to but I will. Not only does this Israeli diamond thing make he look like a total shill for the Jews but he admitted that his wife is a Russian Jew and that he is a Christian Zionist himself. He also smears anyone who doesn’t agree with his nonsense by calling them a “Jesuit Coadjutor” (which is just a pathetic made up fictional term). There is plenty more dirt on the guy that can be found HERE but this is just so over-the-top obvious that I am gobsmacked that anyone actually takes anything this guy says seriously. You have to be incredulously stupid, or a Jew to promote this guy and his conspiracy theories about the Jesuits running the world. We’re done with him, he deserves no more attention, and please, nobody ever bring up this con-artist ever again.

Why is it that Phelps’ paypal account works just fine, when anybody who says anything about Jews on their website gets their paypal immediately shut down? The answer is obvious, the Jesuits don’t run squat. Other than that freak, the people who usually promote the Jesuits stuff are either Jews, Christian Zionists, or just kooks who are bored with blaming the obvious culprits and are looking for a “cool” / “interesting” conspiracy theory to fantasize about in their basements while jerking off to gay porn all day. I’ve chatted with quite a few of these people on YouTube and other places and if you take a look at their profiles they promote pretty much anything that sounds crazy & far-out like the “No Planes” and “Space Beams” on 9/11 theories. Why do a majority of them also promote that stuff as well? Because they are just crazy conspiracy theorists looking for something “interesting” to obsess about when they are not playing World Of Warcraft on their mom’s computers.

The Jesuits are in fact Jewish

One of the most devastating things to the notion that the Jesuits are at the top of this thing is the fact that more than a lot of the Jesuits are in fact Jewish. The Jesuit Order is in reality a Jewish Order masquerading as a Catholic one as a cover, so even if they were at the top it’s still a Jewish conspiracy.

“We Jesuits take pleasure in admitting those of Jewish ancestry.” J. Nadal Morey

“We Jesuits take pleasure in admitting those of Jewish ancestry.” – J. Nadal Morey

An excellent resource documenting all the so called Jesuits who are really Jews turned Catholic, hence “crypto-Jews”, can be found at JewishJesuits.com. The Jesuit Order in its founding was very much Jewish. All five of its founding members were Marrano Jews (i.e. Jews masquerading as Christians).

Ignatius Loyola – Founder of the Jesuit Order (JEW)

Ignatius Loyola – Founder of the Jesuit Order (Jewish)

Alfonso Salmeron – Jewish

Alfonso Salmeron – Jewish

Diego Lainez – Jewish

Diego Lainez – Jewish

Nicolas Bodadilla – Jewish

Nicolas Bodadilla – Jewish

Simao Rodriguez

Simao Rodriguez – Jewish

In his article Synagogue of Satan, John S. Torell states:

“In 1491 San Ignacio De Loyola was born in the Basque province of Guipuzcoa, Spain. His parents were Marranos and at the time of his birth the family was very wealthy. As a young man he became a member of the Jewish Illuminati Order in Spain. As a cover for his crypto Jewish activities, he became very active as a Roman Catholic.”

Marranos are Spanish Jews who outwardly converted to a different religion, often times Roman Catholic, in order to evade persecution and expulsion for their treacherous actions, while secretly maintaining the religion of Judaism as well as practicing the Cabbala (Jewish Mystisism).

Furthermore, Loyola’s secretary, Polanco, was also of Jewish descent and was the only person present at Loyola’s deathbed. James Lainez who succeeded Loyola as the second Jesuit General was also of Jewish descent.(#) Add a (W) after the (E) in Jesuits and what do you get? Jewsuits. A more fitting name.

It’s quite funny how the promoters in the “Jesuits run it all” theories conveniently fail to mention these important facts and attempt to project the Jesuits as purely Roman Catholic. And these skumbags also have the audacity to call us “anti-Semites” while promoting blatantly anti-Catholic conspiracy theories with no facts in hand at all. The Jesuits themselves are crypto-Jews and so are the promoters in the Black Pope theories. The Jews disguise themselves as the religion of their enemies, continue with their treachery under this false guise, and then get everybody to blame their disguise for the world’s problems. Ingenious

The Pope Wears a Yarmulke

Jewish infiltration of the Vatican stems back many hundreds of years, and it would be safe to say that the Jews have a strong vice-grip over that institution, from the inside out. One of the most blatant examples of the Jewishness of the Vatican is the fact that the Pope himself wears a Yarmulke.

Agent of Israel

There are multiple instances where Israel and Jews have attempted to demonize the Vatican when they aren’t co-operative or subservient to their will. One example is the Jewish-controlled mass media going on a massive demoralization campaign against Catholic priests (i.e. Jesuits) with accusations of pedophilia and Satanism. While some of these accusations have proven to be true, many of these claims could easily be embellished or fabricated by the Jewish-controlled mass media when the Vatican does something the Jews don’t like — for instance when the Vatican strongly OPPOSED the Iraq war. Blackmail anyone? And whose to say that these Pedophiles and Satanists in the Catholic Church aren’t just crypto-Jews? To boot, the man who came out with a lot of those accusations was Fr. Malachai Martin who is a ex-Jesuit Zionist who, during the second Vatican Council, drafted the document which exonerated the Jews from culpability in the execution of Jesus Christ. So, the man who writes books claiming the Catholic Church is full of pedophiles and Satanists is a Zionist who exonerates the Jews for murdering Jesus. Go figure.

Another more recent example of Jews trying to demonize the Vatican in the press was this story about how a pamphlet that was being passed out to the IDF troops in Israel claimed that the Vatican was training Hezbollah how to kill Jews.

It is redundantly obvious that the Vatican is infiltrated and blackmailed by Jews which utterly puts to shame any notion that the “Jesuits” control anything let alone Israel and Jews. It’s the other way around.

Who Controls the Vatican Treasure?

The Jewish Encyclopedia (Vol. 2, p. 497) admits that…

“A number of Catholics undertook to organize a competitor bank to rival the Rothschild power… sometime about 1820. The Rothschild’s crushed it.”

It says further:

“It is a somewhat curious sequel to the attempt to set up a Catholic competitor to the Rothschilds that at the present time (1905) the latter are the guardians of the papal treasure.” (#)

So the Jewish Rothschild banking dynasty controls the Vatican treasure.

They Cannot Explain Away Bishop Williamson

Truth Hero

download (7)
download (9)
Vol. 2 page 497

Bishop Williamson – Truth Hero

If the Jesuits are so bad and evil than how do you explain Bishop Richard Williamson? Catholic Bishop (Jesuit) Richard Williamson is a great man who has valiantly publicly stated that 9/11 was a fraud, a lie, and that the holocaust was also a lie. Many of these Black Popers will shy away from any reference of Bishop Williamson and nary a mention of one of his excellent sermons exposing 9/11 among other crimes. I have even heard some pathetic cretins say he is “controlled opposition” like stoppering little maggots. These cowards won’t hesitate to defame a person who has more courage in his fingernail than they have in their entire bodies. Bishop Williamson puts his very livelihood and safety on the line when he speaks out about these subjects. Soulless cockroaches who attack him because he puts to shame this “Jesuit Conspiracy” claim are a complete waste of oxygen.

Conclusion

Do Jesuits control the Media, own Hollywood, the Federal Reserve, and constantly inhabit high positions in government? Nope. Have Jesuits been expelled from 109 locations since 250 AD? Nope. Did Jesuits run the African Slave trade, instigate WWI & WWII, invent Communism & Neo-Conservatism, perpetrate the 9/11 attacks, attack the U.S.S. Liberty, assassinate JFK, run the Diamond District, Porn Industry, run the Drug Trade? Nope. Are you called “anti-Catholic” for blaming Jesuits for everything under the sun that they don’t even do? Nope, but we’re called anti-Semitic for blaming the people which ALL of the evidence shows are the ones responsible.

Secret Jewish Plot Unveiled by the Catholic Gazette of England

jwewewewewew

In the London Catholic Gazette of February 1936 a sensational article was published under the heading: “The Jewish Peril and the Catholic Church”. The monthly organ of the Catholic Missionary Society of England was quoting speeches delivered in a series of secret Jewish meetings in Paris. A few weeks later, the Parisian weekly “Le Reveil du Peuple” published a similar account, adding that the statements had been made at a recent convention of the B’nai B’rith (secret Masonic order in which no Gentile is admitted) held in Paris.

The article of the “Catholic Gazette” read as follows:

“THE JEWISH PERIL AND THE CATHOLIC CHURCH”

That there had been and still is a Jewish problem no one can deny. Since the rejection of Israel, 1,900 years ago, the Jews have scattered in every direction, and in spite of the difficulties and even persecution, they have established themselves as a power in nearly every nation of Europe.

In view of this Jewish problem, which affects the Catholic Church in a special way, we publish the following amazing extracts from a number of speeches recently made under the auspices of a Jewish society in Paris. The name of our informant must remain concealed. He is presently known to us, but by reason of his peculiar relations with the Jews at the present time, we have agreed not to disclose his identity nor to give away any further details of the Paris meeting beyond the following extracts which, though sometimes freely translated, nevertheless substantially convey the meaning of the original statements.–Editorial Note glories in the fact that without detriment to their own racial unity and international character, the Jews have been able to spread their doctrines and increase their political, social and economic influence among the nations..

——–

As long as there remains among the Gentiles any moral conception of the social order, and until all faith, patriotism and dignity are uprooted, our reign over the world shall not come.

“We have already fulfilled part of our work, but we cannot yet claim that the whole of our work is done. We have still a long way to go before we can overthrow our main opponent: the Catholic Church…

“We must always bear in mind that the Catholic Church is the only institution which has stood, and which will, as long as it remains in existence, stand in our way. The Catholic Church, with her methodical work and her edifying and moral teachings, will always keep her children in such a state of mind, as to make them too self-respecting to yield to our domination, and to bow before our future King of Israel…

“That is why we have been striving to discover the best way of shaking the Catholic Church to her very foundations. We have spread the spirit of revolt and false liberalism among the nations of the Gentiles so as to persuade them away from their faith and even to make them ashamed of professing the precepts of their Religion and obeying the Commandments of their Church. We have brought many of them to boast of being atheists, and more than that, to glory in being descendants of the ape! We have given them new theories, impossible of realization, such as Communism, Anarchism, and Socialism, which are now serving our purpose…The stupid Gentiles have accepted them with the greatest enthusiasm, without realizing that those theories are ours, and that they constitute our most powerful instrument against themselves…

GENTILES BUILDING THEIR OWN JAILS

“We have blackened the Catholic Church with the most ignominious calumnies, we have stained her history and disgraced even her noblest activities. We have imputed to her the wrongs of her enemies, and thus brought these latter to stand more closely by our side… So much so, that we are now witnessing to our greatest satisfaction, rebellions against the Church in several countries… We have turned her clergy into objects of hatred and ridicule, we have subjected them to the contempt of the crowd… We have caused the practice of the Catholic religion to be considered out of date and a mere waste of time..

.

“And the Gentiles, in their stupidity, have proved easier dupes than we expected them to be. One would expect more intelligence and more practical common sense, but they are no better than a herd of sheep. Let them graze in our fields till they become fat enough to be worthy of being immolated to our future King of the World…

“We have founded many secret associations, which all work for our purpose, under our orders and our direction. We have made it an honour, a great honour, for the Gentiles to join us in our organizations, which are, thanks to our gold, flourishing now more than ever. Yet it remains our secret that those Gentiles who betray their own and most precious interests, by joining us in our plot should never know that these associations are of our creation and that they serve our purpose...

“One of the many triumphs of our Freemasonry is that those Gentiles who become members of our Lodges, should never suspect that we are using them to build their own jails, upon whose terraces we shall erect the throne of our Universal King of Israel; and should never know that we are commanding them to forge the chains of their own servility to our future King of the world.

INFILTRATION

“So far, we have considered our strategy in our attacks upon the Catholic Church from the outside. But this is not all. Let us now explain how we have gone further in our work, to hasten the ruin of the Catholic Church, and how we have penetrated into her most intimate circles, and brought even some of her Clergy to become pioneers of our cause.

“Apart altogether from the influence of our philosophy, we have taken other steps to secure a breach in the Catholic Church. Let me explain how this has been done.

“We have induced some of our children to join the Catholic body, with the explicit intimation that they should work in a still more efficient way for the disintegration of the Catholic Church, by creating scandals within her. We have thus followed the advice of our Prince of the Jews, who so wisely said: ‘Let some of your children become canons, so that they may destroy the Church’. Unfortunately, not all among the ‘convert’ Jews have proved faithful to their mission. Many of them have even betrayed us! But, on the other hand, others have kept their promise and honored their word. Thus the counsel of our Elders has proved successful.

REVOLUTION

“We are the Fathers of all Revolutions – even of those which sometimes happen to turn against us. We are the supreme Masters of Peace and War. We can boast of being the Creators of the REFORMATION! Calvin was one of our Children; he was of Jewish descent, and was entrusted by Jewish authority and encouraged with Jewish finance to draft his scheme in the Reformation.

“Martin Luther yielded to the influence of his Jewish friends, and again, by Jewish authority and with Jewish finance, his plot against the Catholic Church met with success…

“Thanks to our propaganda, to our theories of Liberalism and to our misrepresentations of Freedom, the minds of many among the Gentiles were ready to welcome the Reformation. They separated from the Church to fall into our snare. And thus the Catholic Church has been very sensibly weakened, and her authority over the Kings of the Gentiles has been reduced almost to naught..

.

We are grateful to Protestants for their loyalty to our wishes – although most of them are, in the sincerity of their faith, unaware of their loyalty to us. We are grateful to them for the wonderful help they are giving us in our fight against the stronghold of Christian Civilization, and in our preparations for the advent of our supremacy over the whole world and over the Kingdoms of the Gentiles.

“So far we have succeeded in overthrowing most of the Thrones of Europe. The rest will follow in the near future. Russia has already worshiped our rule, France, with her Masonic Government, is under our thumb. England, in her dependence upon our finance is under our heel; and in her Protestantism is our hope for the destruction of the Catholic Church. Spain and Mexico are but toys in our hands. And many other countries, including the U.S.A., have already fallen before our scheming.

CHURCH WAS LAST BASTION

“But the Catholic Church is still alive..

wp-image-619258156

“We must destroy her without the least delay and without the slightest mercy. Most of the Press in the world is under our Control; let us therefore encourage in a still more violent way the hatred of the world against the Catholic Church. Let us intensify our activities in poisoning the morality of the Gentiles. Let us spread the spirit of revolution in the minds of the people. They must be made to despise Patriotism and the love of their family, to consider their faith as a humbug, their obedience to their Church as a degrading servility, so that they may become deaf to the appeal of the Church and blind to her warnings against us. Let us, above all, make it impossible for Christians outside the Catholic Church to be reunited with that Church, or for non-Christians to join that Church; otherwise the greatest obstruction to our domination will be strengthened and all our work undone. Our plot will be unveiled, the Gentiles will turn against us, in the spirit of revenge, and our domination over them will never be realized.

“Let us remember that as long as there still remain active enemies of the Catholic Church, we may hope to become Masters of the World… And let us remember always that the future Jewish King will never reign in the world before the Pope in Rome is dethroned, as well as all the other reigning monarchs of the Gentiles upon earth.”

http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-occupiedgovernments-vatican.html

London Catholic Gazette of February 1936

The Jewish Encyclopedia (Vol. 2, p. 497)