- Home
- News
- Opinion
- Letters
- Sports
- Prospecting
- Essentials
- Obituaries
- Real Estate
- Comics
- Gallery
- Classifieds
- Advertisers
- Coupons
- Contact Us
Share Article
370
868370868
G Edward Griffin Author of The Creature from Jekyll Island
This is part two of a three-part series on the Fed, inflation and currency wars.
Contrary to what is taught in government schools, the real history of America is as much about the struggle between the people and the banks as it is about the dates and places of certain events.
For example, most of the wars America has found itself in have been about economics, not ideology. While we all are taught the Revolutionary War was about freedom, according to Benjamin Franklin, the primary reason was because King George III and the international bankers wouldn’t let the colonists issue their own currency.
Likewise, the war of 1812 was fought because the American government refused to re-charter a central bank. Nathan Mayer Rothschild, a member of Europe’s most powerful banking family, is reported as saying that “the United States would find itself involved in a most disastrous war if the bank’s charter were not renewed.” Several months later, the British declared war on the United States using loans alleged to have come from the Rothschilds.
In 1816 a second central bank was established, but when its charter came up for renewal in 1832, President Andrew Jackson vetoed it, which resulted in the international bankers trying to assassinate him.
G. Edward Griffin believes the Civil War was fought over economics not slavery. “It was about the economic division between the north and south,” he said, “and slavery was only added as an issue towards the end of the war to give it a high moral sense.”
America’s entry into World War I was also not for the reasons given according to Griffin. “The bankers wanted the U.S. in World War I because the British and French were losing. J.P. Morgan had all these many hundreds of millions in war loans to those countries and if they lost, there was no way the investors would get paid back.”
Another factor was a desire by the Zionists to establish a Jewish homeland in Palestine. At one point, a member of the Rothschild family approached the British government and promised to bring America into the war on Britain’s side if they were given Palestine, which at the time was in Turkish hands. The agreement between the Zionist leadership and the British is enshrined in the Balfour Declaration which is on display at the British Library.
In the case of the U.S. entry into WWII, Griffin believes the country fought because the State Department, Treasury Department, and the Executive Branch were all dominated by members of the Council on Foreign Relations. “These people wanted the U.S. to play a key role in the creation of an international government,” he said. “And they knew the only way to bring it about was to have the U.S. play the role of a victor in a great war … I think that was the primary motivation, even more so than the economic one.”
The birth of the Fed
The Federal Reserve was actually the third central bank established in America and was legislated into existence in 1913.
Griffin, who has written a book on the history of the Fed, said it’s best understood in terms of concept. ”It is a cartel,” he said. “A banking cartel no different from a banana or oil cartel.”
Griffin says the Fed was created in response to demand from the public for banking reform. At the time, there was concern about the concentration of financial power in the hands of a few Wall Street firms and the public wanted Congress to bring the industry under control.
However the banking industry, seeing the writing on the wall, decided to take charge of the banking reform movement rather than try to fight it. So in 191o, a group of bankers met secretly at Jekyll Island, a private resort island. The group included Sen. Nelson Aldrich, A. Piatt Andrew, Frank Vanderlip, Henry P. Davison, Charles D. Norton, Benjamin Strong and Paul Warburg.
They drafted legislation that supposedly controlled the banks but instead protected them and gave them additional power and enhanced profits. “It was a brilliant ploy and it worked,” said Griffin. Later, over 100 amendments were added to further enhance the power of the Fed.
“People thought they were getting a piece of legislation that would allow the government to control the banks,” said Griffin. “But what they got was a piece of legislation that allowed the banks to control the government. And those banks are primarily the New York banks like Bear Stearns, CitiCorp, JP Morgan Chase, and others. To know who they are, just look who shows up to testify before Congress,” he said.
Since its founding, Griffin said the Fed has only grown in power. “It is astride the economy and absolute master of the monetary system and it is regulator of all commercial activity in the U.S. It is the tail that wags the dog.”
Educating the public
Having a monopoly on money issuance is one thing, keeping it is another. Griffin maintains that bankers have been able to keep and expand their monopoly over the economy and the government by taking control of the educational system and the media. The purpose being to “educate” Americans to accept socialism and an all-powerful government to manage society.
He says tax exempt foundations owned by banking families such as the Rockefellers “made a conscious decision at the turn of last century to change textbooks and teaching institutions of America so they would no longer teach the value of individual liberty … but rather teach collectivism. They made the conscious decision to provide funding for universities that would change their curriculum to teach that. The history is very clear and very well documented and it’s shocking. And there’s no doubt in my mind that the reason the American people today are willing to accept socialism … is because they have been educated that way. It’s that simple.”
Changing the system
Griffin believes the Federal Reserve is gradually impoverishing the general population with all its money printing and spending.
“The people at the top, where the fresh money is coming in are government employees, government contractors, those getting government grants, the military — these are the politically favored class. They are making out like gangbusters with all this fresh money coming in. They are getting wealthier and wealthier and wealthier.
“But the … middle class. They’re the ones losing the value of their homes, losing their jobs, having to tear up their credit cards. The middle class has been losing a tremendous amount of their wealth during this process. It’s aggravating the distinction between the haves and have-nots and pushing the middle class into the have-not category.”
Griffin said the only solution is for Americans to recapture control of the system. “They have to replace the people in Congress who have allowed and encourage this to happen. Nothing will change as long Congress is dominated by individuals who are collectivists in their thinking and especially those who are members of the Council on Foreign Relations or are dependent upon those who are members of the CFR through the corporations and institutions they dominate. We have to change leadership because nothing else will work.”
Contact Dawn Hodson at 530-344-5071 or dhodson@mtdemocrat.net. Follow @DHodsonMtDemo on Twitter.
Evelyn, regarding offering differing viewpoints, I do wish that MD made more effort in that direction (although it would spoil some of my fun, as I already read lots of news that is based on those pesky things called facts). So how might they offer alternative ideas? I think, investigate one area, present facts from named sources, develop a balanced argument, etc. It’s hard. The Federal is a terrific subject for this. One part you’d need to consider is how having this control may have contributed to greater prosperity and comfort for Americans, and whether that approach is sustainable.
Catherine, I’m not sure I’m following you when you say “having this control may have contributed to greater prosperity and comfort for Americans … .” Do you mean the Federal Reserve has brought the country greater prosperity?
I mean the Fed has enabled an unnatural kind of stability. Not a personal preference or viewpoint, but if you’re reporting on the fed, you have to look at how the controls it enables have provided foundations for growth that we might not have otherwise enjoyed. I’m just saying you’d have to look at many facets.
These articles are based on interviews with Griffin and Rickards. They are not book reviews. Their books were referenced to establish them as qualified to speak on the subject.
Ms. Hodson, you might reconsider jumping into the quicksand of reader comments. Once in, it is an inevitable process of being consumed.
Catherine you speculate, “ . . . may have contributed to greater prosperity and comfort for Americans, and whether that approach is sustainable.” – Spot on! I would add that the creation of the FED has lead to greater prosperity for the entire planet. Sustainability? Only by periodic deflations will the compounding of the money function be sustained. These “periodic deflations” will always be perceived as theft, graft and corruption and assigned to conspiratorial machinations.
Evelyn, thank you very much for the Tragedy and Hope, A History of Our Time PDF link. I played for a while with a word search “conspiracy”. YES, they do exist. We are left to winnow wheat from chaff.
TRIVIA President Clinton was one of Quigley’s students.
Phil, I’d prefer that banking be nationalized. The Fed is a cartel, but in the strictest sense, most governments function as cartels. I’d just prefer the benefits being less concentrated.
Quigley’s densely packed T&H is impossible for me to take in minus electronic search. Much easier than reading consecutively pgs. 1-1090!
“The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences.” ~ Tragedy and Hope, pgs. 277-278
Catherine, the thought of the democratization of monetary policy/strategy is more than I can bare. Imagine the human circulatory system being subjected to a vote of the constituents – one brain – two hands – two feet . . . The brain would lose more than win . . . especially with us men . . .
“This front organization, called the Royal Institute of International Affairs, had as its nucleus in each area the existing submerged Round Table Group. In New York it was known as the Council on Foreign Relations, and was a front for J. P. Morgan and Company … .” ~ T&H, pg. 788
FOUND IT! – the much quoted – The Right’s Fairy Tale Does Have a Modicum of Truth
This myth, like all fables, does in fact have a modicum of truth. There does exist, and
has existed for a generation, an international Anglophile network which operates, to some
extent, in the way the … Right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which
we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the
Communists, or any other groups, and frequently does so. I know of the operations of this
network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the
early 1960′s, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most
of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments.
I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies (notably to its belief
that England was an Atlantic rather than a European Power and must be allied, or even
federated, with the United States and must remain isolated from Europe), but in general
my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role
in history is significant enough to be known. – LINK – T&H – page 786
Ah, yes… hate to see Little Phil be in charge… But somehow, other countries have managed with nat’l banking , if imperfectly.
hey phil, my spouse is a Captain in the U.S. Army. she will be the first to tell you 911 was an inside job. How come there has not been a single terrorist attack on our soil since 911? Do you really think it is our vigilance that is preventing this?
Hey, I have a load of batstuff crazy ideas, too! When’s Dawn gonna interview me and chrispy?
Foaming, You’ll need to write a book, first.
chrispy: Your wife’s opinion is shared by over 320 U.S. Military Officers.
Colonel, 320 military officers would equal what percentage of the military officer corps?
Using Evelyn’s data along with 201,730 (http://usmilitary.about.com/od/promotions/l/blofficerprom.htm) it seems that 0.16% of the US military officer corps believe that 9/11 was an inside job. It seems final. Since 99.84% do not believe 9/11 was an inside job the question is resolved. TRUTHERS ARE A PANTLOAD! – QED
In no way preempting Col Longhofer: (1) The answer is: Infinitesimally small. (2) That’s hardly the point. (3) Peruse the list of signatories (the above is an active link). (4) Unintentionally, I misrepresented the signatories. They do NOT say that 911 was an inside job. Rather, following on 6 “Whereas” statements, the well identified currently serving and former US Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force & Coast Guard Commissioned & Non-Commissioned Officers “petition the Congress of the United States for a new and independent investigation into the events of 9/11/01 by a duly constituted legal body with the authority to subpoena and require testimony under oath, and with authority to prosecute if criminal activity is discovered, so that the perpetrators of these crimes against humanity can at last be brought to justice.”
No, 0.16% means nothing of the sort!!! What it DOES mean is that 320 military officers have had the courage to identify themselves publicly with the call for a new 911 investigation. Definitely not a strategic career move.
Please don’t use such big words. I had to look up PANTLOAD. When did rudeness become de rigueur?
99.99& of truthers understand PANTLOAD. Only .01% of truthers understand de rigueur. I was attempting to reach the masses.
. . . So, let me make sure I’m properly understanding. 320 former US Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force & Coast Guard Commissioned & Non-Commissioned Officers are “the masses”, for whom PANTLOAD is applicable?
Gotta laugh. This website allows PANTLOAD but screens out D*CK.
Phil, you are correct, officer strength is around 200K, so 320 is not a consensus. Evelyn, wonder how many of the 320 are retired and how many are active duty? Guessing that most are retired.
James, peruse the website. Detailed info on each individual is provided. I haven’t read all the biographies because I am simply to lazy to go through so many screens-full of information. But at a reasonable guess, most/many are retired. It’s easier to be courageous in retirement. Nothing about the military or society in general encourages peopole to speak their minds. Simply consider what happens to whistle blowers. Freedom of speech is long dead and gone, minus a respectful funeral service.
I’m getting too excited. spell check: (1) … TOO lazy to go; (2) PEOPLE, not peopole
About those “screens-full of information”. I just did a quick check. About 200 screens. But doing a lazy ramble is quite interesting.
“320 IS NOT A CONSENSUS” – You don’t reasonably suppose the military might send around a questionnaire to all former and presently serving officers. Indeed, let’s workshop the matter!!! ********** I’m finished now. My contribution is totally worn out, and most likely in the process I’ve worn out everyone here.
LINK – How China Is Driving Federal Reserve Policy
LINK – The Federal Reserve’s New Policies Look Alarmingly Chinese
LINK – Federal Reserve allows Chinese-controlled banks to take stakes in US banks