Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter 2 Share on Facebook 9 Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! 1 Share on Reddit 2 Share on StumbleUpon 1 Tell A Friend 5 (20 Shares)  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites (# of views)   49 comments

Exclusive to OpEdNews:
OpEdNews Op Eds

The Central Role of Central Bankers in the Wars of the Past Two Centuries

By   Follow Me on Twitter     Message Richard Clark     Permalink
      (Page 1 of 6 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

Must Read 9   Valuable 5   Well Said 3  
View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com Headlined to H4 3/21/13

Author 8235
Become a Fan
  (110 fans)
- Advertisement -

(Article changed on March 23, 2013 at 22:19)

(Article changed on March 22, 2013 at 15:21)

(Article changed on March 21, 2013 at 13:31)

How many wars are started for no other reason than to force privately-owned central banks into the economic systems of nations?   And why has the US government been mired in so many military actions in other nations that do not have privately-owned central banks?  

To answer these questions we should start at America's beginning.   According to Ben Franklin and others, the United States fought the American Revolution primarily over King George III's Currency act, which forced the colonists to conduct their business using no currency other than printed bank notes borrowed at interest from the Bank of England.  

After the revolution, the new United States adopted a radically different economic system in which the government issued its own value-based money, so that private banks like the Bank of England could no longer siphon off a share of the wealth of American workers by way of privately-originated, interest-bearing bank notes.   The Bank of England had to be stopped from doing exactly what America's privately-owned central bank does today.

"The refusal of King George III to allow the colonies to operate an honest money system, which freed the ordinary man from the clutches of the money manipulators was probably the prime cause of the revolution."   -- Benjamin Franklin

Source 

 

- Advertisement -

Bankers are absolutely dedicated to their schemes for siphoning off a share of our income and wealth (which, parasites that they are, is their life's blood).   They know full well how easy it is to corrupt a nation's leaders to get what they want.   And so it was that just one year after Mayer Amschel Rothschild had uttered his infamous "Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who makes the laws," the bankers succeeded in setting up a new, privately-owned central bank called The First Bank of the United States, largely through the efforts of the Rothschild's chief US supporter, Alexander Hamilton.   Founded in 1791, by the end of its twenty-year charter The First Bank of the United States had almost ruined our nation's economy, while enriching its bankster owners in the process.   Congress therefore refused to renew their charter and signaled its intention to go back to a government-issued currency on which the people paid no interest at all to any banker.     This then resulted in a threat from Nathan Mayer Rothschild against the US government:   "Either the application for renewal of the charter will be granted, or the United States will find itself involved in a most disastrous war."   But Congress still refused to renew the charter for the First Bank of the United States, whereupon Nathan Rothschild railed, "Teach those impudent Americans a lesson!   Bring them back to colonial status!"   Then, financed by the Rothschild-controlled Bank of England, Britain launched the war of 1812.   The purpose was to either recolonize the United States and force it back into debt-slavery (to the Bank of England), or to plunge the United States into so much debt that Americans would then be forced to accept a new privately-owned central bank.  

Rothschild's plan worked.   Even though the War of 1812 was won by the United States, Congress was forced to grant a new charter for yet another privately-owned central bank, to once again issue the public currency in the form of loans at interest.   This new private bank was called The Second Bank of the United States.   So, once again, "private' bankers were in control of the nation's money supply and cared not who made the laws, as long as the necessary legislation could be purchased.   Nor did they care how many British and American soldiers had to die so that they could recapture the very lucrative arrangements whereby the gullible and unknowing citizens of the United States could be systematically and surreptitiously milked.

Once again, therefore, the nation was plunged into debt, unemployment, and poverty by the predations of a privately-owned central bank.   So it was that in 1832, Andrew Jackson successfully campaigned for his second term as President under the slogan, "Jackson And No Bank!"   (i.e. no privately-owned central bank.)   True to his word, Jackson succeeded in blocking the renewal of the charter for the Second Bank of the United States, addressing these early banksters as follows:

"Gentlemen! I too have been a close observer of the doings of the Bank of the United States.   I have had men watching you for a long time, and am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country.   When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank.   You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter I shall ruin ten thousand families.   That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin!   Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin!   You are a den of vipers and thieves.   I have determined to rout you out, and by the Eternal, (bringing his fist down on the table) I will rout you out!"

(This quote is taken from the original minutes of the Philadelphia committee of the citizens sent to meet with President Jackson (February 1834), and is quoted in the book, Andrew Jackson and the Bank of the United States (1928) by Stan V. Henkels)

- Advertisement -

Shortly after President Jackson (the only American President to actually pay off the national debt) ended the life of the predatory Second Bank of the United States, there was an attempted assassination, which failed when both pistols used by the would-be assassin, Richard Lawrence, failed to fire.   Lawrence later said that with Jackson dead, "Money would be more aplenty."

Challenging the corporate control of media, education and history

 

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6

 

- Advertisement -

Must Read 9   Valuable 5   Well Said 3  
View Ratings | Rate It

Several years after receiving my M.A. in social science (interdisciplinary studies) I was an instructor at S.F. State University for a year, but then went back to designing automated machinery, and then tech writing, in Silicon Valley. I've (more...)
 

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon


Go To Commenting

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Follow Me on Twitter

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Related Topic(s): ; ; , Add Tags
- Advertisement -

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Was Pat Tillman Murdered by an American Sharpshooter to Shut Him up?

New JFK assassination bombshells

Two U.S. presidents implicated by ex-CIA black-ops assassin

The cholesterol - heart disease scam: How the medical-industrial complex is raking in billions at our expense

Four Ticking Time Bombs That Will Soon Ignite a Revolution

The Ultimate Goal of the Bankster-led Political-economic Warfare Being Waged Against Us Is . . . ?