A little more than a century ago, philosopher George Santayana warned, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." We ought to take note of that wisdom more often because the past is the mother of today and the grandmother of tomorrow.
In the American Revolution, we had won the recall of British troops from American soil but not the bankers. Even though we are taught that we won our independence from England, we actually were able to remain free from the international bankers for only a few years at the close of the presidency of Andrew Jackson. The most visible part of the power structure was the East India Company owned by the bankers and the Crown in London, England. This was an entirely private enterprise whose flag was adopted by Queen Elizabeth in 1600-thirteen red and white horizontal stripes with a blue rectangle in its upper left-hand corner. We've added some stars, but otherwise we fly the same flag.
Even though the Treaty of Paris ended the Revolutionary War in 1783, the simple fact of our existence threatened the Money Powers where it hurts most: financially. The United States stood as a heroic role model for other nations, which inspired them to also struggle against oppressive Money Powers. The French Revolution (1789-1799) and the Polish uprising (1794) were, in part, encouraged by the American Revolution. Though we stood like a beacon of hope for most of the world, the Money Powers regarded the United States as a political infection, the principle source of radical democracy that was destroying the control by Money Powers around the world. The Money Powers realized that if the principle source of that infection could be destroyed, the rest of the world might avoid the contagion and the control by the Money Powers would be saved.
Knowing they couldn't destroy us militarily, they resorted to covert methods of political and financial subversion, employing spies and secret agents skilled in bribery and legal deception; it was perhaps the first "cold war." In the 1794 Jay Treaty, the United States agreed to pay £600,000 sterling to King George III, as reparations for the American Revolution. The US Senate ratified the treaty in secret session and ordered that it not be published.
When Benjamin Franklin's grandson published it anyway (perhaps our first whistleblower), the exposure and resulting public uproar so angered the Congress that it passed the Alien and Sedition Acts (1798) so federal judges could prosecute editors and publishers for reporting the truth about the government. Since we supposedly had won the Revolutionary War, why would our Senators agree to pay reparations to the loser? And why would they agree to pay £600,000 sterling, eleven years after the war ended? It doesn't make sense, especially in light of the Senate's secrecy and later fury over being exposed... unless we assume our Senators had been bribed to serve Money Powers and betray the American people! That's treason! It's treason today.
From the beginning, the United States Bank had been opposed by the Democratic-Republicans lead by Thomas Jefferson, but the Federalists (the pro-Money Power Tories) won the vote. The initial capitalization was $10,000,000 -- 80% of which would be owned by foreign bankers. Since the bank was authorized to lend up to $20,000,000 (double its paid capital), it was a profitable deal for both government and the bankers, because they could lend, and collect interest on $10,000,000 that didn't exist.
However, the European bankers outfoxed the US government, and by 1796, the US government owed the bank $6,200,000 and was forced to sell most of its shares. By 1802, our government owned no stock in the United States Bank!
Thomas Jefferson warned:
If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks...will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.... The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.Chief among the international financiers was Amschel Bauer of Frankfurt, Germany who, in 1748 opened a goldsmith shop under the name of Red Shield. ("Rothschild" in German is pronounced Rote-shilld). In 1787, Amschel (Bauer) Rothschild is reported to have said, "Let me issue and control a Nation's money, and I care not who writes the laws." He had five Sons Amschel Mayer, Solomon, Jacob, Nathan, and Carl. In 1798, the five Rothschild brothers opened banks in Germany, Vienna, Paris, London, and Naples.
The objective of the United States Bank was to receive special privilege to use the unjust fractional reserve banking to print money and loan it to the government and industry. No money could go into circulation without interest being paid to the bankers. Fractional reserve banking is very simple. It is simply a special privilege given to a man or group of men to create credit out of nothing; by extending this credit/debt to everyone else in society who does not have the same privilege and then collecting from society the money plus interest they become very rich without having to produce anything of value.
The basic mathematics behind this system is very clear. If this system is left in place long enough, the man or group who controls this system of debt creation will own all the gold available in the nation. Once the supply of real money (gold)is in his or their hands, this man or group of men becomes the master of the entire nation. Why? Because this man or group of men controls the only source of operating medium (money) available through which the nation functions. Only the man who has the privilege of printing the money and loaning it at interest can determine who gets special funding-his friends and allies. Everyone else is limited to how much money they have access to; therefore, after two or three generations, the friends and allies of this "banker" will own all of the nation-just as America is now owned by a very small cadre of very wealthy men, most of them not American.
How long this process takes to work its way through the wealth of the nation depends upon how successful the "banker" is in forcing, through bribery and corruption, the restriction of the formal government's issuance of real money backed by gold or silver. As the supply of real money shrinks, the people of the nation are forced to rely on the creation of a fictitious debt by the privileged few to a greater and greater extent, until finally, the only thing left is a massive amount of "unpayable debt," created from nothing and consisting only of the interest charged upon the fictitious debt, and collecting interest for every moment of its existence...all for the benefit of the privileged, who become the de facto (illegally usurped) government because of the "money power" they wield.
Through the Bank of England, the Rothschilds demanded a private bank in the United States to hold the securities of the United States as the pledged assets to the Crown of England in order to secure the debt to which our government had defaulted. As one of his first acts, President Washington declared a financial emergency. William Morris with the help of Alexander Hamilton, Secretary of Treasury, heavily promoted the creation of a private bank to service the debt to the international bankers. In 1791, Congress chartered the first national bank for a term of 20 years, to hold the securities of the same European bankers who had been holding the debts before the war. The bankers loaned worthless, un-backed, non-secured printed money to each other to charter this first bank. In December 12, 1791, the Bank of the United States opened its doors in Philadelphia. The holder of the securities was the private bank. So under public international law, the creditor banks forced the United States to establish a private bank to hold the securities as the collateral for the national debt.
James Madison warned:
"History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and its issuance."After what has occurred in the first week of October 2008 isn't it clear that we haven't learned from our past? Too busy making a living, too busy being hockey moms or soccer dads, too busy with anything else than staying free. You could say that we've taken our eye off the ball and whiffed on that high fast ball that the Tories in the Senate threw us. We have to refocus on taking back our power.
You can't have something for nothing,
you can't have your freedom for free.
You won't get wise with the sleep still in your eyes,
no matter what your dreams might be. - Rush