This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Seven Men, Nine Days, One New Monetary Cartel, Pt. 1
Many investors today, as they learn more about the nature of
the Federal Reserve, are asking themselves how the US, the supposed land of the
free, permit a non-Government-based cartel to take control of its monetary system?
Who controls the Fed? And just how did they attain this unbelievable power to
operate with the Government’s approval?
To answer all of these questions, we need to put on our
winter coats and step back in time to a New Jersey train platform on a cold
wintery night in November 1910…
At first glance, nothing around us would look unusual. The
train at the platform was comprised of your standard chair cars which would be
converted to sleepers at night. Poorer passengers took the cars closer to the
engine, while the more well off sat and slept in cars behind the dining car.
However, one thing was very unusual about this particular
train. And that something unusual was a single private train car located at the
end of the train.
Unlike the others cars whose interiors were dreary affairs
of metal and wood, this car’s interior was filled with rich mahogany, velvet,
and polished brass. And unlike the other cars which had regular train porters,
this car had private servants who were scurrying about stocking the bar and
cigar boxes. Finally, unlike the other railcars whose sides were marked with
numbers, this particular car had a single plague reading “Aldrich.”
As in Senator Nelson
Aldrich, Republican “whip,” investment associate of JP Morgan, and father in
law to John D Rockefeller, Jr.
Aldrich arrived at the train car first, decked out in the
finest clothes imaginable and accompanied by several porters carrying his
luggage. However, once he arrived, he was soon joined at his private car by six
guests.
Each guest arrived separately so as not to imply that they
knew each other. Indeed, two of them bumped into each other on the platform,
they feigned ignorance of each other’s identity. They only addressed one another
by first name both in public and in Aldrich’s private car. In fact, their
identities were kept so secret that even Aldrich’s servants didn’t know who the
six guests were.
Fortunately for us, G. Edward Griffin, author of The Creature From Jekyll Island has
painstakingly proved their identities. As he notes, they were:
1)
Nelson Aldrich, Senator of Rhode Island and Republican
“whip,” Chairman of the National Monetary Commission business associate of JP
Morgan and father-in-law to John D. Rockefeller, Jr.
2)
Abraham Andrew, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.
3)
Frank Vanderlip, President of National City Bank of New
York, the most powerful US bank at the time, representing William Rockefeller
and the international investment house of Kuhn, Loeb, & Co.
4)
Henry Davidson, Senior Partner at the JP Morgan
Company.
5)
Charles Norton, President of JP Morgan’s First National
Bank of New York.
6)
Benjamin Strong, head of JP Morgan’s Bankers Trust
Company.
7)
Paul Warburg, partner of Kuhn, Loeb, & Co, a
representative of the Rothschild banking dynasty in England and France, and
brother to Max Warburg who was head of the Warburg banking consortium in
Germany and the Netherlands.
Together, these six men, represented interests that
controlled one fourth of the world’s
entire wealth. That is not a typo. These individuals represented the
four most powerful groups in the Anglo-American banking
world. They were:
From the US From Europe
Rockefellers Rothschilds
Morgans Warburgs
The train took Aldrich’s private car to Georgia where it was
unfastened from the rest of the train. The men then boarded a ferry to Jekyll
Island: a private vacation resort recently purchased by JP Morgan and several
business associates. To maintain secrecy, the resort’s normal staff were put on
vacation and all new servants and porters were brought in.
During the next nine days, these seven men (still only using
their first names to avoid recognition) hatched out a plan to create the system
that would eventually become the Federal Reserve banking system.
The reason for their doing this was simple: competition.
The Nationals Vs. The
Non-Nationals
Before the creation of the Federal Reserve banking system,
the US’s banking system was divided into two types of banks: national banks and
non-national banks.
National banks received their charters from the Federal
Government and could issue their own notes, or money. These were the “old
money” vanguard of the banking system, the elite banks based in NY and backed
by the noble class families mentioned before.
In contrast, non-nationals were private banks that operated
without government charters. These were the “upstarts” of the US banking
industry, springing up mainly in the south and west.And the nationals were none
too pleased about their presence.
The upstarts were not only giving banking a bad name (the
industry suffered 1,748 bank failures from 1890 to 1910), but they were also
eating into the Old Vanguard’s profits: as early as 1896, non-national banks
controlled up to 54% of the US’s savings deposits.
A second, more pressing issue was also on the minds to the
Anglo-American banking giants as they journeyed to Jekyll Island: the US
monetary system was moving away from
debt usage to private capital.
Because there was no centralized system for determining
interest rates, banks set their own interest rates. This in turn, kept the
money supply relatively tight as there were strict limits on how many loans
banks could generate relative to their assets. Because of this, many
corporations were seeking funding privately or from operations (cash reserves).
G. Edward Griffin, in The
Creature From Jekyll Island, notes that from 1900 to 1910, some 70% of
corporate funding was generated internally, rather than taking out loans.
In other words, big business was moving away from dealing
with the banks. This was a huge issue for the Anglo-American banking giants as
I shall explain.
Let’s say that back in 1900, Joe America makes a deposit of
$100 in ABC bank, earning an interest rate of 1%. ABC then turns around and using
Joe’s $100 as reserves, lends out as much as $1,000 at an interest rate of 5%.
In essence the bank has just created $900 out of thin air.
However, by doing this the bank is now earning $50 in interest (5% on $1,000)
while paying out $1 to Joe (1% of $100) thus pocketing $49 in profits.
As you can imagine, this set-up was obscenely profitable for
the banks, which is why the Morgans, Rothschilds, et al were so concerned that
Corporate America was moving away from borrowing to fund growth.
Moreover, the fractured nature of the banking system (there
were no set rates or capital standards) meant that banks had a tendency to go
under. Consider that in the early 20th century, banks in general
often lent out ten times the amount of money they held in deposits, assuming it
unlikely that any large number of customers might decide to cash out at the
same time.
Even more insane, more reckless banks typically only had 3%
of deposits in actual cash on hand (the
rest was often tied up in short-term loans and investments).
This obviously put the bank in a very tenuous position.
Suppose Joe decides to withdraw his $100? Or what if Joe wrote a check for $50
to buy some groceries? Well, if the grocery store clerk used the same bank as
Joe, there was no problem because no physical cash had to actually leave its
vaults.
However, if the Grocer took the check to another bank and
cashed it, then $50 in actual physical cash would have to leave Joe’s bank and
be transferred to the other bank. Multiply this by a few hundred transactions
at a time when most banks only had 3% of reserves in physical cash and you
quickly realize why nearly 2,000 banks went under between 1890 and 1910.
I’ll continue to remainder of my analysis in the second
portion of this article.
Best Regards,
Graham Summers
PS. If you’re getting worried about the future of the stock
market and have yet to take steps to prepare for the Second Round of the
Financial Crisis… I highly suggest you download my FREE Special Report
specifying exactly how to prepare for what’s to come.
I call it The
Financial Crisis “Round Two” Survival Kit. And its 17 pages contain a
wealth of information about portfolio protection, which investments to own and
how to take out Catastrophe Insurance on the stock market (this “insurance”
paid out triple digit gains in the Autumn of 2008).
Again, this is all 100% FREE. To pick up your copy today, got
to http://www.gainspainscapital.com
and click on FREE REPORTS.
PPS. We ALSO publish a FREE Special Report on Inflation
detailing three investments that have all already SOARED as a result of the
Fed’s monetary policy.
You can access this Report at the link above.
- advertisements -
"..Progressive Movement enjoyed much success several years later, in the Year 1913, advancing elements of their particular agenda."
You've made some really highly tenuous statements there; akin to throwing a victim trapped in a cage with a ferocious lion a pound of steak. Not a particularly wise move.
During that same time, many strikes were met with mortal violence and death. The year 1913, was simply a response to a colossal number of strikes during the few years prior, resulting in 1912 that the number of hours women and children were forced to work in America were cut back to 54 hours per week, with males still working the same number of slave labor hours.
Also, don't forget that in 1913, the oil depletion allowance was passed, along with the aforementioned income tax (definitely not truly progressive, and quickly corrupted in 1914, 1915, and further, with changes to the original legislation).
Did the "progressives" or big government left really want a Federal Reserve system? If so, they were idiots.
Yes, they did. First of all, they were venal to begin with and could be bought off with promises, money, and petty power abuse privileges. Second, the lawmakers were manipulated and or paid to craft policies favorable to socialists, communists, and progressives (redundant, yes I know) so as to create a favorable environment. Third, anyone who posed a thread to their dishonorable scheme would be politically destroyed or worse.
Never forget our own brave and valorous patriot Sen. Louis Thomas McFadden who stood up to the Federal Tapeworm Reserve and paid with his life.
good additional info. thanks for posting.
The establishment GOPers had a very small 2012 presidential straw poll today with Ron Paul coming in 2nd to Mittens Romney (this appears to be one that the RP folks couldn't "crash"). Considering that the GOP establishment despises Ron Paul and wouldn't even let him speak at the last convention, I think the results are interesting and likely indicate that more and more people are getting educated on the Fed, and they're not liking it one bit.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/eye-on-2012/mitt-romney-tops-new-hampshire.html
Yeah. I read the straw poll results. My thought is that RP has his best opp for the GOP nomination this year- more than other years he has run. I will switch from independent to GOP in 2012 if he decides to run. 2012, even more than 2008, I believe, finds the American public frothing to put someone into office who might, just might, work outside the groove.
i doubt he runs, he is 75 now, i get the sense he is about ready to retire and start taking it easy. anyways, my theory is that as soon as a fiscal conservative takes office, which i am certain will happen in 2012, the Bernank will pull the brake lever on QE and the resulting train wreck will be laid at the feet of the politicians in office at the time. then they can say "its just another failure of the free market".
RP is sounding and looking less geared up these days so you could be right-on. I'm less enthusiastic with RP Jr. At some point QE must cease and desist and entry of the GOP back into the oval is as good an opp as any. The resulting train wreck? If one is far from the tracks will be intriguing to watch unfold.
Having been disgusted with both parties, I am a registered independent.
Given the prospect of Ron Paul running for prez, I am going to change my party affiliation to Republican so that I can vote for him in the primary.
He's the only ZHer we have in Washington.
me too. i contributed, campaigned, voted and convinced at least two other people to vote for obama. it is the political act i most regret in my life, though the choices were very poor.
As did I. But look at the alternative last time around. McSame and Missy Failin'? If I had it to do over I would have just written RP in and been done with it. I talked a tried and true GOP small town rancher friend into voting for O'B. I remember how on election day he made a point of stopping by to tell me he had decied to vote outside his usual party for the first time in his voting life. I've apologize to him a few times since then. But we both agree that by the time they get high enough to get elected they are just not worth having.
Fucked up on hopium, eh? Lousy come down I hear.
Back off a little. Don't tell me you were that thrilled with the GOP ticket in 2008. So we F-ed up. You never have? We might get something accomplished in 2012 if we stop the GOP vs Dem bullshit and accept we are all in this together.
SheHunter
Sorry about the arrogant sounding post. I meant it as a light hearted joke, using "Fucked up" as a metaphor for being stoned. As you say, we have all been in that "hopium" state and my reference to the come down was the feeling that one gets after the epiphany one has, that these clowns can't cave anyone. Sorry to be offensive. Will try to choose my words and structure my phrasing more carefully in the future.
Truce accepted. cheers,
SheHunter
How about a flash mob invade brian sacks office? Or at least surround his car and tell him he is a ninny. Anyone interested?
very interested, with bricks in hand. But i am on the wrong(west)coast.
It's not a conspiracy. Really. It's perfectly normal to have the most power banking cartel ever manage a ' free' nation's (now irredeemable paper) money. Anyone who questions or criticizes the arrangement is wearing a tin foil hat. Look how great things have worked out for us. We are guaranteed a war for as long as we want. We have 2 going strong (that we know of) and others in the pipeline. Everyone should just turn on American idol and relax and not even think about simple money issues because we aren't smart enough. They are doing God's work so we don't have to worry about it. Everything is going to turn out fine. Nobody I talk to is even the slightest bit concerned.
coincidentally, anyone who questions or criticizes the arrangement will also be immediately attacked by the ADL, the JDL, and the AIPAC as an anti-semetic and marginalized in the MSM.
Could not have said it better. May as well lend some sarcasm to the situation. Either that or many of us will become pissed to the point of armed and dangerous.
Yes, our betters have always had a comforting way of giving us peace and assuaging the barnacles of history. To wit: “Lenin is the modern version of George Washington.”
“In 1915, the American International Corporation was formed in New York. Its principal goal was the coordination of aid, particularly financial assistance, to the Bolsheviks which had previously been provided by [Jacob] Schiff and other bankers on an informal basis. The new firm was funded by J.P. Morgan, the Rockefellers, and the National City Bank. Chairman of the Board was Frank Vanderlip, former president of National City, and member of the Jekyll Island group which wrote the Federal Reserve Act in 1910; directors were Pierre DuPont, Otto Kahn of Kuhn, Loeb Co., George Herbert Walker, grandfather of President George H. Bush, William Woodward, director of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, etc., etc, etc…” – Eustace Mullins, The World Order: Our Secret Rulers
In 1917, Vanderlip publicly referred to Lenin as “the modern version of George Washington.”
These same men financed Woodrow Wilson’s political campaign; Wilson in dutiful repayment in 1913 signed the Federal Reserve Act into law.
And “none dare call it conspiracy.”
And that ugly, skanky, bag of porcine excrement who went by the name of Jacob Schiff was the one who covered Trotsky's expenses while he lived in New York. Trotsky was awaiting looted American tax money to bring back to Russia and destroy the whole empire so as to make it easier for the central bankers to do the only thing they know how to do--loot.
Blackie, good to see you posting again. ZH offers a much better and more widely read platform for your insights & comments.
+100
You should really turn /sarc off because some people here might think your serious. :)
Those people that are not concerned aren't because they are sheeple.
And Graham: Nice primer on fractional reserve banking.....zzzzzzzzzz.
Nice.
Not that it really matters since there might not be any anyway, but who controls the US gold reserves: the Fed or the treasury?
Excellent post, and an excellent additional (and short, only four pages total) read is an outstanding explanation of the present Global Banking Elite below:
http://csper.wordpress.com/2010/08/12/monopoly-money-and-the-international-banking-cartel/
http://csper.wordpress.com/2010/08/20/global-empire-and-the-international-banking-cartel-part-2/
(Took me many years to gain an understanding of what this super-bright fellow writes about in four pp.)
From research in forensic econ over the years, it is MHO that the five most powerful (first three the richest) families in North America today are:
(1) Rockefeller family
(2) Morgan family
(3) Du Pont family
(4) Koch family
(5) Peter G. Peterson family
(and the most vile as well)
Most powerful and influential top five groups (all international membership):
(1) Bretton Woods Committee (brettonwoods.org)
(2) Trilateral Commission
(3) Group of 30
(4) Peterson Institute
(5) Council on Foreign Affairs
That's all one really needs to understand today and thanks again for this excellent blog posting.
I respectfully disagree regarding the Crown of Iniquity -- that goes to the Rothschilds. No matter how vile the Petersons are they are only a distand second to the most disgusting family ever to crawl the face of the earth. They are the vermin behind every war, genocide, massacre, and revolution since 1789. Indeed, it was they who demanded of the King of England a war against America in 1812. And why? Because our Congress at that time refused to renew the charter for the Rothschild central bank. And yes, there really was a time when Congress believed in that thing about "all enemies foreign and domestic." So Nathan Rothschild said, "Teach those impudent Americans a lesson. Bring them back to colonial status."
The nerve of that tub. Check out his picture when you have the chance.
Anyway, since he controlled the Bank of England he had his way, and after who knows how many American, British, and probably Hessian deaths, the filthy parasitic central bankers got their 20-year charter, whereupon it started again.
So I do not defend any of the others, they are all of the same smarmy ilk. But the depravity prize goes to the Roths.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zw3i5Rzpx5A&feature=related
Renaissance 2.0: Lesson 6 (part 1 of 3) - Brightening the Future
This is a nice read as a follow-on to the information provided above:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north932.html
from the link..
"This is the same old Punch and Judy show that monetarists and Keynesians have been playing ever since 1936. The monetarists condemn the national government for its spending, but only after the government has bailed out the big banks and large corporations that were threatened with bankruptcy during the recession that was caused by the central bank's prior monetary inflation. The Keynesians remain silent during the boom phase, never calling on the central bank to stabilize money. Then they complain during the recession that the central bank is being too tight with the monetary base. The result of this Punch and Judy show is the astronomical increase in both the monetary base and debt. Neither side ever convinces the other to put on the brakes and stop both the expansion of money and the increase in debt. Only the Austrians do recommend this, in boom times and busts. They are represented only by Ron Paul. And we know what Fisher thinks of Ron Paul.
Here is a rule governing the legitimate use of rhetoric. You use clever language and images to call attention to the facts. You are not supposed to lie about the facts in order to mislead your audience. For example, you are allowed to identify your target as an intellectual weasel, but always with the facts to back it up. Your audience will remember "intellectual weasel," but that is legitimate when your target really is one.
Why did Bernanke go along with Paulson and buy all that Fannie/Freddie debt? Because he is a Keynesian, but a Keynesian who is a believer in Friedman's monetarism. He is therefore a follower of Irving Fisher's 1930s theory of credit deflation – not the contraction of fractional reserve banking – as the cause of the Great Depression. "
for informational purposes: the so called rockefellers are masquerading under this pseudonym. turns out they are of german jewish descent.
roggenfelder google search renders this:
http://www.google.com/search?q=roggenfelder&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=o...
helps sometime to know who is who in the zoo. since the elder roggenfelder was a shady peddler selling natural occuring "rock oil" off the back of a wagon as the end all be all cure, the name rock oil feller was stuck on him.
its shocking that all americans dont realize the entire financial system of the US is controlled by one religion that 95% of the citizens are not members of.
Until the blinders are removed and the system is by and for the people, we will be forced into the rediculous destabilization efforts of the tribe of finance gangsters