Real American History
You Were Never Taught
In School
We need moral and strong men like Andrew Jackson and Thomas Jefferson who opposed Rothschild financial tyranny under the disguise of a national central bank
The very idea of a central bank run by
professional bankers has been a contentious issue since the founding of
the United States.The arguments for and against a central bank can be
seen in the debates of Founding Fathers Thomas Jefferson and Alexander
Hamilton. Hamilton believed in strong central government and a central
bankoverseen by a wealthy elite. “No society could Succeed which did not
unite the interest and credit of rich individuals with those of the
state,” he wrote. Supporters of Hamilton’s elitist ideals formed
America’s first political party, the Federalists. Hamilton, once
descrihed as a “tool of the international bankers,” argued that “a
national debt, if it is not excessive, will be to us a national
blessing.”
The Bank of North America was created in
1781, even before the draft- ing of the Constitution, by Continental
Congressman Robert Morris, who tried to craft it into a central bank
copying the Bank of England. It lasted just three years before being
discontinued due to rampant fraud and the inflation caused by the
creation of baseless “fiat” currency.
Hamilton, a former aide to Morris, became secretary of the Treasury
and in 1791 headed the next attempt at a central bank by establishing
the First Bank of the United States, a move strongly opposed by
Jefferson and his followers.
Jefferson knew from European history
that a central bank could quickly become the master of a nation. He
pointed to the British experience and noted that “The other nations of
Europe have tried and trodden every path of force or folly in fruitless
quest of the same object, yet we still expect to find in juggling tricks
and banking dreams, where money can be made out of nothing. …” “I
sincerely believe . . . that banking establishments are more dangerous
than standing armies; and that the principle of spending money to be
paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity
on a large scale,” he wrote to John Taylor in 1816, adding, “Already
they have raised up a money aristocracy. . .. The issuing power should
be taken from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly
belongs.” Jefferson further believed a central bank to be
unconstitutional. “
I consider the foundation of the Constitution as laid on this ground: That ‘all
powers not delegated to the United States, by the Constitution, nor pro-
hibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States or to the people.’ To
take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specially drawn around the
powers of Congress, is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no
longer susceptible of any definition. The incorporation of a bank, and the
powers assumed by this bill, have not, in my opinion, been delegated to
the United States, by the Constitution.”
powers not delegated to the United States, by the Constitution, nor pro-
hibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States or to the people.’ To
take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specially drawn around the
powers of Congress, is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no
longer susceptible of any definition. The incorporation of a bank, and the
powers assumed by this bill, have not, in my opinion, been delegated to
the United States, by the Constitution.”
Ironically, Jefferson’s supporters,
considered liberal in their time, formed what was to become the
Republican Party. Jefferson was not alone among the Founding Fathers to
express distaste over the profit of banking. “Our whole banking system I
ever abhorred, I continue to Abhor, and I shall die abhorring. . . .”
wrote John Adams in 1811. “Every bank of discount, every bank by which
interest is to be paid or profit of any kind made by the [lender], is
downright corruption. It is taxation for the public for the benefit and
profit of individuals.. ..” The First Bank of the United States also was
closely modeled after the Bank of England and created a partnership
between the government and banking interests. Twenty percent of the
bank’s capital was obtained through the federal government with the
remaining 80 percent pledged by private investors, including foreigners
such as the Rothschilds. “The law records show that they [the
Rothschilds] were the power in the old Bank of the United States,” wrote
author Gustavus Myers. It is clear that con- spiring European bankers
and their New World associates were trying to gain control over
America’s money supply.
This bank also caused inflation by the creation of fractional-reserve
notes. Money merchants prospered but the average citizen suffered. In
1811, when the bank’s twenty-year charter came up for renewal, it was
defeated by one vote in both the Senate and the House.
notes. Money merchants prospered but the average citizen suffered. In
1811, when the bank’s twenty-year charter came up for renewal, it was
defeated by one vote in both the Senate and the House.
But the costs of the War of 1812, along
with chaotic financial conditions, prompted Congress to issue a
twenty-year charter to the Second Bank of the United States in 1816.
This central bank ended in 1836, after President Andrew Jackson in 1832
vetoed a congressional bill to extend its charter, precipitating what
became known as the Bank War. Jackson, the first president from west of
the Appalachian Mountains and the hero of the Battle of New Orleans,
denounced the central bank as unconstitutional as well as “a curse to a
republic; inasmuch as it is calculated to raise around the
administration a moneyed aristocracy dangerous to the liberties of the
country.”
Lawrence’s pistols misfired, and the unharmed but infuriated Jackson
withdrew government funds from the “den of vipers” and Second Bank
president Nicholas Biddle retaliated by curtailing credit nationally, caus-
ing widespread economic panic. According to author Eustace Mullins,
Biddle was an agent of Jacob Rothschild in Paris
withdrew government funds from the “den of vipers” and Second Bank
president Nicholas Biddle retaliated by curtailing credit nationally, caus-
ing widespread economic panic. According to author Eustace Mullins,
Biddle was an agent of Jacob Rothschild in Paris
Next, Jackson was censured by Biddle’s friends in the Senate by a vote
of 26-20 for failure to obtain Congressional authorization to withdraw
the funds. The political motivation behind this action was confirmed in
1837, when the Senate annulled Jackson’s censure by a 24-19 vote. Bid-
die disappeared from the scene, and by the end of his two terms “Old
Hickory” had managed to totally eliminate the national debt. Jackson saw Biddle’s maneuverings as a bald-faced attempt to black-mail the government into renewing the bank’s charter.
of 26-20 for failure to obtain Congressional authorization to withdraw
the funds. The political motivation behind this action was confirmed in
1837, when the Senate annulled Jackson’s censure by a 24-19 vote. Bid-
die disappeared from the scene, and by the end of his two terms “Old
Hickory” had managed to totally eliminate the national debt. Jackson saw Biddle’s maneuverings as a bald-faced attempt to black-mail the government into renewing the bank’s charter.
He warned, “The bold effort the present
bank had made to control the Government, the distress it had wantonly
produced … are but premonitions of the fate that awaits the American
people should they be deluded into a perpetu- ation of this institution,
or the establishment of another like it.”
Source – Rule by Secrecy (BOOK-PDF) Written by Jim Marrs –
Pages 67-71
No comments:
Post a Comment