“For money, some men will allow the innocent to hang. They will turn traitor… they will lie, cheat, steal and they will kill. They appear brilliant, charming and generous! But they are deadly! Such are men as Dimitrios.”

Americans, living in what is called the richest nation on earth, seem always to be short of money. Wives are working in unprecedented numbers, husbands hope for overtime hours to earn more, or take part-time jobs evenings and weekends, children look for odd jobs for spending money, the family debt climbs higher, and psychologists say one of the biggest causes of family quarrels and breakups is “arguments over money.” Much of this trouble can be traced to our present “debt-money” system.

Too few Americans realize why Christian Statesmen wrote into Article I of the U.S. Constitution: Congress shall have the Power to Coin Money and Regulate the Value Thereof…

They did this in prayerful hope it would prevent “love of money” from destroying the Republic they had founded. Among other things in this series – we shall see how subversion of Article I has brought on us the “evil” of which God’s Word had warned.

What follows, became the final manuscript for a live broadcast series, ‘Mask of Dimitrios,’ which originally aired on short-wave radio in 2004, wherein we described the aftermath of the establishment of the Federal Reserve Bank. In the fall of 2010, we posted the series over eight consecutive weekends on a now defunct site for the purposes of research, education and consideration. Some of what you’ll discover, are from the writings of one Henry Ford – yes – THAT Henry Ford, as told through a series of “Editorials“, originally posted in a now little remembered publication (owned by Ford), in addition to the testimony given before the U.S. Senate, by the individual, who would become (rubber-stamped is more like it) the Federal Reserves’ first ‘Alan Greenspan’ – one Paul Warburg. Additional reference material was drawn upon to develop the original audio presentation.

Where does the responsibility of this debacle originate? Who were the perpetrators of this massive “check-kiting” scheme, which has brought America to it’s knees? In this series, ‘Mask of Dimitrios‘, we hope to bring the truth to the surface. ~ Jeffrey Bennett, Publisher

WARNING: The following publication is based on years of historical study, conducted by a number of reliable sources – AND from records of the United States Senate. Contained within are numerous references to ‘Jews’ – however this is not meant to attack or be considered as Anti-Semitic. Truth and history is what it is, and nothing can be done to change this. ~ J.B.

‘Mask of Dimitrios’

Chapter I ~ ‘Prelude to a Game’

How the People Lost Control of the Federal Reserve

“If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them (around the banks), will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.” ~ Thomas Jefferson

Instead of the Constitutional method of creating our money and putting it into circulation, we now have an entirely unconstitutional system. This has resulted in almost disastrous conditions, as we shall see.

Since our money was handled both legally and illegally before 1913, this series of programs will primarily consider only the years following 1913, since from that year on, ALL of our money has been created and issued by an illegal method that will eventually destroy the United States. Prior to 1913, America was a prosperous, powerful, and growing nation, at peace with its neighbors and the envy of the world. But – in December of 1913, Congress, with many members away for the Christmas holidays, passed what has since been known as the FEDERAL RESERVE ACT. Omitting the burdensome details, it simply authorized the establishment of a Federal Reserve Corporation, with a Board of Directors (The Federal Reserve Board) to run it, and the United States was divided into 12 Federal Reserve “Districts.”

This simple, but terrible, law completely removed from Congress the right to “create” money or to have any control over its “creation,” and gave that function to the Federal Reserve Corporation. This was done with appropriate fanfare and propaganda that this would “remove money from politics” (they didn’t say “and therefore from the people’s control”) and prevent “Boom and Bust” from hurting our citizens. The people were not told then, and most still do not know today, that the Federal Reserve Corporation is a private corporation controlled by bankers and therefore is operated for the financial gain of the bankers over the people rather than for the good of the people. The word “Federal” was used only to deceive the people.

More Disastrous Than Pearl Harbor
Since that “day of infamy” – more disastrous to us than Pearl Harbor – the small group of “privileged” people who lend us “our” money have accrued to themselves all of the profits of printing our money – and more! Since 1913 they have “created” tens of billions of dollars in money and credit, which, as their own personal property, they then lend to our government and our people at interest. “The rich get richer and the poor get poorer” had become the secret policy of our National Government.

Money is Man’s Only “Creation”
Economists use the term “create” when speaking of the process by which money comes into existence. Now, creation means making something that did not exist before.

Lumbermen make boards from trees, workers build houses from lumber, and factories manufacture automobiles from metal, glass and other materials. But in all these they did not “create,” they only changed existing materials into a more usable and, therefore, more valuable form. This is not so with money. Here, and here alone, man actually “creates” something out of nothing. A piece of paper of little value is printed so that it is worth a piece of lumber. With different figures it can buy the automobile or even the house. Its value has been “created” in the true meaning of the word.

Money “Creating” Profitable
First of all, money is very cheap to make, and whoever does the “creating” of money in a nation can make a tremendous profit! Builders work hard to make a profit of 5% above their cost to build a house.

Auto makers sell their cars for 1% to 2% above the cost of manufacture and it is considered good business. But money “manufacturers” have no limit on their profits, since a few cents will print a $1 bill or a $10,000 bill.

That profit is part of our story, but first let us consider another unique characteristic of the thing – money, the love of which is the “root of all evil” and the men who brought us the evil Federal Reserve system.

Adequate Money Supply Needed
An adequate supply of money is indispensable to civilized society. We could forego many other things, but without money industry would grind to a halt, farms would become only self-sustaining units, surplus food would disappear, jobs requiring the work of more than one man or one family would remain undone, shipping and large movements of goods would cease, hungry people would plunder and kill to remain alive, and all government except family or tribe would cease to function.

An overstatement, you say? Not at all. Money is the blood of civilized society, the means of all commercial trade except simple barter. It is the measure and the instrument by which one product is sold and another purchased. Remove money or even reduce the supply below that which is necessary to carry on current levels of trade, and the results are catastrophic. For an example, we need only look at America’s Depression of the early 1930’s.

The Bankers Depression of the 1930’s
In 1930 America did not lack industrial capacity, fertile farmland, skilled and willing workers or industrious farm families. It had an extensive and highly efficient transportation system in railroads, road networks, and inland and ocean waterways. Communications between regions and localities were the best in the world, utilizing telephone, teletype, radio, and a well-operated government mail system. No war had ravaged the cities or the countryside, no pestilence weakened the population, nor had famine stalked the land. The United States of America in 1930 lacked only one thing: an adequate supply of money to carry on trade and commerce.

In the early 1930’s, Bankers, the only source of new money and credit, deliberately refused loans to industries, stores and farms. Payments on existing loans were required however, and money rapidly disappeared from circulation. Goods were available to be purchased, jobs waiting to be done, but the lack of money brought the nation to a standstill. By this simple ploy America was put in a “depression” and the greedy Bankers took possession of hundreds of thousands of farms, homes, and business properties. The people were told, “times are hard,” and “money is short.” Not understanding the system, they were cruelly robbed of their earnings, their savings, and their property.

Money for Peace? No! Money for War? Yes!
World War II ended the “depression.” The same Bankers who in the early 30’s had no loans for peacetime houses, food and clothing, suddenly had unlimited billions to lend for Army barracks, K-rations and uniforms! A nation that in 1934 couldn’t produce food for sale, suddenly could produce bombs to send free to Germany and Japan!

With the sudden increase in money, people were hired, farms sold their produce, factories went to two shifts, mines re-opened, and “The Great Depression” was over!

Some politicians were blamed for it and others took credit for ending it. The truth is the lack of money (caused by the Bankers) brought on the depression, and adequate money ended it. The people were never told that simple truth and in this article we will endeavor to show how these same Bankers who control our money and credit have used their control to plunder America and place us in bondage.

They Print It – We Borrow It and Pay Them Interest
We shall start with the need for money. The Federal Government, having spent more than it has taken from its citizens in taxes, needs, for the sake of illustration, $1,000,000,000. Since it does not have the money, and Congress has given away its authority to “create” it, the Government must go to the “creators” for the $1 billion. But, the Federal Reserve, a private corporation, doesn’t just give its money away! The Bankers are willing to deliver $1,000,000,000 in money or credit to the Federal Government in exchange for the Government’s agreement to pay it back – with interest! So Congress authorizes the Treasury Department to print $1,000,000,000 in U.S. Bonds, which are then delivered to the Federal Reserve Bankers.

The Federal Reserve then pays the cost of printing the $1,000,000,000 (about $1,000) and makes the exchange. The Government then uses the money to pay its obligations. What are the results of this fantastic transaction? Well, $1 billion in Government bills are paid all right, but the Government has now indebted the people to the Bankers for $1 billion on which the people must pay interest! Tens of thousands of such transactions have taken place since 1913 so that by the 1980’s, the U.S. Government was indebted to the Bankers for over one-trillion dollars on which the people paid over $100 billion a year in interest alone with no hope of ever paying off the principal and over twenty years later the debt has grown by nearly seven-times that of the 1980’s. Supposedly our children and following generations will pay forever and forever!

And There’s More…
You say, “This is terrible!” Yes, it is, but we have shown only part of the sordid story. Under this unholy system, those United States Bonds have now become “assets” of the Banks in the Reserve System which they then use as “reserves” to “create” more “credit” to lend. Current “reserve” requirements allow them to use that $1 billion in bonds to “create” as much as $15 billion in new “credit” to lend to States, Municipalities, to individuals and businesses. Added to the original $1 billion, they could have $16 billion of “created credit” out in loans paying them interest with their only cost being $1,000 for printing the origina1 $1 billion! Since the U.S. Congress has not issued Constitutional money since 1863 (over 150 years), in order for the people to have money to carry on trade and commerce they are forced to borrow the “created credit” of the Monopoly Bankers and pay them usury-interest!

And There’s Still More…
In addition to the vast wealth drawn to them through this almost unlimited usury, the Bankers who control the money at the top are able to approve or disapprove large loans to large and successful corporations to the extent that refusal of a loan will bring about a reduction in the price that that Corporation’s stock sells for on the market. After depressing the price, the Bankers’ agents buy large blocks of the stock, after which the sometimes multi-million dollar loan is approved, the stock rises, and is then sold for a profit. In this manner billions of dollars are made with which to buy more stock. This practice is so refined today that the Federal Reserve Board need only announce to the newspapers an increase or decrease in their “re-discount rate” to send stocks up and down as they wish.

Using this method since 1913, the Bankers and their agents have purchased secret or open control of almost every large corporation in America. Using that control, they then force the corporations to borrow huge sums from their banks so that corporation earnings are siphoned off in the form of interest to the banks.

This leaves little as actual “profits” which can be paid as dividends and explains why stock prices are so depressed, while the banks reap billions in interest from corporate loans. In effect, the bankers get almost all of the profits, while individual stock holders are left holding the bag.

The millions of working families of America are now indebted to the few thousand Banking Families for twice the assessed value of the entire United States. And these Banking Families obtained that debt against us for the cost of paper, ink, and bookkeeping!

The Interest Amount is Never Created
The only way new money (which is not true money, but is “credit” representing a debt), goes into circulation in America is when it is borrowed from Bankers. When the State and people borrow large sums, we seem to prosper. However, the Bankers “create” only the amount of the principal of each loan, never the extra amount needed to pay the interest. Therefore, the new money never equals the new debt added. The amounts needed to pay the interest on loans is not “created,” and therefore does not exist!

Under this kind of a system, where new debt always exceeds the new money no matter how much or how little is borrowed, the total debt increasingly outstrips the amount of money available to pay the debt. The people can never, ever get out of debt!

• In 1910 the U.S. Federal debt was only $1 billion, or $12.40 per citizen. State and local debts were practically non-existent.

• By 1920, after only 6 years of Federal Reserve shenanigans, the Federal debt had jumped to $24 billion, or $228 per person.

• In 1960 the Federal debt reached $284 billion, or $1,575 per citizen and State and local debts were mushrooming.

• By 1981 the Federal debt passed $1 trillion and was growing exponentially as the Banker’s tripled the interest rates. State and local debts are now MORE than the Federal, and with business and personal debts totaled over $6 trillion, 3 times the value of all land and buildings in America.

• During the administration of George W. Bush, the Federal debt surpassed the $7 trillion dollar level – about $25,000 per citizen.

• In the first 18 months of the Barack Obama administration, it has been said, that more debt was created than by all previous administrations combined – going all the way back to the Presidency of George Washington.

If we signed over to the money-lenders all of America we would still owe them 14 more Americas (plus their usury, of course!) NOTE: This figure is no longer valid, as it is much higher. (07.18.18)

However, they are too cunning to take title to everything. They will instead leave you with some “illusion of ownership” so you and your children will continue to work and pay the Bankers more of your earnings in ever-increasing debts. The “establishment” has captured our people with their ungodly system of usury and debt as certainly as if they had marched in with a uniformed army.

Where does the responsibility of this debacle originate? Who were the perpetrators of this massive “check-kiting” scheme, which has brought America to it’s knees? In this series, Mask of Dimitrios, we hope to bring the truth to the surface.

Jewish Ideas in America Monetary Affair

“When I came here I was at once impressed by the lack of system, by the old-fashioned nature of the system that prevailed here; and I got immediately into one of those periods of high interest rates, where call money went up to 25 and 100 percent; and I wrote an article on the subject then and there for my own benefit. ~ Paul Warburg

It has been said that Jewish bankers exercise their large measure of control because they are abler than the other bankers.

The great Jewish banking houses of the United States are foreign importations, as perhaps everyone knows. Most of them were at one time, sufficiently recent to be considered in their immigrant status, while the thought of them as aliens was and still are stimulated by their retention of oversea connections. It is this international quality of the Jewish banking group which has largely accounted for Jewish financial power: there has remained team-play, intimate understandings, and while there remains a margin of competition among themselves (as at golf) there is also a wiping out of that margin when it comes to a contest between Jewish and “Gentile” capital.

Four conspicuous contemporary names in Jewish-American finance are Belmont, Schiff, Warburg and Kahn. Each of them, are of foreign origin.

August Belmont was the earliest and arrived in America in 1837 as the American representative of the Rothschilds in whose offices he had been raised. His birthplace was that great center of Jewish international finance, Frankfort-on-the-Main. He became the founder of the Belmont family in America, which has largely forgotten its Jewish origin. Politics was a part of his concern in this country, and during the critical time from 1860 to 1872 he was chairman of the National Democratic Committee. His management of the Rothschild interests was exceedingly profitable to that house, although the operations in which he engaged were quite simple compared with the operations of the present day.

Jacob H. Schiff was another Jewish financier who was given to the world by Frankfort-on-the-Main. He entered the United States in 1865, after having passed his apprenticeship in the office of his father, who was also an agent of the Rothschilds. The name Schiff runs a long way back without change, unlike the name of Rothschild. Originally named Bauer, this family of financiers took a new name from the red shield which adorned their house in the Jewish section of Frankfort and thus became “Rot-schild.” Commonly the last syllable is pronounced as if it were “child”; it is “schild” – ‘shield‘. An epoch-making family in itself, it has trained hundreds of agents and apprentices, of whom Jacob Schiff was one. He became one of the principal channels through which German-Jewish capital flowed into American undertakings, and his agency in these matters gave him a place in many important departments of American business, especially railroads, banks, insurance companies and telegraph companies. He married Theresa Loeb, and in due time came to be head of the firm of Kuhn, Loeb & Company.

Mr. Schiff, as well, was interested in politics with a Jewish angle, and was perhaps the moving force in the campaign which forced Congress and the President to break off treaty relations with Russia, then a friendly nation, on a strictly Jewish question which had been skillfully given an American aspect. Mr. Schiff was of inestimable assistance to Japan in the war against Russia, but is understood to have been disappointed by Japan’s shrewdness in preventing too high a return being made for that assistance.

Associated with Mr. Schiff in Kuhn, Loeb & Company is Otto Herman Kahn, who is probably more international than were either of the two gentlemen mentioned above and is more constantly engaged in dabbling in mysterious matters of an international nature. This characteristic may be accounted for, however, by his experience of many countries. He was born in Germany and is also a product of the Frankfort-on-the-Main school of finance, having had connection with the Frankfort Jewish house of Speyer.

Of just how many countries Mr. Kahn has been a citizen is a question not easy to determine because of the doubt that was once cast upon his American citizenship by a protest against his being permitted to cast his vote last year and by his failure – the announced cause being physical indisposition – to cast his vote. If Mr. Kahn was a citizen of the United States (a status that would be readily proclaimed upon proof that he was), that probably increases the number of his citizenships to three. He was a German citizen by birth, and served in the German Army. In 1914, in August, at the time of the outbreak of the European War, when efforts were being made, which afterwards succeeded, to put Paul M. Warburg, a member of the firm of Kuhn, Loeb & Company, on the Federal Reserve Board, Mr. Warburg testified that at that time Mr. Kahn was not a citizen of the United States.

Senator Bristow – “How many of these partners are American citizens, or are they all American citizens . . . .”

Mr. Warburg – “They are all American citizens except Mr. Kahn.” – (p. 7, Senate Hearings, August 1, 1914.)

Senator Bristow – “Now, the members of your firm, are they all American citizens except Mr. Kahn?”

Mr. Warburg – “Except Mr. Kahn, yes.”

Senator Bristow – “Was Mr. Kahn ever an American Citizen?”

Mr. Warburg – “No.”

Senator Bristow – “He never was?”

Mr. Warburg – “No; he is a British subject.”

The Chairman – “He lives in England, does he not?”

Mr. Warburg – “No. At one time he thought he would move to Europe, and that was when the question arose of his standing for Parliament; then he changed his mind and moved back to the United States.”

Senator Bristow – “He was at one time a candidate, or a prospective candidate for Parliament, was he not?”

Mr. Warburg – “No; he was not; but there was talk about it; it had been suggested, and he had it in his mind. Something had been written about it in the papers.” – (p. 76, Senate Hearings, August 3, 1914.)

So, that if Mr. Kahn was a citizen of the United States at that time, which as a matter of fact had been disputed, then he had been a citizen of three countries, Germany and Great Britain being the other two.

Mr. Kahn, by the way, was one of those Jews whose adoption of another form of faith brought no denunciation whatever from the Jews themselves. A most peculiar circumstance! But doubtless not inexplicable. Mr. Kahn was not called a “renegade Jew” nor any of the other nasty names heaped upon Jewish converts to Christianity, because he did not deserve them. They did not fit him. He was not renegade. And he never was regarded for a moment by Jacob H. Schiff as anything but a Jew, else that “Prince of Israel” would not have chosen him to remain in America and run the business of Kuhn, Loeb & Company, at a time when it seemed undesirable to put the junior Schiff in full charge of it.

Doubtless it was Mr. Kahn’s desire, just at the time Jacob Schiff made his wishes known, to go to England and stand for Parliament.

But from New York he fulfills, probably as well as he could from London, those mysterious missions which frequently take him to the Continent, at which times he makes what are regarded as certain authoritative decisions, though just whose decisions it is not always possible to say. In Paris particularly, and at points east thereof, Mr. Kahn has been established in the position of spokesman of the American Financial Hierarchy, which, of course, he is not. But he undoubtedly is the spokesmen of some group, possibly the group that so ably put through the Jewish program at the Peace Conference, the group that impressed Eastern Europe with the feeling that the United States of America was a very powerful Semitic empire. Mr. Kahn’s trips abroad are usually unheralded, but their results richly repay observation.

A fourth member of the Jewish financial group in America (which is the form of statement which Mr. Chaim Weizmann would sanction, rather than to say “Jewish-American financiers“) was Mr. Paul Warburg, to whose testimony we have just alluded.

Mr. Warburg was the most recent of all. He was born in Germany in 1868; he came to the United States in 1902; he became an American citizen in 1911. He came to the United States for the express purpose of reforming our financial system, and it is hardly possible to understand fully the system in operation today without reference to Paul Warburg. He was a man of very fine mind, a money-maker, but something more – a shrewd student of the systems by which money is made. There are two types engaged in the mere work of money-making, which is better described as “money-getting,” without reference to production; one type grubs away under whatever system obtains, regarding it as fixed as the solar system; another type is sufficiently detached to see the system as an artifice that may be mended, remodeled or supplanted altogether. Paul Warburg, scion of a long line of German Jewish bankers, is of the latter type. He was not content with the fact that the cash-register fills itself with money; he wants also to know how the cash-register works, and whether it can be worked. He was thus a student of money and of the number of ways in which it can be manipulated.

Perhaps it will be best to let him tell his own story as far as he goes. When he told it to the Committee on Banking and Currency of the United States Senate in executive session, there was some dispute as to whether the proceedings should be recorded by stenographer. It was finally agreed that notes should be made but should not be divulged. The testimony was printed, “in confidence” on August 5, 1914, and nominally “made public” on August 12.

The Warburgs were one of the international families whose importance was not realized until World War I, and would not have been realized then if their internationalism had not been so apparent. It was an interesting spectacle to see brothers occupying important places of counsel on either side of the great struggle.

Paul Warburg learned the rudiments of banking in his father’s bank at Hamburg, Germany, studying the over-sea trade that is the foundation of that city’s business. The banking house of Warburg in Hamburg dates from 1796.

Mr. Warburg – “After that I went to England, where I stayed for two years, first in the banking and discount firm of Samuel Montague & Company, and after that I took the opportunity of staying two months in the office of a stockbroker in order to learn that part of the business.

“After that I went to France, where I stayed in a French bank, so that … “

The Chairman – “What French bank was that?”

Mr. Warburg – “It is the Russian bank for foreign trade, which has an agency in Paris.

“And after that I went back to Hamburg and worked there again for a year, I think.

“Then I went round to India, China and Japan.

“And then I came to this country for the first time in 1893. I stayed here only a short time then, and went back to Hamburg, and then became a partner of the firm in Hamburg.”

The Chairman – “How long were you in Hamburg then in the banking business?”

Mr. Warburg – “Until 1902 . . . . And then I moved over here to this country to become a partner of Kuhn, Loeb & Company.”

“I explained in the curriculum which I gave you, Mr. Chairman, that by marriage I am related to members of the firm, the late Mr. Loeb having been my father-in-law, which brought about a desire on the part of the family to bring me over here . . . . I ought to say that I got married in this country in 1895 and that I have been in this country every year since, for several months . . . . That is the history of my banking education.”

It will be recalled that Jacob H. Schiff also married a daughter of Mr. Loeb, so that Mr. Warburg married the sister of Mrs. Jacob H. Schiff. Felix Warburg, Paul’s brother, who is also in the firm, married Mr. Schiff’s daughter.

Mr. Warburg immediately cast a critical eye upon the state of financial affairs in the United States and it is significant of the grasp he already had on such matters that he found the country rather behind the times.

He conceived the ambition – the very daring ambition – of taking hold of the United States’ monetary system and making it what he thought it ought to be.

This alone would make him a remarkable man. It illustrates very well that detached point of view which the Jew is more fitted to take than any other man perhaps. He sees countries and systems with the same freedom from intimate bias with which another man would view assorted fish upon a market stall. Most of the world is engaged in doing its work and indulging its national, racial, domestic and social affections and inclinations; a small minority stands in the background and watches the entire mass at its unconscious maneuvers, and studies it as an observer studies a hive of bees. The man at work has no time except for his job. One man, standing back and studying 1,000 men at work, is able to see how he might utilize their labor or possess himself of a first toll on their production. Doubtless there must be men to stand at a sufficient distance from things to get a correct idea of their interrelationship, and doubtless such an attitude may be made of great service to the race, but doubtless it has also contributed to the selfish manipulation of natural and social processes.

Mr. Warburg testified:

“When I came here I was at once impressed by the lack of system, by the old-fashioned nature of the system that prevailed here; and I got immediately into one of those periods of high interest rates, where call money went up to 25 and 100 percent; and I wrote an article on the subject then and there for my own benefit.

“I was not here three weeks before I was trying to explain to myself the roots of the evil. I showed the article to a few friends but I kept it in my desk, because I did not want to be one of those who try to inform and educate the country after they have been here for a month or so; and I kept that article until the end of 1906, shortly before the panic, when those conditions arose again, and when one newspaper wanted for an issue at the end of the year an article dealing with the conditions in our country.

“Then I took out that article and touched it up and brought it up to date; and that was the first article of mine that was published. It was called, ‘Defects and Needs of Our Banking System.’ . . . .

“That was, however, the first time that I know of that the question of the discount system and the concentration of reserves was really brought out; and I got a great many encouraging letters asking me to go on and explain my ideas.”

Mr. Warburg was perfectly willing to talk to the committee about himself, but not about Kuhn, Loeb & Company, his firm.

“I cannot discuss the affairs of my firm nor my partners,” he said, “nor be asked to criticize acts of my partners, either to approve them or in any other way,” but eventually he did tell a number of things which students of American financial affairs have considered interesting. Of which more later.

On page 77 of the testimony, more personal matters appear:

Senator Bristow – “When did you become a citizen of the United States, Mr. Warburg?“

Mr. Warburg – “1911. Did I not answer that?“

Senator Bristow – “Perhaps so. Did you intend to become a citizen when you came to the United States in 1902?“

Mr. Warburg – “I had no definite intentions then, because some of the reasons that brought me over here were family reasons; . . . . That had a good deal to do with my first coming here; and I was not sure at all that I would stay here when I came.”

Senator Bristow – “When did you decide to become a citizen of the United States?“

Mr. Warburg – “In 1908, when I took out my papers.”

Senator Bristow – “When you took out your first papers? You took out your second papers then, in 1911?“

Mr. Warburg – “Yes.”

Senator Bristow – “You made your declaration in 1908; that is when you decided to become an American citizen?“

Mr. Warburg – “Yes.”

Senator Bristow – “Why did you wait as long as you did after you came to this country, before deciding to become a citizen of this country?“

Mr. Warburg – “I think that a man that does not come here as an immigrant; a man who has had, if you may call it such, a prominent position in his own country, will not give up his nationality so easily as a man who comes over here knowing that he does not care for his own country at all. I had been a very loyal citizen of my own country; and I think that a man who hesitates in giving up his own nationality and taking a new one, is apt to be more loyal to his new country when he does change his nationality than a man who gives up his old country more lightly.“

Senator Bristow – “Yes.“

Mr. Warburg – “I may add this: That a thing which had a great deal of influence on my making up my mind to remain in this country and work here, and become a part and parcel of this country, was that monetary reform work, for I felt I had a distinct duty to perform here; and I thought I could do that; and in fact I have been working on it since 1906 or 1907.

“Then I felt that it was the right thing for me to become an American citizen and work here and throw in my lot definitely with this country.“

Senator Bristow – “When you became an American citizen; and the motive which induced you to become an American citizen was, then, as I understand it, largely with a view of laboring to bring about a reform of the American monetary system?“

Mr. Warburg – “Well, you put it nearly exclusively on that. I think a man wants to feel that he is going to do some useful work in his country; that he has a mission to perform; and that is what happened to me . . . . Moreover, I had been long enough in this country then to have thoroughly taken root and feel that I was a part and parcel of it.“

Senator Bristow – “Yes. When did you first become active in promoting the monetary reforms in the United States?“

Mr. Warburg – “1906.“

Senator Bristow – “What was your method of promoting your ideas with regard to monetary reforms?“

Mr. Warburg – “Mainly writing.”

Senator Bristow – “Were you connected with the Monetary Commission?“

Mr. Warburg – “No, not directly . . . .“

Senator Bristow – “Were you consulted in regard to the report of the Monetary Commission in any way?“

Mr. Warburg – “Yes, Senator Aldrich consulted with me about details, and I gave him my advice freely.“

Senator Bristow – “And in regard to the bill which was prepared by Senator Aldrich in connection with the commission, were you consulted in regard to that?“

Mr. Warburg – “Yes.“

Senator Bristow – “What part did you have in the preparation of that bill, directly or indirectly?“

Mr. Warburg – “Well, only that I gave the best advice that I could give.“

Most readers will recall that the name of “Aldrich” was, the synonym for the money power in government. Senator Nelson W. Aldrich was an able man and a tireless worker. His character for thoroughness and industry did more than anything else to disabuse the popular mind of the notion that such men were mere “tools of the money interest,” or engaged in their work out of lust for gain, or out of sheer pleasure in legislating against the interests of the people. Senator Aldrich led on tariff and financial matters because he understood them; and he understood them by tireless study of them; and, therefore, he was the master of other men who had not paid the price of knowledge. But, he understood these matters from the standpoint of the business interests only. He was sincerely desirous of the prosperity of the country, but that prosperity was written in banking balances.

Years ago it might not have been possible to judge him thus calmly, because then he represented in the public mind, more than any individual does today, the concentrated power of the financial group. Their prosperity was his first care, possibly because he believed that their prosperity was also the country’s.

It was such a man, then, that came to Mr. Warburg for advice. The labors of Senator Aldrich comprise many volumes of difficult material and Senator Aldrich’s appeal to Mr. Warburg was a very high compliment to the quality of the latter’s mind and financial experience – this, of course, assuming that Mr. Warburg’s counsel was not forced upon the Aldrich committee by the New York money interests.

In his testimony, Mr. Warburg did not tell all. The omission, however, was supplied by an article in Leslie’s Weekly in 1916, the author being B. C. Forbes.

It is a story of which Current Opinion said: “It reads like the opening in a chilling shocker.“

It appears that the conferences between Mr. Warburg and Senator Aldrich took place on an isolated island off the coast of Georgia – Jekyll Island. Included in the party, besides Senator Aldrich and Mr. Warburg, were two New York bankers and the then Assistant Treasurer of the United States. The mysteriousness of it all was well brought out by Mr. Forbes:

“Picture a party of the nation’s greatest bankers stealing out of New York on a private railroad car under cover of darkness, stealthily hieing hundreds of miles south, embarking on a mysterious launch, sneaking out to an island deserted by all but a few servants, living there a full week under such rigid secrecy that the name of not one of them was once mentioned lest the servitors learn their identity and disclose to the world this strangest, most secret episode in the history of American finance.

“The utmost secrecy was enjoined upon all. The public must not glean a hint of what was to be done. Senator Aldrich notified each one to go quietly into a private car which the railroad had received orders to draw up at an unfrequented platform. Drawn blinds balked any peering eyes that might be around. Off the party set. New York’s ubiquitous reporters had been foiled. So far so good. After bowling along the railroad hour after hour into southern country, the order was given to prepare to disembark.

“Stepping from the car when the station had been well cleared of travelers, the members of the expedition embarked in a small boat. Silence reigned, for the boatmen must not find out how distinguished were their passengers.

“In due time they drew up at another deserted pier. They were at Jekyll Island, off Georgia. The island was entirely un-peopled save for half a dozen servants.

“‘The servants must under no circumstances learn who we are,’ cautioned Senator Aldrich.

“‘What can we do to fool them?’ asked another member of the group. The problem was discussed.

“‘I have it,’ cried one. ‘Let’s all call each other by our first names. Don’t ever let us mention our last names.’

“It was so agreed.

“The dignified veteran Senator Aldrich, king of Rhode Island and a power second to none in the United States Senate, became just ‘Nelson’; . . . . and the quiet, scholarly member of the powerful international banking firm of Kuhn, Loeb & Company, became ‘Paul.’

“Nelson had meanwhile confided to Harry, Frank, Paul and Piatt that he was to keep them locked up on Jekyll Island, cut off from the rest of the world, until they had evolved and compiled a scientific currency system for the United States, a system that would embody all that was best in Europe, yet so modeled that it could serve a country measuring thousands where European countries measured only hundreds of miles.”

Mr. Forbes does not omit to write this further description of Mr. Warburg’s condition at the time: “unable then to speak idiomatic English with perfect freedom and without an accent, an alien not naturalized.”

Mr. Forbes also wrote – “Here is a German-American, but the sort of one that makes the hyphen look like a badge of honor.“

That was in 1916. Hyphens went out of fashion, though not entirely out of use, soon after.

Thus far the story of Paul Warburg…

Chapter II ~ ‘Let the Games Begin’

The Rothschilds and America
For many years the words international banker, Rothschild, Money and Gold have held a mystical type of fascination for many people around the world but particularly in the United States.

Over the years in the United States, the international bankers have come in for a great deal of criticism by a wide variety of individuals who have held high offices of public trust – men whose opinions are worthy of note and whose responsibilities placed them in positions where they knew what was going on behind the scenes in politics and high finance.

President Andrew Jackson, the only one of our presidents whose administration totally abolished the National Debt, condemned the international bankers as a “den of vipers” which he was determined to “rout out” of the fabric of American life. Jackson claimed that if only the American people understood how these vipers operated on the American scene “there would be a revolution before morning.”

Congressman Louis T. McFadden who, for more than ten years, served as chairman of the Banking and Currency Committee, stated that the international bankers are a “dark crew of financial pirates who would cut a man’s throat to get a dollar out of his pocket… They prey upon the people of these United States.”

John F. Hylan, then mayor of New York, said in 1911 that “the real menace of our republic is the invisible government which, like a giant octopus, sprawls its slimy length over our city, state and nation. At the head is a small group of banking houses, generally referred to as ‘international bankers.‘”

Were these leading public figures correct in their assessment of the situation, or were they the victims of some exotic form of paranoia?

Let us briefly review history analytically and unemotionally and uncover the facts. The truth, as it unfolds, will prove to be eye-opening and educational to those who are seeking to more clearly understand the mind-boggling events that have been (and are) taking place on the national and international scenes.

Humble Beginnings
Europe, towards the end of the eighteenth century or at the time of the American Revolution, was very different from what we know in the same area today. It was composed of a combination of large and small kingdoms, duchies and states which were constantly engaged in squabbles among themselves. Most people were reduced to the level of serfs – with no political rights. The meager ‘privileges’ that were granted to them by their ‘owners’ could be withdrawn at a moment’s notice.

It was during this period of time that a young man appeared on the European scene who was to have a tremendous impact on the future course of world history; his name was Mayer Amschel Bauer. In later years his name, which he had changed, became synonamous with wealth, power and influence. He was the first of the Rothschilds – the first truly international banker!

Mayer Amschel Bauer was born in Frankfurt-On-The-Main in Germany in 1743. He was the son of Moses Amschel Bauer, an itinerant money lender and goldsmith who, tiring of his wanderings in Eastern Europe, decided to settle down in the city where his first son was born. He opened a shop, or counting house, on Judenstrasse (or Jew Street). Over the door leading into the shop he placed a large Red Shield.

At a very early age Mayer Amschel Bauer showed that he possessed immense intellectual ability, and his father spent much of his time teaching him everything he could about the money lending business, and the lessons he had learned from many sources. The older Bauer originally hoped to have his son trained as a Rabbi but the father’s untimely death put an end to such plans.

A few years after his father’s death, Mayer Amschel Bauer went to work as a clerk in a bank owned by the Oppenheimers in Hannover. His superior ability was quickly recognized and his advancement within the firm was swift. He was awarded a junior partnership.

Shortly thereafter he returned to Frankurt where he was able to purchase the business his father had established in 1750. The big Red Shield was still displayed over the door. Recognizing the true significance of the Red Shield (his father had adopted it as his emblem from the Red Flag which was the emblem of the revolutionary minded Jews in Eastern Europe), Mayer Amschel Bauer changed his name to Rothschild; in this way the House of Rothschild came into being.

Rothschilds and America
It would be extraordinarily naïve to even consider the possibility that a family as ambitious, as cunning and as monopolistically minded as the Rothschilds could resist the temptation of becoming heavily involved on the American front.

Following their conquest of Europe early in the 1800s, the Rothschilds cast their covetous eyes on the most precious gem of them all – the United States.

America was unique in modern history. It was only the second nation in history that had ever been formed with the Bible as its law book. [The United States was not formed with the Bible as its law book. It was founded by Masonic deists. Only low rank Masons respect the Bible and consider it their law book; the Founders were high rank Masons, and many professed their lack of respect for the Bible. The writer probably means that the Colonies were formed with the Bible as their law book, and this is basically true. – Ed.] Its uniquely magnificent Constitution was specifically designed to limit the power of government and to keep its citizens free and prosperous. Its citizens were basically industrious immigrants who ‘yearned to breath free’ and who asked nothing more than to be given the opportunity to live and work in such a wonderfully stimulating environment.

The results – the ‘fruit’ – of such a unique experiment were so indescribably brilliant that America became a legend around the globe. Many millions across the far flung continents of the world viewed America the Beautiful as the promised land.

The Big Bankers in Europe
The Rothschilds and their cohorts – viewed the wonderful results borne by this unique experiment from an entirely different perspective; they looked upon it as a major threat to their future plans.

The establishment Times of London stated: “If that mischievous financial policy which had its origin in the North American Republic [i.e. honest Constitutionally authorized no debt money] should become indurated down to a fixture, then that government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off its debts and be without a debt [to the international bankers]. It will become prosperous beyond precedent in the history of the civilized governments of the world. The brains and wealth of all countries will go to North America. That government must be destroyed or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe.“

The Rothschilds and their friends sent in their financial termites to destroy America because it was becoming “prosperous beyond precedent.”

The first documentable evidence of Rothschild involvement in the financial affairs of the United States came in the late 1820s and early 1830s when the family, through their agent Nicholas Biddle, fought to defeat Andrew Jackson’s move to curtail the international bankers. The Rothschilds lost the first round when in 1832, President Jackson vetoed the move to renew the charter of the ‘Bank of the United States’ (a central bank controlled by the international bankers). In 1836 the bank went out of business.

Plan of Destruction
In the years following Independence, a close business relationship had developed between the cotton growing aristocracy in the South and the cotton manufacturers in England. The European bankers decided that this business connection was America’s Achilles Heel, the door through which the young American Republic could be successfully attacked and overcome.

The Illustrated University History, 1878, p. 504, tells us that the southern states swarmed with British agents. These conspired with local politicians to work against the best interests of the United States. Their carefully sown and nurtured propaganda developed into open rebellion and resulted in the secession of South Carolina on December 29, 1860. Within weeks another six states joined the conspiracy against the Union, and broke away to form the Confederate States of America, with Jefferson Davis as President.

The plotters raided armies, seized forts, arsenals, mints and other Union property. Even members of President Buchanan’s Cabinet conspired to destroy the Union by damaging the public credit and working to bankrupt the nation. Buchanan claimed to deplore secession but took no steps to check it, even when a U.S. ship was fired upon by South Carolina shore batteries.

Shortly thereafter Abraham Lincoln became President, being inaugurated on March 4, 1861. Lincoln immediately ordered a blockade on Southern ports, to cut off supplies that were pouring in from Europe. The ‘official’ date for the start of the Civil War is given as April 12, 1861, when Fort Sumter in South Carolina was bombarded by the Confederates, but it obviously began at a much earlier date.

In December, 1861, large numbers of European Troops (British, French and Spanish) poured into Mexico in defiance of the Monroe Doctrine. This, together with widespread European aid to the Confederacy strongly indicated that the Crown was preparing to enter the war. The outlook for the North, and the future of the Union, was bleak indeed.

In this hour of extreme crisis, Lincoln appealed to the Crown’s perennial enemy, Russia, for assistance. When the envelope containing Lincoln’s urgent appeal was given to Czar Nicholas II, he weighed it unopened in his hand and stated: “Before we open this paper or know its contents, we grant any request it may contain.”

Unannounced, a Russian fleet under Admiral Liviski, steamed into New York harbor on September 24, 1863, and anchored there. The Russian Pacific fleet, under Admiral Popov, arrived in San Francisco on October 12. Of this Russian act, Gideon Wells said: “They arrived at the high tide of the Confederacy and the low tide of the North, causing England and France to hesitate long enough to turn the tide for the North” (Empire of “The City,” p. 90).

History reveals that the Rothschilds were heavily involved in financing both sides in the Civil War. Lincoln put a damper on their activities when, in 1862 and 1863, he refused to pay the exorbitant rates of interest demanded by the Rothschilds and issued constitutionally-authorized, interest free United States notes. For this and other acts of patriotism Lincoln was shot down in cold-blood by John Wilkes Booth on April 14, 1865, just five days after Lee surrendered to Grant at Appamattox Court House, Virginia.

Booth’s grand-daughter, Izola Forrester, states in This One Mad Act that Lincoln’s assassin had been in close contact with mysterious Europeans prior to the slaying, and had made at least one trip to Europe. Following the killing, Booth was whisked away to safety by members of the Knights of the Golden Circle. According to the author, Booth lived for many years following his disappearance.

International Bankers Pursue Their Goal
Undaunted by their initial failures to destroy the United States, the international bankers pursued their objective with relentless zeal. Between the end of the Civil War and 1914, their main agents in the United States were Kuhn, Loeb and Co. and the J. P. Morgan Co..

A brief history of Kuhn, Loeb and Co. appeared in Newsweek magazine on February 1, 1936:

“Abraham Kuhn and Solomon Loeb were general merchandise merchants in Lafayette, Indiana, in 1850. As usual in newly settled regions, most transactions were on credit. They soon found out that they were bankers... In 1867, they established Kuhn, Loeb and Co., bankers, in New York City, and took in a young German immigrant, Jacob Schiff, as partner. Young Schiff had important financial connections in Europe. After ten years, Jacob Schiff was head of Kuhn, Loeb and Co., Kuhn having retired. Under Schiff’s guidance, the house brought European capital into contact with American industry.”

Schiff’s “important financial connections in Europe” were the Rothschilds and their German representatives, the M. M. Warburg Company of Hamburg and Amsterdam. Within twenty years the Rothschilds, through their Warburg-Schiff connection, had provided the capital that enabled John D. Rockefeller to greatly expand his Standard Oil empire. They also financed the activities of Edward Harriman (Railroads) and Andrew Carnegie (Steel).

At the turn of the 20th century the Rothschilds, not satisfied with the progress being made by their American operations, sent one of their top experts, Paul Moritz Warburg, over to New York to take direct charge of their assault upon the only true champion of individual liberty and prosperity – the United States.

At a hearing of the House Committee on Banking and Currency in 1913, Warburg revealed that he was “a member of the banking firm of Kuhn, Loeb and Co. I came to this country in 1902, having been born and educated in the banking business in Hamburg, Germany, and studied banking in London and Paris, and have gone all around the world….“

In the late 1800s, people didn’t study banking in London and “all around the world” unless they had a special mission to perform!

Early in 1907, Jacob Schiff, the Rothschild-owned boss of Kuhn, Loeb and Co., in a speech to the New York Chamber of Commerce, warned that “unless we have a Central Bank with adequate control of credit resources, this country is going to undergo the most severe and far reaching money panic in its history.“

Shortly thereafter, the United States plunged into a monetary crisis that had all the earmarks of a skillfully planned Rothschild ‘job.’ The ensuing panic financially mined tens of thousands of innocent people across the country – and made billions for the banking elite. The purpose for the ‘crisis’ was two-fold:

1) To make a financial ‘killing’ for the Insiders, and

2) To impress on the American people the ‘great need‘ for a central bank.

Paul Warburg told the Banking and Currency Committee: “In the Panic of 1907, the first suggestion I made was, ‘let us have a national clearing house’ [Central Bank]. The Aldrich Plan [for a Central Bank] contains many things that are simply fundamental rules of banking. Your aim must be the same….“

Digging deep into their bag of deceitful practices, the international bankers pulled off their greatest coup to date – the creation of the privately owned Federal Reserve System, which placed control of the finances of the United States securely in the hands of the power-crazed money monopolists. Paul Warburg became the ‘Fed’s’ first chairman!

Congressman Charles Lindbergh put his finger firmly on the truth when he stated, just after the ‘Federal’ Reserve Act was passed by a depleted Congress on December 23, 1913: “The Act establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President [Wilson] signs this Bill, the invisible government of the monetary power will be legalized….The greatest crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking and currency bill.“

Jewish Idea Molded Federal Reserve Plan
The last remembrance of Paul M. Warburg was as “an alien not naturalized” secretly closeted with Senator Nelson W. Aldrich and a party of bankers on an obscure island off the southeastern coast of the United States, all the members of the party concealing their identity even from the servants by calling each other by their first names.

That conference in its ultimate results was of the utmost importance to the United States, for then and there were formulated those fiscal devices, those financial methods, those “monetary reforms” which have exerted an influence on every citizen, rich and poor, of the Republic.

Much history was made in that little trip. It irresistibly calls to memory that other trip made in 1915 – almost two years before America’s entry into the war – by Bernard M. Baruch. As long-time listeners of Perspectives on America, will recall, Mr. Baruch had been financial backer of the Plattsburg camp (and would soon become the backer for Winston Churchill, who together would be involved with the plunging of the US Stock Markets some 14 years later), and in his testimony he said he thought that General Wood would admit this. Then – “I went off on a long trip, and it was while on this trip that I felt there ought to be some mobilization of the industries, and I was thinking about the scheme that practically was put into effect and was working when I was chairman of the board. When I came back from that trip I asked for an interview with the President . . . . The President listened very attentively and graciously as he always does.” Mr. Baruch was an authority on the President’s demeanor, for there was a long period in 1917 and 1918 during which he called at the White House every afternoon.

Two momentous trips in our recent history, both of them signalized and given their principal meaning by the presence of Jews. Not that there should not have been Jews in either case; to insist upon their total exclusion would be going too far. The Jew as a citizen, bearing his part, is one matter; the Jew as a master, directing the national show, is quite another thing. It is by no means agreed that Barney Baruch was the only man in the United States who could have run this nation’s war business. That is the explanation made of the high place he took – that he was the only man who could do it. Nonsense! If that be so, let us close up the nation and hand the keys over to the New York Kehillah. Mr. Baruch could say – “I probably had more power than any other man did in the war; doubtless that is true,” but he had that power because he was for the time the head and front of the Jewish group for war purposes.

If the explanation of Jewish mastery at critical moments were “brains,” well and good, but if it were, it would be more evident to the people; brains do not need to be advertised, they advertise themselves. There is another reason.

The British public had recently awoke to the fact that not Lloyd George but Mr. Montagu and Sir Alfred Mond were in charge of the recent negotiations over the German indemnities. These gentlemen are both Jews, one of them of German descent. Of all the British Empire are they the only two men to advise the premier in a great crisis? If they are, why is it? The Montagu’s, we know, control the silver of the world; Sir Alfred Mond, we know, turned a very neat trick of keeping the sign of the Cross off the war memorials raised to the soldiers of the empire; their Jewishness always so apparent. Both financiers; both the close advisers of the premier; as Baruch to Wilson, so they to Lloyd George.

Apparently there are no Anglo-Saxons on either side of the sea capable of managing these deep matters, if we are to judge from the war administrations — those that have passed off the stage and those that still linger. Lloyd George, for once stung to the quick by the criticism of the British public of his tendency to closet himself with Jews when confronted with a crucial question, retorted bitterly – with what? With the old outworn Jewish propagandist boast, that it ill became people who sang Jewish psalms in church to rag the race that wrote them! A most illuminating defense! The world would give a good deal for a true psalm from Sir Alfred Mond, Mr. Montagu, or even Sir Philip Sassoon, who is soon to become the premier’s son-in-law.

In our own history, Barney Baruch boldly claimed his place, he unhesitatingly asserted at he had more power than any man in the war. If Allenby in Palestine needed a locomotive, if the Americans in Russia needed clothing, if the munition mills needed copper – it was Baruch who gave or withheld the word.

Mr. Warburg, being of somewhat finer grain, probably due to his having less than Mr. Baruch of the rough experience of “the Street,” did not make the claim that he is the chief factor in the present monetary system of the United States, nor do we undertake to make it for him lest the cry of “anti-Semitism” wax wrathful again; but fortunately the fact is amply attested by a Jew whose knowledge of the matter is unquestionable.

Listeners have doubtless become aware by this time that for a non-Jew to say that a certain Jew is a most important factor in any field is to be guilty of anti-Semitism, while for a Jew or a “Gentile front” to say it is perfectly proper. It is a rather odd etiquette in which simple minds sometimes become confused.

Professor E. R. A. Seligman, of Columbia University, was the sponsor of this great honor for Mr. Warburg. What Professor Seligman said was of such importance, both as to its source and its subject, that quotation is justified:

“It is in a general way known to the public that Mr. Warburg was in some way connected with the passage of the Federal Reserve Act, and his appointment to his present responsible position on the Federal Reserve Board was acclaimed on all sides with a rare degree of approval and congratulation; but I fancy it is known only to a very few how great is the indebtedness of the United States to Mr. Warburg. For it may be stated without fear of contradiction that in its fundamental features the Federal Reserve Act is the work of Mr. Warburg more than of any other man in the country . . . .

“When the Aldrich commission was appointed it was not long before Senator Aldrich – to his credit be it said – was won over by Mr. Warburg to the adoption of these two fundamental features. The Aldrich Bill differed in some important particulars from the then present law . . . . The concession in the shape of the twelve regional banks that had to be made for political reasons is, in the opinion of Mr. Warburg as well as of the writer of this introduction, a mistake; for it probably, to some extent at least, weakened the good results which would otherwise have followed. On the other hand, the existence of a Federal Reserve Board created, in everything but in name, a real central bank; and it depends largely upon the wisdom with which the board exercises its great powers as to whether we shall be able to secure most of the advantages of a central bank without any of its dangers . . . .

“In many minor respects also the Federal Reserve Act differs from the Aldrich Bill; but in the two fundamentals of combined reserves and of a discount policy, the Federal Reserve Act has frankly accepted the principles of the Aldrich Bill; and these principles, as has been stated, were the creation of Mr. Warburg and of Mr. Warburg alone.

“. . . . It must not be forgotten that Mr. Warburg had a practical object in view. In formulating his plans and in advancing slightly varying suggestions from time to time, it was incumbent on him to remember that the education of the country must be gradual and that a large part of the task was to break down prejudices and remove suspicions. His plans, therefore contain all sorts of elaborate suggestions designed to guard the public against fancied dangers and to persuade the country that the general scheme was at all practicable. It was the hope of Mr. Warburg that with the lapse of time it might be possible to eliminate from the law not a few clauses which were inserted, largely at his suggestion, for educational purposes.

“As it was my privilege to say to President Wilson when originally urging the appointment of Mr. Warburg on the Federal Reserve Board, at a time when the political prejudice against New York bankers ran very high, England also, three-quarters of a century ago, had a practical banker who was virtually responsible for the idea contained in Peel’s Bank Act of 1840. Mr. Samuel Jones Lloyd was honored as a consequence by the British Government and was made Lord Overstone. The United States was equally fortunate in having with it a Lord Overstone . . . .

“The Federal Reserve Act will be associated in history with the name of Paul M. Warburg . . . .” ~ (pp. 387-390, Vol. 4, No. 4, Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science, Columbia University).

It surely cannot be considered invidious for this program thus to introduce to the people of the United States a gentleman whose influence upon the country is so vital. Just how vital can be understood only by those who have studied the puzzle of a country filled with the good things of life, and still unable to use them or to share them because of a kink in the pipe line called “money.”

But that Mr. Warburg himself was not entirely unaware of his position is indicated on page 56 of his testimony quoted last week. Mr. Warburg had just told the Senate Committee that he was making a heavy financial sacrifice to accept the position on the Federal Reserve Board offered him by President Wilson, and into the fitness of which appointment the Senate was carefully inquiring:

Senator Reed – “May I ask what your motive is, or your reason for making that sacrifice?”

Mr. Warburg – “My motive is that I have, as you know, taken a keen interest in this monetary reform since I have been in this country.

“I have had the success which comes to few people, of starting an idea and starting it so that the whole country has taken it up and it has taken some tangible form.”

Professor Seligman advises us of the strategy that was used to get the whole country to take up Mr. Warburg’s idea, and of the fact that some of the items inserted to appease the public might easily be removed when the public shall have become accustomed to Mr. Warburg and the Federal Reserve Board; but Mr. Warburg adds another hint, to the effect that you can do some things by administration which you cannot do by organization.

For example: Mr. Warburg wanted only one central bank which should be the sole arbiter of finance in the United States. The United States Government would have almost nothing to do save to make the money and stand back of it; the bankers of the United States, and the people thereof, would have nothing to do except what they were told; the one central bank would be the real financial governing authority.

When asked by Senator Bristow to state the fundamental difference between the Aldrich plan and the present Federal Reserve plan, Mr. Warburg replied:

“Well, the Aldrich Bill brings the whole system into one unit, while this deals with 12 units and unites them again into the Federal Reserve Board. It is a little bit complicated, which objection, however, can be overcome in an administrative way; and in that respect I freely criticized the bill before it was passed.”

There is evidently, then, a method of administration for which severe critics might even use the word “manipulation,” by which the plain provisions of a banking law, whatever they may be, may be, if not evaded, then somewhat adapted.

This idea was brought to mind by a more colloquial expression of Mr. Warburg’s to be found in his address on “bank acceptances” delivered in 1919:

“In this connection I am reminded of a story I once heard concerning a man belonging to a species now soon to be extinct and to be found by our children in Webster’s dictionary only, the ‘bartender.’ A man of this profession, in pre-historic times, was abandoning his position and was turning over his cash-register to his successor. ‘Please show me how it works,’ said the newcomer. ‘I will show you how it works,’ said the other, ‘but I won’t show you how to work it.'”

The politics of Mr. Warburg and the firm of Kuhn, Loeb & Company formed part of the inquiry, and Mr. Warburg made some interesting revelations which illustrate the oft-repeated statement that it is part of Jewish policy – perhaps of large financial firms generally – to attach themselves to both parties so that certain interests may be the winners regardless of which party is defeated.

Senator Pomerene – “What are your politics?“

Senator Nelson – “No; we have not raised that before this committee.“

Senator Reed – “It has not been raised here, but I should like to know.“

Senator Pomerene – “It has been raised before the Senate.“

Senator Reed – “I will say why I should like to know.“

Senator Pomerene – “Well, I have no objection to saying what was in my own mind.“

The Chairman – “I will say that I do not know what Mr. Warburg’s politics are.“

Senator Pomerene – “Well, I did not.“

Senator Shafroth – “I do not know and I do not care to know.“

Senator Pomerene – “I heard the statement made that the entire board was Democratic, and I had understood that Mr. Warburg was a Republican, or had been, in his affiliations.“

Mr. Warburg – “Well, so I was; and my sympathies were entirely, in the early campaign, for Mr. Taft against Mr. Roosevelt in the first fight. When later on Mr. Roosevelt became President Wilson’s opponent my sympathies went with Mr. Wilson . . . .“

Senator Reed – “Well, you would count yourself a Republican, generally speaking?“

Mr. Warburg – “I would.”

Senator Bristow – “It has been variously reported in the newspapers that you and your partners directly and indirectly contributed very largely to Mr. Wilson’s campaign funds.“

Mr. Warburg – “Well, my partners – there is a very peculiar condition – no; I do not think any one of them contributed largely at all; there may have been moderate contributions. My brother, for instance, contributed to Mr. Taft’s campaign.“

Senator Bristow – “Just what would you consider a moderate contribution to a presidential campaign?“

Mr. Warburg – “Well, that depends who the man is who contributes; but I think anything below $10,000 or $5,000 would not be an extravagant contribution, so far as that should be – “

(Examination resumed another day)

Senator Bristow – “Now, Mr. Warburg, when we closed Saturday some Senator asked you in regard to political contributions, and I understood you to say that you contributed to Mr. Wilson’s campaign.“

Mr. Warburg – “No; my letter says that I offered to contribute; but it was too late. I came back to this country only a few days before the campaign closed.”

Senator Bristow – “So that you did not make any contribution?“

Mr. Warburg – “I did not make any contribution; no.”

Senator Bristow – “Did any members of your firm make contributions to Mr. Wilson’s campaign?“

Mr. Warburg – “I think that is a matter of record. Mr. Schiff contributed. I would not otherwise discuss the contributions of my partners, if it was not a matter of record. I think Mr. Schiff was the only one who contributed in our firm.“

Senator Bristow – “And you stated that your brother had contributed to Mr. Taft’s campaign, as I understand it?“

Mr. Warburg – “I did. But again, I do not want to go into a discussion of my partners’ affairs, and I shall stick to that pretty strictly, or we will never get through.“

Senator Bristow – “I understood you also to say that no members of your firm contributed to Mr. Roosevelt’s campaign.“

Mr. Warburg – “I did not say that.“

Senator Bristow – “Oh! Did any members of the firm do that?“

Mr. Warburg – “My answer would please you probably; but I shall not answer that, but will repeat that I will not discuss my partners’ affairs.“

Senator Bristow – “Yes. I understood you to say Saturday that you were a Republican, but when Mr. Roosevelt became a candidate, you then became a sympathizer with Mr. Wilson and supported him?“

Mr. Warburg – “Yes.“

Senator Bristow – “While your brother was supporting Mr. Taft?”

Mr. Warburg – “Yes.”

Senator Bristow – “And I was interested to know whether any member of your firm supported Mr. Roosevelt.”

Mr. Warburg – “It is a matter of record that there are.“

Senator Bristow – “That there are some of them who did?“

Mr. Warburg – “Oh, yes.“

Senator Bristow – “Will you please indicate – or do you care to indicate – what members of your firm supported Mr. Roosevelt in that campaign?“

Mr. Warburg – “No, sir; I shall have to go on the principle that I cannot disclose the business of a member of my firm.“

The result was this: that in a three-cornered fight between three candidates, Roosevelt, Taft and Wilson, the men who constituted the firm of Kuhn, Loeb, & Company, chief Jewish financial institution of the United States, distributed their support among all three. Schiff for Wilson; Felix Warburg for Taft; and an unknown for Roosevelt — was that unknown Mr. Kahn? In any case, Wilson won, and the above examination relates to a member of the firm of Kuhn, Loeb & Company receiving an important appointment that gave him large power over the finances of the United States.

The point of not discussing the affairs of Kuhn, Loeb & Company was frequently made by Mr. Warburg.

“I cannot discuss the affairs of the firm nor my partners, nor be asked to criticize acts of my partners, either to approve them or in any other way. I would like to say that before we come to the point where I would feel that I should not answer any question,” said Mr. Warburg.

The principle of this objection was conceded by the Senate Committee, but that it ought to serve as a blanket injunction against a number of pertinent inquiries was doubted.

Senator Bristow – “But you are a partner in this firm, and have you not had something to do with its operations and its management?“

Mr. Warburg – “Yes.“

Senator Bristow – “Does that not go to show your general views and practices as a financier and as a citizen and as a business man?“

Mr. Warburg – “Yes; but you have got to take them individually. . . . I cannot permit my firm to be drawn into this discussion.“

Senator Bristow – “But how can you divest yourself from your firm when you have been one of the managers of the firm?“

Mr. Warburg – “I shall divest myself of the firm.”

Senator Bristow – “If the firm has done something that I might think was improper – to illustrate, being called upon to say whether or not I approve your nomination to this responsible position – have I not a right to know what your attitude was in regard to that transaction which your firm performed?“

Mr. Warburg – “Well, inasmuch as my answer there might be a criticism of my firm, I would beg to be excused, and I would leave it to the committee to draw its own conclusions. . . .“

In examining Mr. Warburg about the handling of $100,000,000 Southern Pacific securities, the same difficulty was experienced; Mr. Warburg objected, “but we are getting here again into the transactions of my firm!”

To which Senator Bristow retorted – “Ah! but when you participated in the profits of the transaction, is it not a part of your business life?“

Mr. Warburg – “Certainly it is a part of my business life, and there is no reason why I should not be proud of it. But as a matter of principle I think we should not get into a discussion of the business of my firm.”

Senator Bristow – “I am discussing your business.“

Mr. Warburg – “No, you are discussing the firm’s business.“

Senator Bristow – “Did you get any of the profits that came from the handling of this $100,000,000?“

Mr. Warburg – “You may take it that whatever my firm did I got my profits – my share in the profits.“

Senator Bristow – “Your share in the profits. Now, without being specific, I take it for granted that this was quite material; that that was quite a material interest in size; that is, that you are one of the important members of the firm.”

Mr. Warburg – “I am one of the important members of the firm.”

Senator Bristow – “Yes, I think the testimony and the report here show that you are the third important member – or the second, which is it? – of the firm“

Mr. Warburg – “We are not numbered.”

Senator Bristow – “You are not; all right.“

Mr. Warburg – “There is Mr. Jacob H. Schiff who is the senior.”

Senator Bristow – “Yes.”

Mr. Warburg – “And the others rank very much alike.”

Senator Bristow – “Yes. We may take it for granted, then, that whatever profits accrued to your firm in the handling of this business here since you became a member of it, you participated in the profits as one of the partners.“

Mr. Warburg – “Yes, sir.”

Senator Bristow – “Yes. So I will assume then, of course, that you participated in the marketing of $113,000,000 of Union Pacific, and so on.”

The responsibilities of a member of the Federal Reserve Board, especially such a member as Paul M. Warburg, would be (for it was recognized that because of his purpose and connections he would become a dominating factor), were very great, especially at the time when the appointment was being considered. They are as important now, of course, but in a different way; it is not now a question of military safety. This thought was evidently in the mind of the senators, as the following shows:

Senator Hitchcock – “Mr. Warburg, one of the important functions of the board is to guard the gold supply of the country, and it has been thought that it is very important to have men on the board who had at heart only the interests of the United States, and had no foreign interests or alliances. You have said that you proposed to divest yourself altogether of your banking connections in Germany. Have you any other interests in Europe?“

Mr. Warburg – “No, not to speak of, I may have very unimportant things, like everybody has; but I could dispose of those; it would not amount to anything.“

Senator Hitchcock – “Nothing in the line of banking?“

Mr. Warburg – “No.”

A few moments later the chairman, Senator Owen, said – (the date was August 1, 1914) – “We are on the eve of a great European war, and the organization of this board is of great national importance.“

At this time, Mr. Warburg was a member of the Hamburg firm. He testified (p. 7) – “I am going to leave my Hamburg firm, though the law does not require me to do so.”

A part of the German firm of his father and brothers, a part of the American firm to which he and his brother were related by marital as well as financial ties, Mr. Warburg repeatedly said, he would break off all business relationships so that he, like Caesar’s wife (to quote himself), should be above suspicion.

Chapter III ~ ‘Game, Set, Match’

Protocol No. 20; The Destruction of Capital

1. Today we shall touch upon the financial program, which I put off to the end of my report as being the most difficult, the crowning and the decisive point of our plans. Before entering upon it I will remind you that I have already spoken before by way of a hint when I said that the sum total of our actions is settled by the question of figures.

2. When we come into our kingdom our autocratic government will avoid, from a principle of self-preservation, sensibly burdening the masses of the people with taxes, remembering that it plays the part of father and protector. But as State organization cost dear it is necessary nevertheless to obtain the funds required for it. It will, therefore, elaborate with particular precaution the question of equilibrium in this matter.

3. Our rule, in which the king will enjoy the legal fiction that everything in his State belongs to him (which may easily be translated into fact), will be enabled to resort to the lawful confiscation of all sums of every kind for the regulation of their circulation in the State. From this follows that taxation will best be covered by a progressive tax on property. In this manner the dues will be paid without straitening or ruining anybody in the form of a percentage of the amount of property. The rich must be aware that it is their duty to place a part of their superfluities at the disposal of the State since the State guarantees them security of possession of the rest of their property and the right of honest gains, I say honest, for the control over property will do away with robbery on a legal basis.

4. This social reform must come from above, for the time is ripe for it – it is indispensable as a pledge of peace.

WE SHALL DESTROY CAPITAL!
5. The tax upon the poor man is a seed of revolution and works to the detriment of the State which is hunting after the trifling is missing the big. Quite apart from this, a tax on capitalists diminishes the growth of wealth in private hands in which we have in these days concentrated it as a counterpoise to the government strength of the GOYIM – their State finances.

6. A tax increasing in a percentage ratio to capital will give much larger revenue than the present individual or property tax, which is useful to us now for the sole reason that it excites trouble and discontent among the GOYIM. (Now we know the purpose of the 16th Amendment!!)

7. The force upon which our king will rest consists in the equilibrium and the guarantee of peace, for the sake of which things it is indispensable that the capitalists should yield up a portion of their incomes for the sake of the secure working of the machinery of the State. State needs must be paid by those who will not feel the burden and have enough to take from.

8. Such a measure will destroy the hatred of the poor man for the rich, in whom he will see a necessary financial support for the State, will see in him the organizer of peace and well-being since he will see that it is the rich man who is paying the necessary means to attain these things.

9. In order that payers of the educated classes should not too much distress themselves over the new payments they will have full accounts given them of the destination of those payments, with the exception of such sums as will be appropriated for the needs of the throne and the administrative institutions.

10. He who reigns will not have any properties of his own once all in the State represented his patrimony, or else the one would be in contradiction to the other; the fact of holding private means would destroy the right of property in the common possessions of all.

11. Relatives of him who reigns, his heirs excepted, who will be maintained by the resources of the State, must enter the ranks of servants of the State or must work to obtain the right to property; the privilege of royal blood must not serve for the spoiling of the treasury.

12. Purchase, receipt of money or inheritance will be subject to the payment of a stamp progressive tax. Any transfer of property, whether money or other, without evidence of payment of this tax which will be strictly registered by names, will render the former holder liable to pay interest on the tax from the moment of transfer of these sums up to the discovery of his evasion of declaration of the transfer. Transfer documents must be presented weekly at the local treasury office with notifications of the name, surname and permanent place of residence of the former and the new holder of the property. This transfer with register of names must begin from a definite sum which exceeds the ordinary expenses of buying and selling necessaries, and these will be subject to payment only by a stamp impost of a definite percentage of the unit.

13. Just strike an estimate of how many times such taxes as these will cover the revenue of the GOYIM States.

WE CAUSE DEPRESSIONS
14. The State exchequer will have to maintain a definite complement of reserve sums, and all that is collected above that complement must be returned into circulation. On these sums will be organized public works. The initiative in works of this kind, proceeding from State sources, will blind the working class firmly to the interests of the State and to those who reign. From these same sums also a part will be set aside as rewards of inventiveness and productiveness.

15. On no account should so much as a single unit above the definite and freely estimated sums be retained in the State Treasuries, for money exists to be circulated and any kind of stagnation of money acts ruinously on the running of the State machinery, for which it is the lubricant; a stagnation of the lubricant may stop the regular working of the mechanism.

16. The substitution of interest-bearing paper for a part of the token of exchange has produced exactly this stagnation. The consequences of this circumstance are already sufficiently noticeable.

17. A court of account will also be instituted by us, and in it the ruler will find at any moment a full accounting for State income and expenditure, with the exception of the current monthly account, not yet made up, and that of the preceding month, which will not yet have been delivered.

18. The one and only person who will have no interest in robbing the State is its owner, the ruler. This is why his personal control will remove the possibility of leakages or extravagances.

19. The representative function of the ruler at receptions for the sake of etiquette, which absorbs so much invaluable time, will be abolished in order that the ruler may have time for control and consideration. His power will not then be split up into fractional parts among time-serving favorites who surround the throne for its pomp and splendor, and are interested only in their own and not in the common interests of the State.

20. Economic crises have been produced by us for the GOYIM by no other means than the withdrawal of money from circulation. Huge capitals have stagnated, withdrawing money from States, which were constantly obliged to apply to those same stagnant capitals for loans. These loans burdened the finances of the State with the payment of interest and made them the bond slaves of these capitals …. The concentration of industry in the hands of capitalists out of the hands of small masters has drained away all the juices of the peoples and with them also the States …. (Now we know the purpose of the Federal Reserve Bank Corporation!!)

21. The present issue of money in general does not correspond with the requirements per head, and cannot therefore satisfy all the needs of the workers. The issue of money ought to correspond with the growth of population and thereby children also must absolutely be reckoned as consumers of currency from the day of their birth. The revision of issue is a material question for the whole world.

22. YOU ARE AWARE THAT THE GOLD STANDARD HAS BEEN THE RUIN OF THE STATES WHICH ADOPTED IT, FOR IT HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO SATISFY THE DEMANDS FOR MONEY, THE MORE SO THAT WE HAVE REMOVED GOLD FROM CIRCULATION AS FAR AS POSSIBLE.

GENTILE STATES BANKRUPT
23. With us the standard that must be introduced is the cost of working-man power, whether it be reckoned in paper or in wood. We shall make the issue of money in accordance with the normal requirements of each subject, adding to the quantity with every birth and subtracting with every death.

24. The accounts will be managed by each department (the French administrative division), each circle.

25. In order that there may be no delays in the paying our of money for State needs the sums and terms of such payments will be fixed by decree of the ruler; this will do away with the protection by a ministry of one institution to the detriment of others.

26. The budgets of income and expenditure will be carried out side by side that they may not be obscured by distance one to another.

27. The reforms projected by us in the financial institutions and principles of the GOYIM will be clothed by us in such forms as will alarm nobody. We shall point out the necessity of reforms in consequence of the disorderly darkness into which the GOYIM by their irregularities have plunged the finances. The first irregularity, as we shall point out, consists in their beginning with drawing up a single budget which year after year grows owing to the following cause: this budget is dragged out to half the year, then they demand a budget to put things right, and this they expend in three months, after which they ask for a supplementary budget, and all this ends with a liquidation budget. But, as the budget of the following year is drawn up in accordance with the sum of the total addition, the annual departure from the normal reaches as much as 50 per cent in a year, and so the annual budget is trebled in ten years. Thanks to such methods, allowed by the carelessness of the GOY States, their treasuries are empty. The period of loans supervenes, and that has swallowed up remainders and brought all the GOY States to bankruptcy. (The United States was declared “bankrupt” at the Geneva Convention of 1929! [see 31 USC 5112, 5118, and 5119).

28. You understand perfectly that economic arrangements of this kind, which have been suggested to the GOYIM by us, cannot be carried on by us.

29. Every kind of loan proves infirmity in the State and a want of understanding of the rights of the State. Loans hang like a sword of Damocles over the heads of rulers, who, instead of taking from their subjects by a temporary tax, come begging with outstretched palm of our bankers. Foreign loans are leeches which there is no possibility of removing from the body of the State until they fall off of themselves or the State flings them off. But the GOY States do not tear them off; they go on in persisting in putting more on to themselves so that they must inevitably perish, drained by voluntary blood-letting.

TYRANNY OF USURY
30. What also indeed is, in substance, a loan, especially a foreign loan? A loan is — an issue of government bills of exchange containing a percentage obligation commensurate to the sum of the loan capital. If the loan bears a charge of 5 per cent, then in twenty years the State vainly pays away in interest a sum equal to the loan borrowed, in forty years it is paying a double sum, in sixty — treble, and all the while the debt remains an unpaid debt.

31. From this calculation it is obvious that with any form of taxation per head the State is baling out the last coppers of the poor taxpayers in order to settle accounts with wealthy foreigners, from whom it has borrowed money instead of collecting these coppers for its own needs without the additional interest.

32. So long as loans were internal the GOYIM only shuffled their money from the pockets of the poor to those of the rich, but when we bought up the necessary person in order to transfer loans into the external sphere, (Woodrow Wilson and F.D. Roosevelt) all the wealth of States flowed into our cash-boxes and all the GOYIM began to pay us the tribute of subjects.

33. If the superficiality of GOY kings on their thrones in regard to State affairs and the venality of ministers or the want of understanding of financial matters on the part of other ruling persons have made their countries debtors to our treasuries to amounts quite impossible to pay it has not been accomplished without, on our part, heavy expenditure of trouble and money.

34. Stagnation of money will not be allowed by us and therefore there will be no State interest-bearing paper, except a one per-cent series, so that there will be no payment of interest to leeches that suck all the strength out of the State. The right to issue interest-bearing paper will be given exclusively to industrial companies who find no difficulty in paying interest out of profits, whereas the State does not make interest on borrowed money like these companies, for the State borrows to spend and not to use in operations. (Now we know why President Kennedy was assassinated in 1963 when he refused to borrow any more of the “Bank Notes” from the bankers of the Federal Reserve Bank and began circulating non-interest bearing “Notes” of the “United States of America”!!!).

35. Industrial papers will be bought also by the government which from being as now a paper of tribute by loan operations will be transformed into a lender of money at a profit. This measure will stop the stagnation of money, parasitic profits and idleness, all of which were useful for us among the GOYIM so long as they were independent but are not desirable under our rule.

36. How clear is the undeveloped power of thought of the purely brute brains of the GOYIM, as expressed in the fact that they have been borrowing from us with payment of interest without ever thinking that all the same these very moneys plus an addition for payment of interest must be got by them from their own State pockets in order to settle up with us. What could have been simpler than to take the money they wanted from their own people?

37. But it is a proof of the genius of our chosen mind that we have contrived to present the matter of loans to them in such a light that they have even seen in them an advantage for themselves.

38. Our accounts, which we shall present when the time comes, in the light of centuries of experience gained by experiments made by us on the GOY States, will be distinguished by clearness and definiteness and will show at a glance to all men the advantage of our innovations. They will put an end to those abuses to which we owe our mastery over the GOYIM, but which cannot be allowed in our kingdom.

39. We shall so hedge about our system of accounting that neither the ruler nor the most insignificant public servant will be in a position to divert even the smallest sum from its destination without detection or to direct it in another direction except that which will be once fixed in a definite plan of action. (Is this why a “private corporation,” known as the “Internal Revenue Service,” is in charge of collecting the “payments” of the “Income Taxes” and the IRS always deposits those “payments” to the Federal Reserve bank and never to the Treasury of the United States??)

40. And without a definite plan it is impossible to rule. Marching along an undetermined road and with undetermined resources brings to ruin by the way heroes and demi-gods.

41. The GOY rulers, whom we once upon a time advised should be distracted from State occupations by representative receptions, observances of etiquette, entertainments, were only screens for our rule. The accounts of favorite courtiers who replaced them in the sphere of affairs were drawn up for them by our agents, and every time gave satisfaction to short-sighted minds by promises that in the future economics and improvements were foreseen …. Economics from what? From new taxes? — were questions that might have been but were not asked by those who read our accounts and projects.

42. You know to what they have been brought by this carelessness, to what pitch of financial disorder they have arrived, notwithstanding the astonishing industry of their peoples …. (End 20th Protocol)

Financial Incest: The Players – Nelson W. Aldrich
US politician, born in Foster, RI. He was elected to Congress (1879–81), after which the Rhode Island legislature chose him for a seat in the US Senate (1881–1911). By the turn of the century he controlled the Senate for the Republicans on domestic issues, ruthlessly defending big business and a high protective tariff.

Nelson W. Aldrich was once a very influential figure in Rhode Island politics. After having served as a member and Speaker of the House in the U.S. Congress, he was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1881.

Aldrich had very important financial interests in Rhode Island and elsewhere and was often referred to as the “general manager of the United States.”

In 1908, Aldrich introduced an amendment to establish an income tax after he had denounced it as “communistic” in 1894. Aldrich was viewed as the “authentic voice of J.P. Morgan”. Aldrich was chief sponsor of The National Monetary Commission – the National Reserve Association, which eventually became the Federal Reserve System.

Sen. Aldrich was seen as the embodiment of the “eastern establishment” – the perception by southern and western states that the wealthy families and large corporations of the northeast ran the country.

His daughter later married the son of John D. Rockefeller. Vice-President Nelson Aldrich Rockefeller was named for his maternal grandfather, Nelson W. Aldrich.

Jewish Idea of Central Bank for America

“The administrators chosen by us from the masses will not be persons trained for government, and consequently they will easily become pawns in our game, played by our learned and talented counsellors, specialists educated from early childhood to administer world affairs.” ~ Paul Warburg

According to his own statements and the facts, Paul M. Warburg set out to reform the monetary system of the United States, and did so. He had the success which comes to few men, of coming an alien to the United States, connecting himself with the principal Jewish financial firm here, and immediately floating certain banking ideas which have been pushed and manipulated and variously adapted until they eventuated in what is known as the Federal Reserve System.

When Professor Seligman wrote in the Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science that “the Federal Reserve Act will be associated in history with the name of Paul M. Warburg,” a Jewish banker from Germany, he wrote the truth. But whether that association will be such as to bring the measure of renown, which Professor Seligman implies, the future has reveal.

What the people of the United States do not understand and never have understood is that while the Federal Reserve Act was governmental, the whole Federal Reserve System is private. It is an officially created private banking system.

Examine the first thousand persons you meet on the street, and 999 will tell you that the Federal Reserve System is a device whereby the United States Government went into the banking business for the benefit of the people. They have an idea that, like the Post Office and the Custom House, a Federal Reserve Bank is a part of the Government’s official machinery.

It is natural to feel that this mistaken view has been encouraged by most of the men who are competent to write for the public on this question. Take up the standard encyclopedias, and while you will find no misstatements of fact in them, you will find no direct statement that the Federal Reserve System is a private banking system; the impression carried away by the lay reader is that it is a part of the Government.

The Federal Reserve System is a system of private banks, the creation of a banking aristocracy within an already existing autocracy, whereby a great proportion of banking independence was lost, and whereby it was made possible for speculative financiers to centralize great sums of money for their own purposes, beneficial or not.

That this System was useful in the artificial conditions created by war – useful, that is, for a Government that cannot manage its own business and finances and, like a prodigal son, is always wanting money, and wanting it when it wants it – it has proved, either by reason of its inherent faults or by mishandling, its inadequacy to the problems of peace. It has sadly failed of its promise, and is now under serious question.

Mr. Warburg’s scheme succeeded just in time to take care of war conditions, he was placed on the Federal Reserve Board in order to manage his system in practice, and though he was full of ideas then as to how banking could be assisted, he is disappointingly silent as to how the people can be relieved.

However, this is not a discussion of the Federal Reserve System. General condemnation of it would be stupid. But it is bound to come up for discussion one day, and the discussion will become much freer when people understand that it is a system of privately owned banks, to which have been delegated certain extraordinary privileges, and that it has created a class system within the banking world which constitutes a new order.

Mr. Warburg, it will be remembered, wanted only one central bank. But, because of political considerations, as Professor Seligman tells us, twelve were decided upon. An examination of Mr. Warburg’s printed discussions of the subject shows that he at one time considered four, then eight. Eventually, twelve were established. The reason was that one central bank, which naturally would be set up in New York, would give a suspicious country the impression that it was only a new scheme to keep the nation’s money flowing to New York. As shown by Professor Seligman, quoted in the last number, Mr. Warburg was not averse to granting anything that would allay popular suspicion without vitiating the real plan.

So, while admitting to the Senators who examined him as to his fitness for membership on the Federal Reserve Board – the Board which fixed the policies of the banks of the Federal Reserve System and told them what to do – that he did not like the 12 district banks idea, he said that his objections to it could “be overcome in an administrative way.” That is, the 12 banks could be so handled that the effect would be the same as if there were only one central bank, presumably in New York.

And that is about the way it resulted, and that will be found to be one of the reasons for the present situation of the country.

There is no lack of money in New York today. Motion picture ventures are being financed into the millions. A big grain selling pool, nursed into existence and counseled by Bernard M. Baruch, has no hesitancy whatever in planning for a $100,000,000 corporation. Loew, the Jewish theatrical man, had no difficulty in opening 20 new theaters during that period of history – but go into the agricultural states, where the real wealth of the country was in the ground and in the granaries, and you could not find money for the farmer.

It is a situation, which none can deny and which few can explain, because the explanation is not to be found along natural lines. Natural conditions are always easiest to explain. Unnatural conditions wear an air of mystery. Here is the United States, the richest country in the world, containing at the present hour the greatest bulk of wealth to be found anywhere on earth – real, available, usable wealth; and yet it is tied up tight, and cannot move in its legitimate channels, because of manipulation which is going on as regards money.

Money is the last mystery for the popular mind to penetrate, and when it succeeds in getting “on the inside” it will discover that the mystery is not in money at all, but in its manipulation, the things which are done “in an administrative way.”

The United States has never had a President who gave evidence of understanding this matter at all. Our Presidents have always had to take their views from financiers. Money is the most public quantity in the country; it is the most federalized and governmentalized thing in the country; and yet, in the present situation, the United States Government has hardly anything to do with it, except to use various means to get it, just as the people have to get it, from those who control it.

The Money Question, properly solved, is the end of the Jewish Question and every other question of a mundane nature.

Mr. Warburg is of the opinion that different rates of interest ought to obtain in different parts of the country. That they have always obtained in different parts of the same state we have always known, but the reason for it has not been discovered. The city grocer can get money from his bank at a lower rate than the farmer in the next county can get it from his bank. Why the agricultural rate of interest has been higher than any other (when money is obtainable; it is not obtainable now) is a question to which no literary nor oratorical financier has ever publicly addressed himself. It is like the fact of the private business nature of the Federal Reserve System – very important, but no authority thinks it worth while to state. The agricultural rate of interest is of great importance, but to discuss it would involve first an admission, and that apparently is not desirable.

In comparing the present Federal Reserve Law with the proposed Aldrich Bill, Mr. Warburg said:

Mr. Warburg – “. . . . . . . . I think that this present law has the advantage of dealing with the entire country and giving them different rates of discount, whereas, as Senator Aldrich’s bill was drawn, it would have been very difficult to do that, as it provided for one uniform rate for the whole country, which I thought was rather a mistake.”

Senator Bristow – “That is, you can charge a higher rate of interest in one section of the country under the present law, than you charge in another section, while under the Aldrich plan it would have been a uniform rate.”

Mr. Warburg – “That is correct.”

That is a point worth clearing up. If Mr. Warburg, having educated the bankers, will now turn his attention to the people, and make it clear why one class in the country can get money for business that is not productive of real wealth, while another class engaged in the production of real wealth is treated as outside the interest of banking altogether; if he can make it clear also why money is sold to one class or one section of the country at one price, while to another class and in another section it is sold at a different price, he will be adding to the people’s grasp of these matters.

This suggestion was seriously intended. Mr. Warburg had the style, the pedagogical patience, the grasp of the subject, which would make him an admirable public teacher of these matters.

What he has already done was planned from the point of view of the interest of the professional financier. It is readily granted that Mr. Warburg desired to organize American finances into a more pliable system. Doubtless in some respects he has wrought important improvements. But he had always the banking house in mind, and he dealt with paper. Now, if taking up a position outside those special interests, he would address himself to the wider interests of the people – not assuming that those interests always run through a banking house – he would do still more than he had yet done to justify his feeling that he really had a mission in coming to this country.

Mr. Warburg was not at all shocked by the idea that the Federal Reserve System was really a new kind of private banking control, because in his European experience he saw that all the central banks were private affairs.

In his essay on “American and European Banking Methods and Bank Legislation Compared,” Mr. Warburg says:

“It may also be interesting to note that, contrary to a widespread idea, the central banks of Europe are, as a rule, not owned by the governments. As a matter of fact, neither the English, French, nor German Government owns any stock in the central bank of its country. The Bank of England is run entirely as a private corporation, the stockholders electing the board of directors, who rotate in holding the presidency. In France the government appoints the governor and some of the directors. In Germany the government appoints the president and a supervisory board of five members, while the stockholders elect the board of directors.”

And again, in his discussion of the Owen-Glass Bill, Mr. Warburg says:

“The Monetary Commission’s plan proceeded on the theory of the Bank of England, which leaves the management entirely in the hands of business men without giving the government any part in the management or control. The strong argument in favor of this theory is that central banking, like any other banking, is based on ‘sound credit,’ that the judging of credits is a matter of business that which should be left in the hands of business men, and that the government should be kept out of business. . . . . The Owen-Glass Bill proceeds, in this respect, more on the lines of the Banque de France and the German Reichsbank, the presidents and boards of which are to a certain extent appointed by the government. These central banks, while legally private corporations, are semi-governmental organs inasmuch as they are permitted to issue the notes of the nation – particularly where there are elastic note issues, as in almost all countries except England — and inasmuch as they are the custodians of practically the entire metallic reserves of the country and the keepers of the government funds. Moreover in questions of national policy the government must rely on the willing and loyal co-operation of these central organs.”

That is a very illuminating passage. It will be well worth the reader’s time, especially the reader who has always been puzzled by financial matters, to turn over in his mind the facts here given by a great Jewish financial expert about the central bank idea. Observe the phrases:

(a) “without giving the government any part in the management or control.”

(b) “these central banks, while legally private corporations . . . . are permitted to issue the notes of the nation.”

(c) “they are custodians of practically the entire metallic reserves of the nation and the keepers of the government funds.”

(d) “in questions of national policy, the government must rely on the willing and loyal co-operation of these central organs.”

It is not now a question whether these things are right or wrong; it is merely a question of understanding that they constitute the fact.

It is specially notable that in paragraph (d) it is a fair deduction that in questions of national policy, the government will simply have to depend not only on the patriotism but also to an extent on the permission and counsel of the financial organizations. That is a fair interpretation: questions of national policy are, by this method, rendered dependent upon the financial corporations.

Let that point be clear, quite regardless of the question whether or not this is the way national policies should be determined.

Mr. Warburg said that he believed in a certain amount of government control – but not too much. He said: “In strengthening the government control, the Owen-Glass Bill therefore moved in the right direction; but it went too far and fell into the other and even more dangerous extreme.”

The “more dangerous extreme” was, of course, the larger measure of government supervision provided for, and the establishment of a number of Federal Reserve Banks out in the country.

Mr. Warburg had referred to this before; he had agreed to the larger number only because it seemed to be an unavoidable political concession. It has already been shown, by Professor Seligman, that Mr. Warburg was alive to the necessity of veiling a little here and a little there, and “putting on” a little yonder, for the sake of conciliating a suspicious public. There was also the story of the bartender and the cash register.

Mr. Warburg thought he understood the psychology of America. In this respect he reminded one of the reports of Mr. von Bernstorff and Captain Boyed of what the Americans were likely to do or not to do. In the Political Science Quarterly of December, 1920, Mr. Warburg told how, on a then recent visit to Europe, he was asked by men of all countries what the United States was going to do. He assured them that America was a little tired just then, but that she would come round all right. And then harking back to his efforts of placing his monetary system on the Americans, he said:

“I asked them to be patient with us until after the election, and I cited to them our experiences with monetary reform. I reminded them how the Aldrich plan had failed because, at that time, a Republican President had lost control of a Congress ruled by a Democratic majority; how the Democrats in their platform damned this plan and any central banking system; and how, once in full power, the National Reserve Association was evolved, not to say camouflaged, by them into the Federal Reserve System.”

Remembering this play before the public, and the play behind the scenes, this “camouflaging,” as Mr. Warburg says, of one thing into another, he undertook to assure his friends in Europe that regardless of what the political platforms said, the United States would do substantially what Europe hoped it would. Mr. Warburg’s basis for that belief was, as he said, his experience with the way the central bank idea went through in spite of the advertised objection of all parties. He believes that with Americans it is possible to get what you want if you just play the game skillfully. His experience with monetary reform seems to have fathered that belief in him.

Politicians may be necessary pawns to play in the game, but as members of the government Mr. Warburg does not want them in banking. They are not bankers, he says; they don’t understand; banking is nothing for a government man to meddle with. He may be good enough for the Government of the United States; he is not good enough for banking.

“In our country,” says Mr. Warburg, referring to the United States, “with every untrained amateur a candidate for any office, where friendship or help in a presidential campaign, financial or political, has always given a claim for political preferment, where the bids for votes and public favor are ever present in the politician’s mind, . . . . a direct government management, that is to say, a political management, would prove fatal . . . . There can be no doubt but that, as drawn at present (1913), with two cabinet officers members of the Federal Reserve Board, and with vast powers vested in the latter, the Owen-Glass Bill will bring about direct government management.”

And that, of course, in Mr. Warburg’s mind, is not only “dangerous,” but “fatal.”

Mr. Warburg had almost his whole will in the matter. And what was the result?

Turn to the testimony of Bernard M. Baruch, when he was examined with reference to the charge that certain men close to President Wilson had profited to the extent of $60,000,000 on stock market operations which they entered into on the strength of advance information of what the President was to say in his next war note – the famous “leak” investigation, as it was called; one of the several investigations in which Mr. Baruch was closely questioned.

In that investigation Mr. Baruch was laboring to show that he had not been in telephone communication with Washington, especially with certain men who were supposed to have shared the profits of the deals. The time was December, 1916. Mr. Warburg was then safely settled on the Federal Reserve Board, which he had kept quite safe from Government intrusion.

The Chairman – “Of course the records of the telephone company here, the slips, will show the persons with whom you talked.”

Mr. Baruch – “Do you wish me to say, sir? I will state who they are.”

The Chairman – “Yes, I think you might.”

Mr. Baruch – “I called up two persons; one, Mr. Warburg, whom I did not get, and one, Secretary McAdoo, whom I did get — both in reference to the same matter. Would you like to know the matter?”

The Chairman – “Yes, I think it is fair that you should state it.”

Mr. Baruch – “I called up the Secretary, because someone suggested to me – asked me to suggest an officer for the Federal Reserve Bank, and I called him in reference to that, and discussed the matter with him, I think, two or three times, but it was suggested to me that I make the suggestion, and I did so.” (pp. 570-571)

Mr. Campbell – “Mr. Baruch, who asked you for a suggestion for an appointee for the Federal Reserve Bank here?”

Mr. Baruch – “Mr. E. M. House.”

Mr. Campbell – “Did Mr. House tell you to call Mr. McAdoo up and make the recommendation?”

Mr. Baruch – “I will tell you exactly how it occurred: Mr. House called me up and said that there was a vacancy on the Federal Reserve Board. and he said, ‘I don’t know anything about those fellows down there, and I would like you to make a suggestion.’ And I suggested the name, which he thought was a very good one, and he said to me, ‘I wish you would call up the Secretary and tell him.’ I said, ‘I do not see the necessity; I will tell you.’ ‘No,’ he said, ‘I would prefer you to call him up.'” (p. 575)

There we have an example of the Federal Reserve “kept out of politics,” kept away from government management which would not only be “dangerous,” but “fatal.”

Barney Baruch, the New York stock plunger, who never owned a bank in his life, was called up by Colonel E. M. House, the arch-politician of the Wilson Administration, and thus the great Federal Reserve Board was supplied another member.

Editor’s NOTE: It is this same Mr. Baruch, who some fifteen years later, acting in accordance with his Master’s, the Rothschild concern, would send another agent to America, to insure the collapse of Wall Street, and its stock market, from which it would not recover for another twenty-five years – one Winston Churchill, of late, the Chancellor of the Exchequer of England. Churchill stayed in constant touch with Baruch, during his entire fifty-four day visit to the Colonies. Upon the success of the October attack on Wall Street, Churchill departed the united States on the following day, after sending Baruch a telegram, effectively saying. “mission accomplished!”. ~ (JB)

A telephone call kept within a narrow Jewish circle and settled by a word from one Jewish stock dealer – that, in a practical operation, was Mr. Warburg’s great monetary reform. Mr. Baruch calling up Mr. Warburg to give the name of the next appointee of the Federal Reserve Board, and calling up Mr. McAdoo, secretary of the United States Treasury, and set in motion to do it by Colonel E. M. House – is it any wonder the Jewish mystery in the American war government grows more and more amazing?

But, as Mr. Warburg has written – “friendship or help in a presidential campaign, financial or political, has always given a claim to political preferment.” And as Mr. Warburg urges, this is a country “with every untrained amateur a candidate for office,” and naturally, with such men comprising the government, they must be kept at a safe distance from monetary affairs.

As if to illustrate the ignorance thus charged, along comes Mr. Baruch, who quotes Colonel House as saying, “I don’t know anything about those fellows down there and I would like you to make a suggestion.” It is permissible to doubt that Mr. Baruch correctly quotes Colonel House. It is permissible to doubt that all that Colonel House confessed was his ignorance about “those fellows.” There was a good understanding between those two men, too good an understanding for the alleged telephone conversation to be taken strictly at its face value. It is possibly quite true that Mr. House is not a financier. Certainly, Mr. Wilson was not. In the long roll of Presidents only a handful have been, and those who have been have been regarded as most drastic in their proposals.

But this whole matter of ignorance, as charged by Mr. Warburg, sounds like an echo of the Protocols (of the Learned Elders of Zion):

“The administrators chosen by us from the masses will not be persons trained for government, and consequently they will easily become pawns in our game, played by our learned and talented counsellors, specialists educated from early childhood to administer world affairs.”

In the Twentieth Protocol, wherein the great financial plan of world subversion and control is disclosed, there is another mention of the rulers’ ignorance of financial problems.

It is a coincidence that, while he did not use the term “ignorance,” Mr. Warburg was quite outspoken concerning the benighted state in which he found this country, and he was also outspoken about the “untrained amateurs” who are candidates for every office. These, he said, are not fit to take part in the control of monetary affairs. But Mr. Warburg was. He said so. He admitted that it was his ambition from the moment he came here an alien Jewish-German banker, to change our financial affairs more to his liking. More than that, he succeeded; he himself said, more than most men do in a lifetime; he had succeeded, Professor Seligman says, to such an extent that throughout history the name of Paul M. Warburg and that of the Federal Reserve System shall be united.

Chapter IV ~ Checkmate

How Jewish International Finance Functions

“Such has been the development of international bankers that they can no longer be regarded in their professional capacity as the nationals of any country, entitled to do business under their own government’s supervision exclusively. They are really world citizens, with world-wide interests, and as such ought to be made amenable to some form of supernational control.” – George Pattullo, in Saturday Evening Post

Not only did the Jewish financial firm of Kuhn, Loeb & Company use far-sighted prudence in splitting its political support – one Warburg supporting Wilson, another Warburg supporting Taft and an unnamed member of the firm supporting Roosevelt, all at one time, as Paul M. Warburg testified – but it split its activities in several other ways also.

The international interests of the Jews comprising this firm are worthy of note. The influence which forced the United States to repudiate a commercial treaty with Russia while Russia was a friendly country (1911), and thus to compel all business between the United States and Russia to pass through German-Jewish hands, was generated by Jacob H. Schiff. Russia seems to have been the country on which he chose to focus his activities. The full story was told on January 15, 1921, in a column titled, “Taft Once Tried to Resist the Jews – and Failed“.

Mr. Schiff’s activity consisted in forcing the Congress of the United States to do a thing that was repugnant to the reason and conscience of President Taft, and which he personally refused to do or to recommend. Mr. Schiff left the White House in great anger with the threat, “This means war.” It did not mean as much war as it might have, for President Taft acquiesced gracefully in the Jewish victory and was later extremely laudatory of them on the public platform.

Mr. Schiff’s firm also helped finance the Japanese war against Russia, and in return desired Japan as a Jewish ally. The wily Japs, however, saw the game and kept their relations with Mr. Schiff to purely business matters. Which fact is well worth bearing in mind when reading the widespread propaganda for war with Japan. If you would have given particular attention at that time, you would have observed the same interests which were engaged in most loudly “defending” the Jew, as most active in spreading anti-Japanese sentiments in this country.

The Japanese war with Russia, however, enabled Mr. Schiff to advance his plan to undermine the Russian Empire, as it has now been accomplished by Jewish Bolshevism. With funds provided by him, the basic principles of what became known as Bolshevism, were sown among the Russian prisoners of war in Japan, who were sent back as apostles of destruction. Then followed the horrible murder of Nicholas Romanoff, Czar of Russia, with his wife, his crippled son, and his young daughters, the full tale of which had subsquently been told by the Jew who managed the crime.

For the part he played in destroying Russia, Mr. Schiff was wildly hailed in New York the night the news came that the Emperor had abdicated.

Meanwhile, the Jew who was “to take the Czar’s job” (as the common New York ghetto phrase ran, weeks before the event) had left New York to be in waiting.

This Jew was passed out of the United States at the request of a very high American personage whose subservience to the Jews was one of the marvels of the past seven years. Halted by the British, this Jew was released from their toils at the request of a very high American personage. And thus, the Jewish Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, the program of which was made in America, was set in operation without a hitch.

This whole firm is German Jewish, its members having originated in Germany. It had German connections. How far it maintained those connections through all subsequent events is a separate question.

Mr. Otto Kahn‘s allotted portion of the world seems to be Great Britain and France. Mr. Kahn is of German origin, like the rest of the firm, but he has not publicly shown such concern for Germany as have the other members. Mr. Schiff was once very active for the settlement of a peace on the basis of a victorious Germany. Mr. Paul M. Warburg also had interests, discussion of which is postponed for the present. But Mr. Kahn succeeded, through the connivance of American authority and the excessive repression of the newspapers, in conveying the impression that by some species of occult separatism he was not “German-minded.”

Therefore Mr. Kahn flitted lightly everywhere – except Germany. He was sufficiently French to be able to tell in the first column on the first page of Le Matin on what terms America woul do business with Europe, and he spoke as one having authority. He was sufficiently British to have thought of standing for the British Parliament, when an unfortunate event made it necessary for him to remain in the United States. Mr. Kahn sometimes flitted farther East into the more Jewish portions of Europe, and his comings and goings were marked by certain changes with which his name remained most ostentatiously disconnected.

Mr. Kahn had been telling France on what terms the United States will help her. There apparently being no other spokesman, Mr. Kahn’s word was accepted as authority. France was and still is one of the most Judaized countries in the world, the haunt of International Jewish Financiers who exercise their power (thus saving France the trouble of passing laws) to keep the emigrant Jew out of France; so that France presented the spectacle of being Judaized by Jewish finance and not by immigrant Semitic hordes, and is thus a fit platform from which Mr. Otto Herman Kahn could utter his pronouncements.

In his last declaration to France, Mr. Kahn prepared her to expect little by stating that “America is a country of immense resources; but the actual money, which the people have at their disposal is comparatively limited.” True enough. It was a member of Mr. Kahn’s firm who invented a monetary system, which was promised to keep money in more equal relation to wealth.

But as he went on telling what America would and would not do (the American people knowing nothing about it meanwhile) Mr. Kahn discovered with great enthusiasm a place where he thought American capital could be placed, namely, “In the development of the vast and immensely rich colonial empire of France.”

And pray where is that? Any Frenchman would tell you now, “In Syria.” Syria – ah! – that part of the East where the natives are loudly complaining that the Jews are driving them out contrary to every written and moral law.

The Jewish powers have already succeeded in getting French troops over there; bad blood has been caused between France and Great Britain; the Jews on both sides are playing for the middle; and here is Mr. Otto Kahn himself pledging American capital to the development of the French colonial empire! Talk to any Syrian who knows his country’s present status, and he will interpret Mr. Kahn’s words very vividly.

One of the nicest bits of work Mr. Kahn has done is to denounce “pro-German propaganda” which he says has exasperated Americans in favor of France. Next to committing the United States to an undying admiration for Briand, this is really his finest bit. Especially, with Partner Paul playing the German sympathy string! It is a great international orchestra, this Jewish financial firm; it could play The Star Spangled Banner, Die Wacht am Rhein, Le Marseillaise, and God Save the King in one harmonious rendering, paying obsequious attention to the prejudices of each.

Next come the Warburgs. Their interest was, of course, in Germany. Paul stated in his testimony given at the beginning of the World War that he had interests in Hamburg and would dispose of them. The war came on. The Jewish government in the United States was augmented. Mr. Warburg was no mean figure, as previous articles have shown.

The Warburgs are three in number. Felix M. is the other one in America. He appears but slightly in public affairs although he is a member of the American Jewish Committee and of the firm of Kuhn, Loeb & Company. His retiring habit, however, does not argue lack of consequence. He was of sufficient consequence, Jewishly, to have bestowed upon him a sort of honorary rabbinical degree of “Haber” which entitles him to be known as “Haber Rabbi Baruch Ben Moshe.” He is the only Jew in America upon whom the title has ever been conferred.

Max Warburg represents the family in its native land. Max Warburg had as much to do with the German war government as his family and financial colleagues in America had to do with the United States war government. As has been recounted in the press the world over, the brother from America and the brother from Germany both met at Paris as government representatives in determining the peace. There were so many Jews in the German delegation that it was known by the term “kosher,” also as “the Warburg delegation,” and there were so many Jews in the American delegation that the delegates from the minor countries of Europe looked upon the United States as a Jewish country which through unheard-of generosity had elected a non-Jew as its President.

Max Warburg is an interesting character also as regards the establishment of Bolshevism in Russia. The Jews had several objectives in the war, and one of the was to “get Russia.” To this end the German Jews worked very assiduously. Because Russia was a member of the Allies, the work of German Jews was made the easier. But the fact that Russia was an ally made no difference with the Jews who were resident in Allied countries. Win or lose, Russia must be destroyed. It is the testimony of history that it was not so much the German military prowess as the Jewish intrigue that accomplished the downfall of that empire.

In this work Max Warburg was a factor. His bank is noted in a dispatch published by the United States Government as being one whence funds were forwarded to Trotzky for use in destroying Russia. Always against Russia, not for German reasons, but for Jewish reasons, which in this particular instance coincided. Warburg and Trotzky – against Russia!

Poor John Spargo, who ought to know better, denies all this – while every American who comes back from Russia, even those who went over there pro-Bolshevik, yes, and returned Jews themselves, proclaim it.

The crushing fact is that Bolshevism is not only Jewish in Russia, and in America, but it is Jewish in the higher regions of Jewry where better things ought to exist. Take Walter Rathenau, a German Jew on the plane of the Warburgs. Rathenau was the inventor of the Bolshevik system of centralization of industry, material and money. The Soviet Government asked Rathenau directly for the plans, and received them directly from him. Max Warburg’s bank held the money; Walter Rathenau’s mind held the plans – which makes it a pertinent question: If Bolshevism can be so Jewish outside of Russia, what hinders it being Jewish inside Russia?

It is a most significant fact that, as in Washington, the most constant and privileged visitors to the White House were Jews, so in Berlin the only private telephone wire to the Kaiser was owned by Walter Rathenau. Not even the Crown Prince could reach the Kaiser except through the ordinary telephone connections. It was the same in London. It was the same in Paris. It was the same in Petrograd – in Russia which so “persecuted” the race that controlled it then and controls it now.

Now, this sketchy outline of the internationalism of the firm of Kuhn, Loeb & Company is not offered as the result of keen research, for the facts are found on the very surface of the matter, for anyone to see. What is revealed by research is this: whether Mr. Schiff’s interest in Russia had underground features which affected the welfare of nations; whether Mr. Kahn’s flitting missions here and there, which he made with great freedom during the war, were wholly taken up with the business announced in the public notices; and whether Mr. Warburg, whose interest in Germany has not abated, to judge from his recent utterances, was able to retain complete neutrality of mind during the war. These are questions of value. Obviously, they are not easy to answer. But they can be answered.

It was a family enterprise, this international campaign. Jacob Schiff swore to destroy Russia. Paul M. Warburg was his brother-in-law; Felix Warburg was his son-in-law. Max Warburg, of Hamburg, banker of the Bolsheviks, was thus the brother-in-law to Jacob Schiff’s wife and daughter.

Speaking of the far-sighted manner in which the house of Kuhn, Loeb & Company disposes itself over world affairs, there is also the curious fact that in this Jewish firm is one who goes to a Christian church – a most heinous thing for a Jew to do. Split three ways in American politics and as many ways as international matters require, we find this firm split two ways with regard to religion. Mr. Kahn professes – at least attends – a Christian church and is accounted an adherent of it. Yet he is not ostracized. His name is not taboo. The Jews do not curse him. He is not denounced as a renegade. The Jews have not buried him out of mind, as they do others who desert the faith.

This presents a strange situation when it is considered. Not to recount again the horror and reprehension and active antagonism with which Jews view such a desertion, suffice it to say that there is no greater marvel than that of Jacob H. Schiff retaining in the firm of Kuhn, Loeb & Company a “renegade” Jew. He could not have done it; every fiber of his intensely Jewish nature would have rebelled against it. Yet there it is!

Without going further into this ingenious system of covering all vital points from one center, enough has been said to show one busy Jewish financial firm with which political matters, national and international, is almost a profession. The family of Warburg high in the controlling group of two countries, and enemy countries at that. The family of Warburg high in the negotiations of world peace and the discussions of a League of Nations. The family of Warburg now advising the world from both sides of the earth, what to do next. It was probably with more reason than the general public surmised that a New York paper printed during the Peace Conference an article headed, “Watch the Warburgs!”

The fact seems to be that, as Mr. Pattullo is quoted as saying at the head of this article, the international financiers have been so engrossed in world money that the sense of national responsibility sometimes becomes blurred in their minds. They desire everything – war, negotiations and peace – to be conducted in such a way as to react favorably on the money market. For that is their market: money is what they buy and sell: and because money has no fixed price, it is a market, which offers the widest opportunity for the trickster and swindler. One cannot play such tricks with stone or corn or metals, but with money as the commodity everything is possible.

Mr. Warburg is already very much interested about the treatment to be accorded foreign securities in the next war. Readers of the daily newspapers may recall that recently a demand was made for the gold in the Reichsbank, which was resisted on the ground that the Reichsbank, although the central bank of Germany, was really a private concern – just as Paul Warburg said it was and just as he has insisted that our own Federal Reserve System should be, and which it is. There is far-sighted wisdom in that, with a view to possible defeat in war.

Mr. Warburg is apparently quite disapproving of the treatment accorded alien enemy property “by some countries.” He quotes a French banker throughout – nationality not stated – and drives home his point. The French banker used as an illustration a possible war between England and France (this was only last year) and said that the bankers in each country would proceed to withdraw their mutual balances and securities, for fear of confiscation, and that such a course would precipitate a panic.

To which Mr. Warburg adds: “I think that our bankers ought carefully to study this very serious question. We have nothing to gain and much to lose by joining in a policy of disregarding the rights of private property. We shall probably, in the course of time, become the largest owners of foreign securities and properties, which would become endangered in case we were drawn into war. To me, however it is of greater interest that nothing be done that might stand in the way of making the United States the gold reserve country of the world. . . .“

Such talk passes with too little scrutiny. It bears a strong reflection of historic events, which should not be overlooked. Moreover, it presented a grandiose vision, which was supposed to command instant agreement because of its appeal to superficial national pride and selfish ambition.

If what Mr. Warburg said was an intimation that the International Jews were planning to move their money market to the United States, it was safe to say that the United States did not want it – or at least should not have wanted it. We had the warning of history as to what this would mean. It meant that in turn Spain, Venice, Great Britain or Germany received the blame and suspicion of the world for what the Jewish financiers have done. It is a most important consideration that most of the national animosities that exist today arose out of resentment against what the Jewish money power did under the camouflage of national names. “The British did this,” “The Germans did this,” when it was the International Jew who did it, the nations being but the marked spaces on his checker board.

Today, around the world the blaming word is heard, “The United States did this. If it were not for the United States the world would be in better shape. The Americans are a sordid, greedy, cruel people.” Why? Because the Jewish money power is largely centered here and is making money out of both our immunity and Europe’s distress, playing one against the other; and because so many of the so-called “American business men” abroad today are not Americans at all – they are Jews, and in many cases as misrepresentative of their own race as they are of the Americans.

The United States does not want the transfer of All-Judaan to this soil. We do not desire to stand as a gold god above the nations. We would serve the nations, and we would protect them, but we would do both in the basis of real values, not in the name or under the sign of gold.

On the one hand Mr. Warburg recites pitiful facts about Germany in order to raise sympathy for her, and on the other hand he stimulates the gold lust of the United States. The plight of Germany is entirely due to the forces from which the United States has only narrowly escaped; and to harken to international Jewish plans for the rehabilitation of Germany is to be in danger of approving plans which will fasten Jewish domination more strongly on that unhappy country than it is now. Germany has paid dearly for her Jews. The Warburg voice that speaks for her would seem indeed to be the voice of Jacob, but the hand that proposes financial dealings is that of Esau.

The internationalism of the Warburgs is no longer in doubt and cannot be denied. Felix Warburg hung on to the Hamburg connection longer than did Paul, but the breakage of either was probably perfunctory. At the same time that Felix left the Hamburg firm of his brother, Max, a Mr. Stern also left the Frankfort firm of Stern, and both became very active on the Allies side, taking sides against the German nation as lustily as anyone could. “Impossible!” say those who fancy that a German Jew is a German. Not at all impossible; the Jew’s loyalty is to the Jewish nation; what the Jew himself refers to as his “cover nationality” may count or not as he himself elects.

This statement is always met with frothing wrath by the Jews’ “gentile fronts” in the purchased pro-Jewish press. But here is an example: Do you remember “The Beast of Berlin,” that lurid piece of war propaganda? You did not, perhaps, know that its producer was a German Jew, Carl Laemmle. His German birth did not prevent him making money out of his film, and his film does not prevent him annually going back in state to his birthplace. This year he goes accompanied by Abe Stern, his treasurer; Lee Kohlmar, his director; and Harry Reichenbach – a list of names duplicable in any movie group.

Messrs. Stern and Warburg, of Frankfort and Hamburg, respectively, and away from home perhaps only temporarily, were not concerned about the fate of the “Huns,” but they were immensely concerned about the fate of Jewish money power in Germany.

To indicate how blind the public has been to the inter-allied Jewish character of much of the world’s important international financial activity, note this from the Living Age earlier in the year:

“According to the Svensk Handelstidning, the recent American loan of $5,000,000 to Norway was really the outcome of an agreement between the Hamburg firm of Warburg & Company and the New York bankers, Kuhn and Loeb. It is regarded as a significant sign of the times that a German firm should be responsible for an American loan to a neutral country. The conditions subject to which this money was borrowed, are not regarded as very favorable to Norway, and no marked effect on the rate of exchange between the two countries has followed.”

Note, in the light of all the statements made about Kuhn, Loeb & Company, and the Warburgs in particular, the assumption in the above quotation that the transaction was really between a German and an American firm. It was principally an arrangement between the Warburgs themselves in family counsel. But the loan will pass in Norway as “an American loan,” and the fact that the terms of the loan, “are not regarded as very favorable to Norway” will react upon Scandinavian opinion of this country. It goes without saying that “no marked effect on the rate of exchange between the two countries has followed,” for that would not be the object of such a loan. The dislocation of exchange is not unprofitable.

It would be most interesting to know in how far Kuhn, Loeb & Company has endeavored to readjust the rate of exchange.

During the war, Kuhn, Loeb & Company made a loan to the city of Paris. Considerable German comment was occasioned by this – naturally. And it is very well worthy of record that in the city of Hamburg, where Max Warburg does business, the chief of police issued this order:

“Further mention in the press of loans made by the firm of Kuhn, Loeb & Company to the city of Paris, and unfavorable comments thereon, are forbidden.”

The following story is vouched for as reliable, and if in one or two minor details it does not represent the exact fact, it is a trustworthy illustration of how certain things were done:

“A Jewish international banking corporation bought up the mining and other similar concessions of Jugo-Slavia, and consequently the policy pushed at the Peace Conference was that which was most convenient for that group. An understanding on the Fiume question was in progress between Wilson and Nitti. Certain concessions had been agreed upon and Wilson was willing to negotiate, when Oscar Straus and one of the Warburgs appeared on the scene. Wilson changed his attitude over night and afterward insisted on the Jugo-Slavia solution of the problem. The way in which concessions had been bought through that territory was a disgrace, and observers expected that it would play an important part at the Peace Conference.”

The financiers are not the only International Jews in the world. The revolutionary Jews, of all countries and none, are international also. They have seized upon the idea of Christian internationalism, which means amity between nations, and have used it as a weapon with which to weaken nationality. They know as well as anyone that there can be no internationalism except on the basis of strong nationalism, but they count on “cover words” to advance their plan.

Enough transpired between the lower and higher Jewish groups of every large center during the war to render it imperative that Jewry confess, repent and repudiate the madness that has ruled it, or else boldly assert and espouse it before the world.

Certainly enough has transpired to render it desirable that the American people look again into the purposes of those Jews who were instrumental in reorganizing our financial system at a most critical time in the world’s history.

Max Warburg was apparently strong enough to suppress German discussion of his brothers’ activity in America.

The Final Chapter

Part 2 – Jewish Power and America’s Money Famine

“We are international bankers. Germany lost the war? – what of it? – that is an affair of the army. We are international bankers.” ~ a German Banker

The international Jewish banker who has no country but plays them all against one another, and the International Jewish proletariat that roams from land to land in search of a peculiar type of economic opportunity, are not figments of the imagination except to the non-Jew who prefers a lazy laxity of mind.

Of these classes of Jews, one or both are at the heart of the problems that disturb the world today. The immigration problem is Jewish. The money question is Jewish. The tie-up of world politics is Jewish. The terms of the Peace Treaty are Jewish. The diplomacy of the world is Jewish. The moral question in movies and theaters is Jewish.

These facts are unfortunate as well as unpleasant for the Jew, and it is squarely up to him to deal with the facts, and not waste time in trying to destroy those who define the facts. These facts are interpreted by the Jew and the anti-Semite with strange extremes of blindness. The Jew never gets the world’s point of view at all; he always gets the anti-Semite’s point of view; and the anti-Semite is equally at fault in always getting the Jew’s point of view.

To say that the immigration problem is Jewish does not mean that Jews must be prohibited entry to any country; it means that they must become rooted to a country in loyal citizenship, as no doubt some are, and as no doubt most are not. To say that the money question is Jewish does not mean that Jews must get out of finance; it means that they must rid finance of the Jewish idea, which has always been to use money to get a strangle-hold on men and business concerns, instead of using finance to help general business. To say that the tie-up of world politics is Jewish does not mean that Jews, as human beings, are to be denied a voice in affairs; it means that they must give up trying to make the world revolve around the Jewish nation as its axis.

It is not the true Jewishness of the Jew, nor yet the nationalism of the Jew that is on trial, but his anti-national internationalism. A true Mosaic Jew – not a Talmud Jew – would be a good citizen. A nationalist Jew would at least be logical. But an international Jew has proved an abomination, because his internationalism is focused on his own racial nationalism, which in turn is founded on his ingrained belief that the rest of humanity is inferior to him and by right his prey. Jewish leaders may indulge in all the platitudes they possess, the fact which they cannot deny is that the Jew has for centuries regarded the “goyim” as beneath him and legitimately his spoil.

The internationalism of the Jew is confessed everywhere by him. Listen to a German banker: imagine the slow, oily voice in which he said:

“We are international bankers. Germany lost the war? – what of it? – that is an affair of the army. We are international bankers.”

And that has been the attitude of every international Jewish banker during war. The nations were in strife? What of it? It was like a Dempsey-Carpentier bout in New Jersey, or a baseball game in Chicago – an affair of the fighters – “we are international bankers.”

A nation is being hamstrung by artificial exchange rates; another by the sucking of money out of its channels of trade; what of it to the international banker? – he has his own game to play. Hard times bring more plums tumbling off the tree into the baskets of the international bankers than does any other kind of times. Wars and panics are the Jewish international bankers’ harvests.

Citizens wake up with a start to find that even the white nations are hardly allowed to see each other nowadays except through Jewish eyes. When the United States supposedly speaks to France, through whom does she speak? All that France saw at that time in history was Otto H. Kahn! And today it is none other than Alan Greenspan

The business of the Peace Conference has done by Jews – has it come to a point where international diplomacy is to become a Jewish monopoly also? Must the special conversations between France, Britain and the United States be held through Jewish interpreters, while Anglo-Saxons and true Frenchmen do the routine embassy work – or shall it be possible for the non-Jewish nations to see one another occasionally through non-Jewish representatives?

Internationalism is not a Jewish conviction, but a Jewish business device. It is most profitable. In diplomacy and at the immigrant station, internationalism pays. Jews interpret nation to nation in the high rites of special conversations between governments; Jewish interpreters swarm at the ports of every country also, where the poor swarm in. It was stated in the House of Lords at one time that most of the trouble in Palestine was caused by Jewish interpreters. It was charged that the Jewish administration added an extra language to the official list in order to make Jewish interpreters indispensable.

Go through the government of the United States, where the income tax secrets are kept, where the Federal Reserve secrets are kept, where the State Department secrets are kept – and you will find Jews sitting at the very spot where International Jewry desires them to sit, and where nothing is kept from their knowledge.

Go abroad and come back to your country, and a Jew will open the gate to let you in, or close it to keep you out – as he chooses.

“Will you be going to Detroit while you are here?” asked a Jewish government agent of a gentleman entering the country.

“I may go to Detroit,” was the reply.

“Well, you go and tell them a Jew let you into this country,” said the government agent.

What the visitor replied is known, but had better not be quoted. The American Jewish Committee might shriek that the people were being incited to pogroms.

The incident, however, is but a sample of what is occurring every day. The truth about the Jewish Question in the United States is perhaps the one form of truth that cannot be indiscriminately told.

The international Jewish bankers regard themselves as in similar fashion “letting” the nations do this or that, regarding the nations not as fatherlands but as customers – and as customers in the Jewish sense. If an army wins or loses, if a government succeeds or fails, what of it? – that is their affair – “we are international bankers,” and we win, whoever loses.

For international Jewish bankers, war is never over. The period of actual hostilities and the emergencies of the nations were but the opening of the trade. The ready cash was skimmed in then – all the cash the world had. True, some of it had to be distributed among the people as war wages and bonuses, in order to keep the struggle going, but this was soon recovered through the means of high prices, artificial scarcities and the orgy of extravagance deliberately organized and stimulated among the people. That phase over, and money disappeared.

Is there any more tragic joke than that diligently disseminated in this country – “The United States has more gold than any other country in the world”? Where is it? How long since you have seen a piece of gold? Where is all this gold – is it locked up in the Treasury of the United States Government? Why, that government is in debt, desperately trying to economize, cannot pay a soldier a decent, livable wage because the finances of the country cannot stand it! Where is that gold? It may be in the United States, but it does not belong to the United States.

The American farmer, and those American industries which were not “wise” to the tricks of international Jewish bankers, and who were nipped by small loans, are wondering where all this money is.

The Jewish international banking system may be easily described. First, there is the international Jewish headquarters. This was in Germany. It had ramifications in Russia, Italy, France, Great Britain and the South American states. (South American Jewry is very menacing.) Germany and Russia were the two countries scheduled for punishment by the International Jewish bankers because these two countries were most aware of the Jew. They have been punished; that job is done.

Jewish political headquarters, as related to the internal affairs of the Jews, was also located in Germany, but the headquarters dealing with the “goyim” was in France. Statements have been made that the political center of Jewry has been transplanted to the United States. But these statements have been made by American Jews whose wish may have been father to the thought. During the Wilson Administration it was possible for a Jew to think and to hope this, but affairs have slightly changed. The ousting of American Jews from the Zionist movement at the behest of Eastern Jews indicates that if the political center of world Jewry has shifted to the United States, the power is still in the hands of aliens resident here. The center is still in Jewry; the United States is merely a square on Jewry’s world checker-board.

But, wherever the financial and political world centers may be, each country is separately handled. In every country – the United States, Mexico and the republics of South America; in France, England, Italy, Germany, Austria – yes, and in Japan – there is an international Jewish banking firm which stands at the head of the group for that country. Thus, the chief Jewish firm in the United States is Kuhn, Loeb & Company, of which one of the members was Paul M. Warburg, brother of M. Warburg & Company, of Hamburg; and another member of which was Otto H. Kahn, resident successively of Germany, Great Britain and the United States, and self-appointed financial spokesman for the United States to France and Great Britain. Great Britain and France seldom see a special American spokesman who is not a Jew. That may be the reason why they reciprocate by sending Jews to us, thinking perhaps that we prefer them.

Paul M. Warburg was the inventor, perfector and director of the Federal Reserve System of the United States. He has not been the only Jew in the Federal Reserve System, but he was the chief Jew there. His mind counted for a great deal. There were others in the war government, of course; Bernard M. Baruch; Eugene Meyer, Jr.; Hoover’s regiment of Jews; Felix Frankfurter; Julius Rosenwald – hundreds of them, and everywhere; but the financial group alone is only recently receiving our attention, and they are not so notably successful in getting the country out of financial difficulty as they were in other lines of effort.

The Federal Reserve System has in my estimation, proven to be a bad system, in spite of the fact that it yields government monetary functions to private financial corporations, but there are all sorts of testimony that it has been badly manipulated. Mr. Warburg, the listener will remember, spoke about certain things being “overcome in an administrative way,” showing that there was a certain amount of “play” or loose motion in the system which could be manipulated either way. The fact remains that the country went swimmingly through several wars by reason of the assistance of the System, and came very lamely through the Peace processes, as the result of the hindrance of the same System. Mr. Warburg, whose name was so prominently connected with the advertisement of the glory of the System, must also stand being mentioned in connection with the criticism.

Whatever money we are said to have as the per capita in the United States, it is a false statement. The money per capita should always be figured on the basis of money in circulation. The statistical “per capita” is not always in circulation. Less than half of it, as a rule. The rest is being juggled.

Whatever the gold in the country, the wealth is still greater. There is more wealth in the United States than there is gold in the world. At one time, one year’s products of the farms of the United States exceeded in money value all the gold in the world.

Yet, under our present system, the burgeoning bulk of the country’s wealth must pass through the narrow neck of Money. There is more wealth than there is money; there is more money than there is gold; money exists at the pleasure of gold; wealth moves at the pleasure of money. Whoever sits at the neck of money, opening or closing as he will, controls the movement of the world’s wealth. And the world’s prosperity depends on the movement of that wealth. When wealth stands still and does not pass from hand to hand, the world’s circulation has stopped; the world becomes economically sick.

The scarcity of cash in hand has led to Credit. Credit is a form of barter. It is a form of dealing by which many transactions are carried on, only the final one being cleared in money. It is a device, which has its dangers, in spite of the efforts of apologists to exploit its advantages. But one thing the system of Credit indubitably does – it allows the money masters to hang on to the Cash. When the world is caught, it is caught with paper, not with Cash. The Cash is always in the hands of those who extol the advantage of the Credit System. Who holds money holds power, and will hold it, until real barter or real money comes in fashion again.

In 1919-1920, according to one of the best monetary authorities in the United States, the total shrinkage in values of the products of our fields, mines, factories, mills and forests represented a sum greater than the total gold supply of the world.

People say, “Well, the prices were too high.” Certainly they were too high, but who and what made them too high? It was the generosity with which money was supplied by the private Federal Reserve System. There was plenty of money. People say, “Well, the shrinkage is only in paper values; the real value of the product is still there.” Certainly, but when you live under a system in which “real” value and “money” value are so intimately intertwined that it affects your bread and butter, the tenure of your farm, and the steadiness of your job, it is pretty hard to separate the two. Moreover, when your prosperity was due to the readiness of a group of men to let out money, and your adversity is due to the unwillingness of the same group, and your own welfare and your country’s welfare is thus see-sawed up and down without any reference to natural law but solely upon determinations taken in committee rooms, you naturally inquire, “Who is doing this? Where is all the money gone? Who is holding it? Here is the wealth of the country; here is the need of the country; where is the money to transfer the wealth to the need? Every condition remains as it was, except money.”

We have a Federal Reserve System, which initially benefited by the assistance of its perfector and director, Paul M. Warburg and continues to do so under the guiding hand of Mr. Greenspan – and will no doubt be inherited by another of his kind (Ben Bernanke took over at the end of the Greenspan years). And what is the condition in the United States – what will the future hold?

Some of the biggest industrial institutions in the country are now in the hands of creditors’ committees. In the late 1980’s, farmers being sold out by the hundreds, if not thousands.

Many lines of business, airline, store-keeping, manufacturing and agriculture, in depression. Why? For lack of money – real money.

Where is the money? This is a country that is supposed to be the financial center of the world – where is the money?

It is in New York. The Federal Reserve System, which Mr. Warburg desired to head up in one central bank, has turned out that way. The money is in New York.

The money is in New York. Go out through the agricultural states, and you will not find it. Go into the districts of silent factories and you will not find it. It is in New York. The Warburg Federal Reserve had deflated the country. A System that was intended to equalize the ups and downs of financial weather has been used “in an administrative” way to deplete the country of money.

The Federal Reserve has been manipulated – as was Warburg’s vision. It has not been a “federal” reserve; it has been a private reserve. It has been operated in the interest of bankers and not of everyone in general. Capable of being used to carry the country gradually back to a natural flow of business and to a natural level of prices, it was used to bludgeon business at a critical time and to bludgeon it in such a way that money-lenders profited when producers suffered.

If that is the fact, there is no American banker but will say that the method was wrong; economically wrong, logically wrong, commercially wrong, if not criminally wrong.

Today the Federal Reserve boasts of its own reserve as if that were a sign of national economic health. With the country struggling to live, the Federal Reserve ought to be low, not high. The high, which the reserve has reached is a measure of the depth of the country’s continued manipulation and depression.

If the Federal Reserve would let out a part of that flood of money – a high financial authority suggests that less than 10 percent would do it – it would be like an infusion of blood into the nation’s veins.

Kuhn, Loeb & Company, the Speyers and the other Jewish money-lenders have money for Mexico, Norway, Germany, and all sorts of commercial companies being organized to do business overseas, and it is American money. The Warburg Federal Reserve System has been badly misused, badly manipulated, and the country is suffering from it.

Still, the people know not what to do. Money is still a mystery. Banking is still sacrosanct. What would be perfectly apparent if done in ordinary business intercourse with a $5 bill, is exceedingly complicated when the sum is five millions and the parties are (1) country banks, (2) Federal Reserve banks and (3) Wall Street speculative institutions. Yet they are only Tom, Dick and Harry with a $5 bill, after all.

The matter is somewhat affected by the gags that are placed on many men competent to criticize. High officials are more or less tied up, by campaign contributions in which all financial concerns have an interest. Legislative officials are, too many of them, indebted to these same interests. A schedule of the private debts of some of the men who have aspired to the Presidency in the last eight years would be very illuminating – almost as illuminating as a schedule of the names of Jews at whose homes they stayed while on journeys through the country. Men who are thus tied up with the present financial system cannot say what in their minds they know.

It is all illustrated in the testimony once given by T. Cushing Daniel before a committee of Congress. It shows to what an extent the power of this private corporation called the central bank can reach:

“When going through the Bank of England I presented a letter which I had from Secretary Hay, and the official of the bank was very polite. He took me through the bank and when we got back to the reception room I asked him if he would allow me to put a few leading questions to him. He said he would, and I asked him if he would give me a statement of the Bank of England. ‘We do not issue statements.’ ‘Does not the House of Parliament sometimes call on you for some statement as to the condition of the bank?’

‘No, sir; they do not call on us.’ . . . . ‘How is it that some of these revolutionists, so-called, do not get up in the House of Commons and raise the devil to know something about what is going on down here? That would be the condition in our country.’ ‘Oh most of them are large borrowers from the bank, and we have no difficulty with them.'” (laughter…….)

~ Afterwords ~
This concludes our presentation of ‘Mask of Dimitirios‘, but it is not the end of the story. It is fitting that the final chapter, as written and presented here, was originally posted on-line on December 25, 2010, ninety-seven years and two days, since the passing of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. The Republic survived to celebrate the 100th anniversary of that diabolical Act – but for how much longer will we hald together as a nation?

In conception, this series was originally to have been titled, ‘The Shadow Government of the United States‘. Need we say more? Recent headlines don’t even begin to tell the REAL story of these diabolical people – and their plans for the future AmeriKa!

Editor’s Notes & Acknowledgment: The information contained within this multi-part series, was gleaned from numerous sources in 2004, for an audio series recorded by me for my then daily program, Perspectives on America. Among the resources used, were the writings of automotive industrialist, Henry Ford; the highly controversial, Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, records from U.S. Senate archives, and other material.

The above was originally published on the second generation Federal Observer Blog in 2010.

~ About the Author ~
A veteran of Viet Nam, student of history (both American and film), Jeffrey Bennett has broadcast for over a quarter century as host of various programs and has been considered the voice of reason on the alternative media – providing a unique and distinctive broadcast style, including topics such as health and wellness, news, financial well-being, political satire (with a twist), education and editorial commentary on current events through the teaching of history. In addition, he is the CEO of Kettle Moraine, Ltd.