Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Vic S
I didn’t say it started in 1900 or so, I said in the form we have today. I agree that it began around the civil war period to take hold, but it had an earlier attempt with the first and second national banks.

That sounds reasonable to me. A National Bank strikes me as being inherently crony-capitalist. The Navigation act of 1817 is an example of a law written to benefit large corporate interests. There were signs all throughout the era that certain groups of people were trying to gain control of the economic power of the whole nation, and most of those people worked out of the Empire State.

37 posted on 02/23/2017 9:13:08 AM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]


To: DiogenesLamp

If you read - scratch that, the book is 1300 pages of tiny print and very boring writing. Listen to Jay Dyer’s chapter by chapter review of it on youtube (use mp3fy.com to download to mp3).

You’ll understand that there is a group of people in the City of London (not part of England, like the Vatican - the banking center) that Quigley calls the Anglo-American Establishment. They set up central banks in every country that is private. They did it in England around 1650 I believe. They did it in France after the revolution, which was a bankers revolution. In fact, he says that according to the archives he was allowed to read, Napolean was a banking agent. The first thing he did after gaining power after the French Revolution was to create a national bank. The people thought it was public, but it was private, controlled by the City of London.


38 posted on 02/23/2017 10:02:53 AM PST by Vic S
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson