Oakleigh Thome, the president of that particular trust company, testified later before a congressional committee that his bank had been subjected to only moderate withdrawals ... that he had not applied for help, and that it was the [Morgan's] 'sore point' statement alone that had caused the run on his bank. From this testimony, plus the disciplinary measures taken by the Clearing House against the Heinze, Morse and Thomas banks, plus other fragments of supposedly pertinent evidence, certain chroniclers have arrived at the ingenious conclusion that the Morgan interests took advantage of the unsettled conditions during the autumn of 1907 to precipitate the panic, guiding it shrewdly as it progressed so that it would kill off rival banks and consolidate the preeminence of the banks within the Morgan orbit." Our Founding Fathers revolted against the near-total government of the English monarchy. But they knew that having no government at all would lead to chaos. So they set up a Constitutional Republic with a very limited government. They knew that men prospered in freedom. Although the free enterprise system is not mentioned specifically in the Constitution, it is the only one which can exist under a Constitutional Republic. All collectivist systems require power in government which the Constitution did not grant. Our Founding Fathers had no intention of allowing the government to become an instrument to steal the fruit of one man's labor and give it to another who had not earned it. Our government was to be one of severely limited powers. Thomas Jefferson said: "In questions of power then let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution." Jefferson knew that if the government were not enslaved, people soon would be. But while wars and revolutions have been useful to international bankers in gaining or increasing control over governments, the key to such control has always been control of money. You can control a government if you have it in your debt; a creditor is in a position to demand the privileges of monopoly from the sovereign. Money-seeking governments have granted monopolies in state banking, natural resources, oil concessions and transportation. However, the monopoly which the international financiers most covet is control over a nation's money.

When the United States was formed, those who controlled the European central banks wanted to establish a presence in the United States, and Thomas Jefferson wrote to John Adams: “... I sincerely believe, with you, that the banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies...” Discusses EO 11647 which establishes ten Federal Regional Councils and which, the author claims, is just more Big Brotherism." [16] Some conspiratorialists do indeed overdraw the picture by expanding the conspiracy (from the small clique which it is) to include every local knee-jerk liberal activist and government bureaucrat. Or, because of racial or religious bigotry, they will take fragments of legitimate evidence and expand them into a conclusion that will support their particular prejudice, i.e., the conspiracy is totally “Jewish,”“Catholic,” or “Masonic.” These people do not help to expose the conspiracy, but, sadly play into the hands of those who want the public to believe that all conspiratorialists are screwballs. Then we ask our interviewee: "Since you say you are not a socialist but you feel the country is being socialized, why don't you do something about it?" His response will run: "I'm only one person. Besides it's inevitable. You can't fight city hall , heh, heh, heh." Allen died as the result of a liver ailment in 1986 in Long Beach, California, at the age of 50. [2] Writing [ edit ]Such was the case with the author of this book. It was only because he set out to prove the conservative anti-Communists wrong that he happened to end up writing this book. His initial reaction to the conservative point of view was one of suspicion and hostili ty; and it was only after many months of intensive research that he had to admit that he had been "conned." If perchance one of the men you ask to define Communism happened to be a politi cal science professor from the local college, he might well reply: "You can't ask 'what is Communism?' That is a totally simplistic question about an extremely complex situation. Communism today, quite unlike the view held by the right wing extremists in America, is not an international monolithic movement. Rather, it is a polycentric, fragmented, nationalistic movement deriving its character through the charismas of its various national leaders. While, of course, there is the welding of Hegelian dialectics with Feuerbachian materialism held in common by the Communist parties generally, it is a monumental oversimpli fication to ask 'what is Communism.' Instead you should ask: What is the Communism of Mao Tse-tung? What is the Communism of the late Ho Chi Minh, or Fidel Castro or Marshal Tito?" surrounding the Railroad strike of 1922, the death of President Harding, and the forced resignation Everyone knows that Adolph Hitler existed. No one disputes that. The terror and destruction that this madman infli cted upon the world are universally recognized. Hitler came from a poor family which had absolutely no social position. He was a high school drop-out and nobody ever accused him of being cultured. Yet this man tried to conquer the world. During his early career he sat in a cold garret and poured onto paper his ambitions to rule the world. We know that. Wether you are very wealthy or a pauper, unless you are a member of the Establishment, you are ultimately their victim.

The Industrialists were instrumental in empowering Communism since its inception. In 1933, FDR was pushed into recognizing Russia which saved it from financial collapse, and at the same time the bankers were underwriting loans for the new regime of Adolph Hitler. In 1941, they rushed to the aid of the United State’s “Noble Ally” Stalin when he broke with Hitler, and after the war the Establishment carved up Europe and set up a China policy described by Owen Lattimore: “The problem was how to allow them [Free China] to fall without making it look as if the United States had pushed them.”Many extremely patriotic individuals have innocently fallen for the conspiracy's line. Walter Trohan, columnist emeritus for the Chicago Tribune and one of America's outstanding politi cal commentators, has accurately noted: Economics Professor Stuart Crane notes that there are two means used to collateralize loans to governments and kings. Whenever a business firm borrows big money its creditor obtains a voice in management to protect his investment. Like a business, no government can borrow big money unless willi ng to surrender to the creditor some measure of sovereignty as collateral. Certainly international bankers who have loaned hundreds of billi ons of dollars to governments around the world command considerable influence in the policies of such governments. Probably at some time you have been involved with or had personal knowledge of some event which was reported in the news. Perhaps it concerned an athletic event, an election, a committee or your business. Did the report contain the "real" story, the story behind the story? Probably not. And for a variety of reasons. The reporter had time and space problems and there is a good chance the persons involved deliberately did not reveal all the facts. Possibly the reporter's own prejudices governed what facts went into the story and which were deleted. Our point is that most people know from personal experience that a news story often is not the whole story. But many of us assume that our own case is unique when really it is typical. What is true about the reporting of local events is equally as true about the reporting of national and international events.