The Creature From Jekyll Island

BOOKS by G. Edward Griffin

The Creature From Jekyll Island: An Examination of Global Financial Control

Overview

An intricate history and nature of the Federal Reserve System, arguing it is one of the most perilous entities to have taken root in our society.

It sets out to unravel a profound historical enigma, uncovering the architects and mechanisms behind a system that has continuously operated against the public interest. The seemingly convoluted structure of finance is, in fact, a deliberate obscuration of simple realities. The book proposes seven fundamental reasons for the abolition of the Federal Reserve System:

• It is incapable of achieving its stated objectives.
• It operates as a cartel against the public interest.
• It functions as the supreme instrument of usury.
• It generates our most inequitable form of taxation.
• It encourages warfare.
• It destabilises the economy.
• It serves as an instrument of totalitarianism.

The Genesis of the Federal Reserve: The Jekyll Island Conspiracy

The conceptualisation of the Federal Reserve System traces back to a clandestine meeting in November 1910, held on Jekyll Island, Georgia. This gathering was shrouded in profound secrecy; participants arrived separately, used only first names, and the domestic staff were specially hired and screened to ensure the identities of the guests remained undisclosed. The official guise for this nine-day retreat was a duck hunting expedition.

However, the true purpose was far more significant: to forge an agreement on the structure and operation of a banking cartel. The attendees, seven men who collectively represented an estimated one-fourth of the world's wealth, sought to maximise their profits by stifling competition, erecting barriers to new market entrants, and leveraging governmental authority to enforce their cartel agreement.

Key figures present included Senator Nelson Aldrich, A. Piatt Andrew (Assistant Secretary of the Treasury), Frank Vanderlip (President of Rockefeller's National City Bank), Henry P. Davison (senior partner of J.P. Morgan & Company), Charles D. Norton (President of J.P. Morgan's First National Bank of New York), Benjamin Strong (head of J.P. Morgan's Bankers Trust Company), and Paul M. Warburg (a partner in Kuhn, Loeb & Company and a representative of the Rothschild banking dynasty). Paul Warburg, notably, emerged as the intellectual architect and "father of the system."

The conspirators faced five primary objectives:

• To halt the expansion of smaller rival banks and secure continued control over the nation's financial resources in their own hands.
• To introduce an elastic money supply, thereby reversing the trend of private capital formation and reclaiming the industrial loan market.
• To consolidate the disparate, often meagre, reserves of all the nation's banks into a single, vast reserve, ensuring all banks adhered to uniform loan-to-deposit ratios and protecting them from currency drains and bank runs.
• Crucially, to transfer the inevitable financial losses from the bank owners to the taxpayers.
• To persuade Congress that their scheme was, in fact, a measure designed to safeguard the public interest.

To achieve this fifth, critical objective, the strategists devised a meticulous plan of deception:

• The proposed entity was never to be called a cartel or even a central bank.
• It was to be portrayed as a government agency.
• The establishment of regional branches would create the illusion of decentralisation, suggesting it was not dominated by Wall Street interests.
• The initial structure would appear conservative, incorporating sound banking principles, with the foreknowledge that provisions could be quietly altered or removed in subsequent years.
• The public's anger, stoked by recent financial panics and bank failures, would be exploited to generate popular demand for monetary reform.
• The Jekyll Island plan would be presented as the direct solution to this perceived need.
• University professors would be enlisted to lend an aura of academic approval.
• Paradoxically, some of the very proponents of the scheme would publicly speak out against it, to convince the public that Wall Street bankers were opposed to the measure.

The Federal Reserve System: A Cartel Disguised

The Federal Reserve System, or "the creature," emerged as a private institution masquerading under a governmental facade. Its very name, carefully chosen to avoid terms like "bank" or "cartel," aimed to conjure images of federal authority and financial stability. The twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks, initially presented as a decentralised structure, were always intended to operate as a singular central bank, with ultimate control residing in New York.

The primary function of this system is its unique ability to create "checkbook money" out of nothing. It also acts as the "lender of last resort," providing seemingly unlimited funds to distressed banks, thereby confirming its most fundamental, albeit hidden, role.

Despite its stated mission to stabilise the economy, the Federal Reserve has presided over a litany of financial crises, including the crashes of 1921 and 1929, the Great Depression, numerous recessions, and a staggering 1,000% inflation, which has eroded 90% of the dollar's purchasing power by 1990. I argue that these outcomes are not failures of its stated objectives but rather the successful fulfilment of its true, concealed aims. Furthermore, the system has locked the nation into perpetual debt, as eliminating the national debt would inherently destabilise the money supply, which is inextricably linked to this debt.

A History of Central Banking in America

The Federal Reserve System is not America's first foray into central banking; it is the fourth. Our history reveals a recurring pattern of financial instability whenever such an institution has been allowed to operate:

• The Bank of North America (1781): Established by the Continental Congress, this was America's first central bank. Modelled on the Bank of England, it issued fractional paper notes and used government funds to supplement private capital. It ultimately led to inflation.
• The First Bank of the United States (1791): Proposed by Alexander Hamilton, this bank was granted a 20-year charter and a monopoly on banknote issuance. Though privately owned (with government capital provided through a loan), it was heavily influenced by the Rothschild banking dynasty in Europe. It also contributed to inflation.
• The Second Bank of the United States (1816): Created to address the monetary chaos following the War of 1812, this institution was a carbon copy of its predecessor. Under the direction of Nicholas Biddle, it became a formidable adversary to President Andrew Jackson, who vehemently opposed its existence. Biddle notoriously engineered a deliberate contraction of the money supply, triggering a national panic and depression, which he publicly blamed on Jackson. Despite initial setbacks, Jackson ultimately prevailed, leading to the bank's demise in 1836. This "Bank War," I contend, marked the widespread advent of the boom-bust cycle across America.

In every instance, the outcome has been consistent: inflation and economic turmoil.

The Mechanism of "Bailouts"

A core objective of the Federal Reserve is to shift financial losses from the owners of large banks onto the taxpayers. This process, which I call the "bailout game," unfolds as follows: the Federal Reserve grants commercial banks the authority to create "checkbook money" from nothing, which they then lend out. When these loans inevitably default, and the losses exceed the bank's equity, the bank becomes insolvent. The Federal Reserve intervenes as the "lender of last resort," generating new money and lending it to the distressed institutions, or by guaranteeing their loans.

This action effectively constitutes a hidden tax through inflation, as the newly created money dilutes the value of existing currency, effectively fleecing the public. Large banks, particularly those with extensive international operations, benefit disproportionately, receiving what amounts to a free ride on their FDIC coverage, at the direct expense of smaller banks and the general taxpayer.

The Savings and Loan crisis serves as a prime example, where vast sums disappeared due to governmental mismanagement, with the ultimate cost, hundreds of billions of dollars, being absorbed by the taxpayer. I maintain that this crisis was not an anomaly but a direct consequence of governmental regulation that insulated the industry from free market forces, encouraging unsound business practices.

Global Ambitions: The IMF and World Bank

The blueprint for a global financial architecture was laid at the Bretton Woods conference in 1944, driven by Fabian Socialists John Maynard Keynes of England and Harry Dexter White, then Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury. White, intriguingly, was also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and involved in a Communist espionage ring.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, established during this conference, were designed to be the foundational elements of a world central bank and a common international [[Fiat]]. Their ostensible purpose was to stabilise exchange rates and promote international trade, but their hidden agenda was the construction of world [[Socialism]].

The mechanism involves the transfer of money from industrialised nations (primarily the United States) to developing countries. When these nations default on their loans, the IMF and World Bank intervene, generating additional funds from nothing. This process, I argue, systematically diverts vital development capital from the private sector in industrialised nations, leading to rising interest rates and economic stagnation in those countries. The ultimate consequence for industrialised nations is a drastic reduction in their living standards and the erosion of their sovereignty, compelling them towards acceptance of world government control. For developing nations, their political leaders become reliant on the IMF's financial flows, transforming them into subservient components of a global socialist system.

This system, I contend, has continuously funded and perpetuated corruption and despotism across the globe, in nations such as Tanzania, Uganda, Zimbabwe, Ethiopia, Vietnam, Laos, Syria, Indonesia, Nicaragua, Poland, and Russia.

The much-publicised "demise of communism" in the Soviet bloc is, I believe, a carefully orchestrated deception. While the populations genuinely rejected the system, the top communist leaders were, and remain, quite cordial with leading Western financiers, collaborating when it serves their mutual interests. This apparent shift was a strategic ploy to encourage Western nations to disarm and to channel vast sums of money into the ailing Soviet economy. The objective is not genuine reform, but a transition towards a "social democracy" that retains state control, thereby facilitating a later merger into world government.

The "New World Order" Blueprint

The intellectual and strategic epicentre for the implementation of this Fabian plan in America is the [[Council on Foreign Relations]] (CFR). This small, influential group, which I believe constitutes the hidden government of the United States, includes a vast majority of America's leaders across all sectors. CFR members have openly advocated for the weakening of America as a prerequisite for establishing world government, pursuing this goal through "end runs around national sovereignty," gradually eroding it piece by piece through treaties and international agreements.

The current economic landscape is shaped by what I identify as "doomsday mechanisms": spiralling federal debt, burgeoning entitlement programmes, and the Federal Reserve System itself, all of which are designed to systematically exhaust the American economy through foreign aid and domestic "boondoggles" (wasteful projects).

A crucial document, "The Report From Iron Mountain" (1966), provides startling insights into this grand design. This purported think-tank study, with alleged ties to the Department of Defence and the CFR, explored methods for governments to perpetuate their power and control their citizens. Its chilling conclusion was that historically, war has been the sole reliable means to stabilise society and ensure popular compliance with the state.

Given the eventual aim of a disarmed world government, the report posited the necessity of finding a credible substitute for war. This substitute, it argued, did not need to be a real threat, only a believable one. After rejecting poverty and alien invasion, the report settled on the environmental pollution model. This was deemed the most promising as it could be grounded partly in observable facts (like smog and water pollution), allowing for the creation of terrifying, albeit inaccurate, "end of the earth" scenarios. The purpose of these predictions is not to inform, but to frighten the masses into accepting reduced living standards, increased taxation, and pervasive bureaucratic intervention as the necessary price to "save Mother Earth." I contend that the environmental movement, therefore, serves as a "gigantic ruse" for achieving world government.

The report also detailed mechanisms for compulsory service, suggesting that in the absence of war, forced labour battalions could be created to tackle social issues, effectively implementing a "sophisticated form of slavery" as a prerequisite for social control. Even "blood games," violent competitive events, were considered for their ability to diffuse societal frustrations, though ultimately deemed insufficient to fully replace the intensity of war hysteria.

Leaders such as Maurice Strong, members of the Club of Rome (e.g., Jimmy Carter, Jacques Cousteau, Mikhail Gorbachev), and others are prominent advocates for world government and population control. Cousteau, for instance, famously stated the need to eliminate 350,000 people per day to stabilise global population. Strong himself outlined a hypothetical scenario of a global monetary crisis, engineered by world leaders, to compel affluent nations to accept the authority of a world government. I believe such ideas reflect the true intentions behind the globalist agenda.

The "London Connection" and War Profiteering

The influence of the Rothschild banking dynasty in Europe and its close alliance with the House of Morgan reveals a long-standing practice of profiting from both sides of armed conflicts. This "Rothschild formula" involves manipulating governments into military engagements, not for nationalistic reasons, but for private gain and political favouritism. The objective is often to ensure neither side achieves a decisive victory or defeat, thereby perpetuating conflict and debt.

The Bank of England, the model for the Federal Reserve, institutionalised fractional reserve banking and established the template for the partnership between bankers and politicians. It routinely created vast sums of fiat money to finance wars.

The Great Depression, I argue, was not an accidental occurrence but a direct consequence of deliberate policy. Under Benjamin Strong's leadership, the Federal Reserve systematically inflated the American money supply to bolster the ailing British economy, which was struggling with massive welfare programmes and union demands. This infusion of excess credit into the American stock market, coupled with artificial interest rate adjustments, was calculated to devalue the dollar, causing gold to flow to England, but it inevitably led to the catastrophic crash of 1929.

Even the American Civil War, often portrayed as a struggle for freedom, was fundamentally rooted in clashing economic interests and banking monopolies. European powers, particularly the Rothschilds, actively sought to embroil the United States in civil conflict to prevent the enforcement of the Monroe Doctrine and facilitate their colonial expansion into Latin America. Both the Union and the Confederacy financed their war efforts through the issuance of fiat money, leading to widespread inflation and wealth confiscation from their respective populations. Even Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, I contend, was a strategic move to rally support for the war, not purely a humanitarian act.

In more contemporary times, I maintain that the funding of World War I and II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and even conflicts in the Middle East have been enabled by the "Mandrake mechanism" of the Federal Reserve. American assistance in building the military capabilities of nations such as Russia and China, and the strategic support for figures like Saddam Hussein (whose continued existence, I believe, serves to justify military presence and alliances), cannot be understood without recognising this underlying pattern of war as a tool for global control.

The Nature of Money

A crucial part of understanding this hidden system is comprehending the fundamental nature of money itself. A working definition is that money is anything which is accepted as a medium of exchange. These can be classified into four forms:

• Commodity Money: This possesses intrinsic value, with gold historically serving as the universal standard. The supply of gold is irrelevant to its function as a measure of value; its purchasing power is automatically regulated by the human effort required to extract it, ensuring long-term price stability. Governments, however, tend to dislike commodity money as it limits their ability to increase spending without direct taxation.
• Receipt Money: This represents genuine claims to actual deposits of commodity money. In its pure form, it is honest.
• Fiat Money: This is paper money decreed legal tender, entirely unbacked by gold or silver, and possessing no intrinsic value. Governments invariably enforce its acceptance through law. Fiat money is the fundamental cause of inflation, as it allows politicians to increase spending without raising taxes. The decline in purchasing power experienced by the populace precisely equals the wealth transferred to the government through this hidden tax, inevitably leading to economic chaos and political unrest.
• Fractional Money: This is paper money backed by only a portion of its stated value, a hybrid between receipt and fiat. Banks operating under this system lend out far more than they hold in reserves, creating money out of debt. The inherent temptation for bankers to create as much of this money as possible leads to a continuous reduction of the reserve fraction, inevitably causing it to degenerate into pure fiat money. This practice, from its inception, has resulted in a consistent pattern of inflation, economic booms and busts, and bank runs.

The "secret science" of fractional reserve banking, is creating money out of nothing, has unbound the money supply from natural constraints, limiting it only by the extent to which bankers can reduce their gold reserves. This, being the root of most of modern man's economic difficulties.