"I have two great enemies, the Southern army in front of me and the financial institutions in the rear. Of the two, the one in the rear is the greatest enemy."
If he was really so anti-Big Banks, why did he actively lobby for the passage of the National Bank Act of 1863, thus empowering his supposed “greatest enemy”?
Booth worked for British intelligence located in Montreal. He was carrying a check from a local bank. British intelligence, like for Lincoln, used a front drug company called Permindex to whack JFK. You might enjoy the Committee of 300 by John Coleman. Also the full conspiracy to kill Lincoln by numerous American freemasons can be found in Donald Jeffries Crimes and Coverups in American Politics with an intro by Ron Paul.
Mullins acquires his information from the Library of Congress. A close confident of Ezra Pound. Financial organizations and royalty whack political leaders if not the Bank of England per se.
I took the time to read the chapter on the Lincoln assassination in Crimes and Cover-ups, and the picture is markedly different from the way you summarized it.
Per Jeffries, Booth was connected to Confederate and Yankee intelligence networks, not British. The author does point out that a number of Freemasons sat on the investigative tribunal after the assassination — but he doesn’t actually argue that “numerous American freemasons” plotted the killing itself. The chapter’s final thrust does tie the motive to Lincoln’s Greenback policy, and here he leans heavily on the infamous London Times passage attributed to Lord Goschen:
“If this mischievous financial policy, which has its origin in North America, shall become endurated down to a fixture, then that Government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off debts and be without debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its commerce. It will become prosperous without precedent in the history of the world. The brains, and wealth of all countries will go to North America. That country must be destroyed or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe.”
The problem is that this quotation is a fraud. It doesn’t appear in The Times of the 1860's, nor in Goschen’s writings. He quotes it in the book as "allegedly" coming from the London Times, but the lack of a publication date is a glaring red flag that we are dealing with an apocryphal quote. Just as the Goschen passage collapses under scrutiny, so too does the oft-repeated claim that Lincoln warned of bankers as his “greatest foe”; it never appears in his writings and is first seen in sources decades after his death.
Then there’s the issue of the timeline, and it's why I find Dr. North’s point persuasive: Greenbacks were never meant to be a permanent revolution in money; they were a wartime expediency. Once a more centralized system could be established, Lincoln immediately pivoted to it. Basing his assassination on dubious quotations and a temporary fiscal policy doesn’t account for either the chronology or his actual legislative record.
Now, none of that means there wasn’t a Masonic conspiracy, as there quite clearly was. I've read Dave McGowan's work on this subject (https://centerforaninformedamerica.com/lincoln/) and can find no fault with much of the chapter. The record makes it plain that the "assassination" was not the work of Booth alone. There was a cover-up, and there were layers of complicity. And yes, Freemasonry played a massive role in fomenting pre-war tensions, infiltrating both Northern and Southern leadership.
But that razor cuts both ways: there are strong reasons to believe Lincoln himself was a Mason, or, at the very least, deeply enmeshed in Masonic networks (https://www.gnosticwarrior.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Abraham-Lincoln-Freemason-An-Address-1914.pdf). If that’s the case, the idea of the Masons as the unified hand behind his death only demonstrates that Lincoln had outlived his usefulness like so many other Masonic tyrants before him.
The assassination (as it were) reeks of conspiracy, and Masonic influence is undeniable in the war and its aftermath. But the idea that Lincoln was killed by the bankers because of his Greenback policy is a pernicious historical myth.
Finally, while Eustace Mullins did his research at the Library of Congress, that only tells us where he sat with his notepad, not whether the conclusions he drew were sound. The Library of Congress is an archive. One can spend a lifetime in those reading rooms and still spin myths. I'd highly encourage you to read Dr. Gary North's work on this topic.
All interesting. Will review. You read the Mullins piece?
Seems that the BOE was controlled by the Rothchilds.
Thanks for the discourse. Much is new to me this year.
"Under this roof are the heads of the family of Rothschild—a name famous in every capital of Europe and every division of the globe. If you like, we shall divide the United States into two parts, one for you, James, and one for you, Lionel. Napoleon shall do exactly and all that I shall advise him"(p. 228, "The Rothschilds," by John Reeves).
This book (& several others) expose the REAL DIS-honest Abe
https://mises.org/library/book/real-lincoln
"I have two great enemies, the Southern army in front of me and the financial institutions in the rear. Of the two, the one in the rear is the greatest enemy."
Abraham Lincoln
Politicians say a lot of things.
If he was really so anti-Big Banks, why did he actively lobby for the passage of the National Bank Act of 1863, thus empowering his supposed “greatest enemy”?
https://www.garynorth.com/public/6925.cfm
https://www.garynorth.com/public/6941.cfm
interesting links to Ellen Brown, looks like she all in on AI & CBDC UBI
Color me shocked.
Not.
He created the Greenbacks to go around the Rothchild Bank of England. A national bank is always preferred. That's why the BOE had him killed.
https://www.heritage-history.com/index.php?c=read&author=mullins&book=canaan&story=civil
Did you even read the links I provided? Dr. Gary North has already refuted this tired notion with actual documentation.
I’d love to see some actual proof the Bank of England had Lincoln whacked, not Eustice Mullins’ baseless assertions.
Booth worked for British intelligence located in Montreal. He was carrying a check from a local bank. British intelligence, like for Lincoln, used a front drug company called Permindex to whack JFK. You might enjoy the Committee of 300 by John Coleman. Also the full conspiracy to kill Lincoln by numerous American freemasons can be found in Donald Jeffries Crimes and Coverups in American Politics with an intro by Ron Paul.
Mullins acquires his information from the Library of Congress. A close confident of Ezra Pound. Financial organizations and royalty whack political leaders if not the Bank of England per se.
I took the time to read the chapter on the Lincoln assassination in Crimes and Cover-ups, and the picture is markedly different from the way you summarized it.
Per Jeffries, Booth was connected to Confederate and Yankee intelligence networks, not British. The author does point out that a number of Freemasons sat on the investigative tribunal after the assassination — but he doesn’t actually argue that “numerous American freemasons” plotted the killing itself. The chapter’s final thrust does tie the motive to Lincoln’s Greenback policy, and here he leans heavily on the infamous London Times passage attributed to Lord Goschen:
“If this mischievous financial policy, which has its origin in North America, shall become endurated down to a fixture, then that Government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off debts and be without debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its commerce. It will become prosperous without precedent in the history of the world. The brains, and wealth of all countries will go to North America. That country must be destroyed or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe.”
The problem is that this quotation is a fraud. It doesn’t appear in The Times of the 1860's, nor in Goschen’s writings. He quotes it in the book as "allegedly" coming from the London Times, but the lack of a publication date is a glaring red flag that we are dealing with an apocryphal quote. Just as the Goschen passage collapses under scrutiny, so too does the oft-repeated claim that Lincoln warned of bankers as his “greatest foe”; it never appears in his writings and is first seen in sources decades after his death.
Then there’s the issue of the timeline, and it's why I find Dr. North’s point persuasive: Greenbacks were never meant to be a permanent revolution in money; they were a wartime expediency. Once a more centralized system could be established, Lincoln immediately pivoted to it. Basing his assassination on dubious quotations and a temporary fiscal policy doesn’t account for either the chronology or his actual legislative record.
Now, none of that means there wasn’t a Masonic conspiracy, as there quite clearly was. I've read Dave McGowan's work on this subject (https://centerforaninformedamerica.com/lincoln/) and can find no fault with much of the chapter. The record makes it plain that the "assassination" was not the work of Booth alone. There was a cover-up, and there were layers of complicity. And yes, Freemasonry played a massive role in fomenting pre-war tensions, infiltrating both Northern and Southern leadership.
But that razor cuts both ways: there are strong reasons to believe Lincoln himself was a Mason, or, at the very least, deeply enmeshed in Masonic networks (https://www.gnosticwarrior.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Abraham-Lincoln-Freemason-An-Address-1914.pdf). If that’s the case, the idea of the Masons as the unified hand behind his death only demonstrates that Lincoln had outlived his usefulness like so many other Masonic tyrants before him.
The assassination (as it were) reeks of conspiracy, and Masonic influence is undeniable in the war and its aftermath. But the idea that Lincoln was killed by the bankers because of his Greenback policy is a pernicious historical myth.
Finally, while Eustace Mullins did his research at the Library of Congress, that only tells us where he sat with his notepad, not whether the conclusions he drew were sound. The Library of Congress is an archive. One can spend a lifetime in those reading rooms and still spin myths. I'd highly encourage you to read Dr. Gary North's work on this topic.
All interesting. Will review. You read the Mullins piece?
Seems that the BOE was controlled by the Rothchilds.
Thanks for the discourse. Much is new to me this year.
"Under this roof are the heads of the family of Rothschild—a name famous in every capital of Europe and every division of the globe. If you like, we shall divide the United States into two parts, one for you, James, and one for you, Lionel. Napoleon shall do exactly and all that I shall advise him"(p. 228, "The Rothschilds," by John Reeves).
https://youtu.be/WrpNrSqye-c?feature=shared