Historical Error #23: A Bogus Document, "Bankers Manifesto of 1892"
Ellen Brown fills her book with bogus quotes. This time, she refers to a bogus document, supposedly introduced by Charles A. Lindbergh, Sr., "Lucky Lindy's" father. She gets her facts wrong about him, too.
People today might wonder why Dorothy, who could have
stayed and played in the technicolor wonderland of Oz, was
so eager to get home to her dreary Kansas farm. But readers could
have related to that sentiment in the 1890s, when keeping the family
homestead was a key political issue. Home foreclosures and evictions
were occurring in record numbers. A document called "The Bankers
Manifesto of 1892" suggested that it was all part of a deliberate plan
by the bankers to disenfranchise the farmers and laborers of their
homes and property. This is another document with obscure origins,
but its introduction to Congress is attributed to Representative Charles
Lindbergh Sr., the father of the famous aviator, who served in Congress
between 1903 and 1913. The Manifesto read in part:
We must proceed with caution and guard every move made,
for the lower order of people are already showing signs of restless
commotion. . . . The Farmers Alliance and Knights of Labor
organizations in the United States should be carefully watched
by our trusted men, and we must take immediate steps to control
these organizations in our interest or disrupt them. . . . Capital
[the bankers and their money] must protect itself in every possible
manner through combination [monopoly] and legislation. The
courts must be called to our aid, debts must be collected, bonds
and mortgages foreclosed as rapidly as possible. When through
the process of the law, the common people have lost their homes, they
will be more tractable and easily governed through the influence of
the strong arm of the government applied to a central power of
imperial wealth under the control of the leading financiers. People
without homes will not quarrel with their leaders. [Web of Debt, pp. 107-8]
This obvious forgery has even less subtlety that the Czarist police's forgery, The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion.
First, as we read on numerous other sites, this manifesto was written in preparation for a secret meeting in Omaha. Can you believe that these high-level bankers would meet in Omaha, the city that hosted the Populist Party's first national convention in 1890? Doesn't anyone ask: "Why?"
Second, lawyer Brown did her usual investigation of the facts, i.e., no investigation. Lindbergh entered Congress in 1907, not 1903. He served until 1917, not 1913. All she had to do was type in his name, type "Wiki," and click. But this was too much work for her!
Third, references to this bogus document are all over the Web. They all say it was introduced (no one knows where) by Lindbergh (no one knows when). If you don't know where or when a document appeared, and it also sounds crazy, you can be sure it's bogus.
Fourth, can you really believe that high-level bankers -- which bankers? -- would write down their plans in such simple language that 15,200 websites nobody has heard of would publish it? Click the link. See what the caliber of these sites is.
Not one of these sites tells us who wrote this, why, or when and where Lindbergh revealed it, let alone revealed where he got a copy of it. Yet lawyer Brown expects her readers to take it seriously.
Any attorney in a courtroom would make mincemeat of her if she tried a stunt like this.
Then she adds fuel to the fire. On page 147, she quotes from The Bankers Manifesto of 1934, an update of the 1892 manifesto. There is no original source documentation for this manifesto, either. I dare her (or anyone else) to provide it. You can begin here.
For my reply to her response, click here:http://www.garynorth.com/public/7215.cfm
For a detailed critique of Ellen Brown's economics, go here:http://www.garynorth.com/public/department141.cfm