Tuesday 31 March 2009 20:00

President Obama did rise to the occasion in London in certain pertinent respects, and was not only present at the meeting but gave an hour-long press conference as well. This indicates that he was able to ‘deliver’ in respect of certain crucial matters relevant to the whole world, which are alluded to obliquely in the communique. Sensitive and uniquely experienced leadership and inspiration from a certain illustrious quarter is believed to have pleased and assisted both parties concerned. For the time being, pending ‘further and better particulars’, the Editor will not be reporting, tonight at least, on the overall outcome of the G-20 meeting which was both satisfactory and unsatisfactory at one and the same time. The unsatisfactory features will have to be dealt with, but not quite yet. As far as we can tell, the President didn’t get to see the Crown Jewels in the Tower of London!

See at the top of the report ABOVE ‘NEW REPORT STARTS HERE’…

See immediately above to the reposted ‘snipped’ text from our posting dated 26th March








• MADOFF ‘VICTIMS’ LIST: Two reports were posted on 6th February 2009 containing the entire list of customers of Bernard L. Madoff Securities, Inc.. Because the list is so huge, we divided it into two segments: Clients A-N; and clients O-Z, plus a Miscellaneous Section. See: Archive. Our list is the easiest to load and clearest of the lists that have been reproduced privately on the Internet.

• We have just published: International Currency Review Volume 34, #2 on Systemic Fraudulent Finance and The Legalisation of Financial Corruption. Also just published are issues of our titles Economic Intelligence Review, London Currency Report, Interest Rate Service and Arab-Asian Affairs. For further details, please check the second white panel on the Home Page.

• Globalist hegemony ideology and practice is comprehensively debunked in the Editor’s study entitled The New Underworld Order, which can be ordered via the books section of this website. If you want to see what may well happen if the angle of decline steepens much further, you could do worse than also order a copy of The Red Terror in Russia, by the contemporary Russian eyewitness Sergei Melgounov, another Edward Harle Limited book available direct from this website.

• ADVERTISEMENT: Details of the Internet Security Solution software offered by this service in conjunction with a donation are appended at the very foot of this report, below the legal data. See also the catalogue by clicking on World Reports Limited and scrolling down to the bottom.

• DONATIONS: You can help finance these exposures (which the Editor has to prepare on top of his normal publishing responsibilities) by sending us a donation. Press Make a Donation, which is live, and it takes you straight to our ultra-safe ordering system, which accepts Visa and MasterCard.

By Christopher Story FRSA, Editor and Publisher, International Currency Review and associated intelligence publications and information services. See this site for details and ordering facility.

• CORRESPONDENCE TO THE EDITOR: We routinely, automatically DELETE all emails which OMIT any element of the requested coordinates. We are not prepared to deal with anonymous spooks and other cowards who are too scared to provide their coordinates, for identification.

• The CONTACT US facility is found in the red box throughout this combined website.

It emerged in the course of Wednesday 1st April, always allowing for April Fool’s Day of course, that the ‘signal’ emitted by the frenetic operative President Nicolas Sarkozy by his provocative use of the word ‘deliverables’ represented the surfacing of an immense row that has been blazing behind the scenes as these characters vie among themselves for leverage in the context of the fact that President Obama may have arrived empty-handed for the G-20 Meeting, after blocking the releases on Monday (as reported below). You could almost cut the tension with a kitchen knife.

According to our sources, the President of the United States is to go sightseeing at the Tower of London tomorrow, having been told by President Sarkozy and one or two other leaders that he cannot surface at the Canning Town ExCel Centre dump with the rest of them unless he provides concrete undertakings concerning a timetable for the releases.

• In other words, it is reported to us by several sources that the President of the United States and his team have been EXCLUDED from the G-20 meeting. It’s quite difficult to imagine that this state of affairs will have been patched up overnight, but bravado and brinkmanship may be in play.

If this is true (and the entire ghastly situation is typically in a state of extreme flux as the bickering, bargaining and bludgeoning among the rats in this sack continues right up to the ‘finishing’ line), it would be an absolutely deplorable outcome SINCE NO UNDERTAKING GIVEN BY THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT can be relied upon. How any foreign power can imagine otherwise, after the abuses and abominations perpetrated in recent years by Washington, is a mystery.

It would be an act of extreme folly for the other G-20 leaders to accept anything at all other than EXECUTION. US undertakings that execution will occur in the future, WILL BE BROKEN.

Certain sources inform us that the problem all along has been that the Connecticut Trust group, serving the interests of the Bush Cabal, have sabotaged the releases process throughout and that certain top trustees have made a habit of going to the bank, creaming off the profit, and retiring to wait for the start-up process to begin all over again: and that this behaviour has continued for a considerable period of time. Whether this or something like it is near the truth or not, what is fact is that the President of the United States can ORDER compliance with his requirements, and that he can do so inter alia by issuing Executive Orders accordingly.

Thus he could issue Executive Orders to each of the THIRTEEN banks and the other associated parties, and to the Connecticut Trust, DEMANDING compliance according to a specific timeframe.

We are, however, STAGGERED, that such suggestions are floating around at this late stage. If this formula, or something like it, were appropriate, it should have been applied the moment President Obama came to power. Instead of which, we have drifted into April, with the situation becoming more and more tense as these rats smile in public but attack each other behind the scenes.

They are ALL in severe danger of getting up the noses of the whole world with their self-centred, destructive antics. The world is expecting results, and by the vibes sensed to date, all that can be identified is MORE TENSION, MORE SQUABBLING, MORE DISCORD, MORE GRANDSTANDING AND SO FAR, NO SIGN THAT THE FRAUDULENT FINANCE ISSUES ARE BEING ADDRESSED.

As for the antics in London, we have several points to make:

• At the Press Conference with Gordon Brown in the morning of 1st April 2009, April Fool’s Day, assinine British journalists wasted the world’s time with insulting, childish questions. Some idiot from the Sun, a filthy rag published by the globalist with 33 offshore subsidiaries, Rupert Murdoch, asked the President of the United States some fatuous question about football and several other non-issues. You probably observed the huge smile that broke across the face of Gordon Brown, for whom smiling is normally a physical problem. The reason for this gorgeous smile?

The nutcase at the Sun had obligingly asked three goofy questions, so a nice big chunk of the Press ‘Conference’ would now be taken up with trivia of the most degrading kind, thereby relieving the leaders of the residual likelihood that they might be called upon to answer probing questions of substance. If Barack Obama had possessed any spine, he would have retorted that he is in the British capital to do serious business, and has no time or inclination to answer foolish questions.

But no. Lots and lots of precious minutes were deliberately squandered in this display of fatuous stupidity, which degraded the office of the Presidency and made the British Prime Minister look even more trite than has become the norm. But wow, we’ve never seen him smile like that before!

• Concerning the ‘rioting’, you will have observed that the number of ruffians was very modest, probably not more than 3,000. This would appear to be the sum total of the controlled rent-a-mob, directed by paid agents, that could be summoned up to perform the ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS OF OBFUSCATION, DIVERSION AND REDIRECTION, so that the BBC, CNBC et al could focus on these childish antics while the bickering, bargaining and bludgeoning continued behind the scenes in the rat-sack. Reasons that we can confirm that the above is a quasi-accurate summary of the situation include knowledge that paid agents were at work (as in former overt Communist countries), and the obvious fact that the Metropolitan Police could perfectly well have cordoned off much of the City of London so that the rent-a-mob could not get close enough to Royal Bank of Scotland to break all their street level windows.

Mind you, no-one anywhere in the world will have shed a tear about that particular display of vandalism: indeed, one would be inclined to the view that smashing windows at RBS may have been a ‘licensed activity’, and probably organised deliberately.

The other purpose of this orchestrated theatrical display, which may be ‘escalated’ on Thursday, will have been to feed ‘revolutionary TV coverage’ all round the world, in accordance with the World Revolutionary remit to which manipulative elements behind the scenes are working. As for the BBC’s sycophantic coverage of the rabble, nothing gets in the way of that subversive entity’s perverse insistence upon maximising the potential for fostering unease, dissent and tension.

Come the real counter-revolution, the British Broadcasting Corporation will need to be severely reformed and put back on a charter which requires it to elevate standards of morality across the board and to cease and desist from its perverse role as an instrument of the Revolution.


While the Editor was travelling yesterday (he is back in London), our report dated 26th (and 30th) March was extensively publicised on a British TV network, in the afternoon. The two segments that were taken up by ‘mainstream’ TV were the section dealing with the Barclays Bank corruption and the judicial cover-up, and Lord Oakshott’s grim exposure of that bank’s nefarious operations in the House of Lords; and the ‘dialogue’ between President Obama and The Queen, written by the Editor of this service on the basis of ‘relevant information’.

Apparently the fact that our reports were taken up by ‘mainstream’ TV annoyed some people, as though we ourselves sought that coverage. No, we did not. We haven’t solicited independent coverage for anything that we have ever publicised. There’s no need to. That’s the whole point.

It is interesting that those who were annoyed, reacted to the reports ‘going mainstream’. Think about that. What this implies is that, as we have said before, so long as the reports are somehow confined to the Fifth Estate, there’s not a problem (of exposure): but when the crossover takes place, these people get rattled. THIS IS BACK TO FRONT. We know for a fact that our readership, per report, exceeds the total circulations of all British newspapers combined. Therefore, the boot should be on the other foot: it is the Fifth Estate that has been spearheading these exposures, not the ‘mainstream’: it didn’t wake up to the fact that there was a problem until the roof was about to fall in. Everyone knows this, so it astonishes us that our crossover into the ‘mainstream’ was a problem for those who were ‘annoyed’. They seem to be somewhat behind the curve here.

This also shows that the ‘mainstream’, realising it is being deceived, manipulated, controlled and lied to, is now accessing those sources of information that can be trusted within the Fifth Estate (a.k.a. the Internet). This is a NEW development.

And pertinent to this was our reference in the 30th March report to the likelihood that ‘mainstream’ journalists are venting their professional annoyance, even anger, at being deceived, manipulated, controlled and lied to, by rubbishing the characters and behaviour of key globalist operatives on the stage ahead of the overhyped G-20 meeting to be held out at that dump in Canning Town.

Concerning which, everything, we understand, is going pearshaped in sync, given that:

• As widely publicised, President Sarkozy of France has threatened to walk out of the dump if the meeting papers over the cracks and doesn’t tackle the fundamental problems head-on: but his definition of the underlying problems remains unclear as he doesn’t define his terms.

• President Obama blocked the releases yesterday, according to informed sources: because:

• The payee countries are squabbling among themselves, with the big powers and with the United States, over what projects are to be funded, who is getting what, when, and/or all of the above, and:

• Our sources stress that President Obama wants the payouts done properly.

•NOTE: This is what we are being advised. However we remain AGNOSTIC/SCEPTICAL as to whether this is a cover for a failure to release, or the opposite. Right now, it’s not yet clear.

• Memorandum item: Republican crooks in the Congress are reported to be wingeing because they aren’t getting the kickbacks to which they’ve become accustomed. Applies to the others, too.

The ExCel Centre is the most hideous bunker-style block of concrete imaginable. We understand that in addition to the reason for relegation of the G-7 meeting to Canning Town given earlier (it will be the first time that any Head of State has been anywhere near the place since the days of King Canute), this hideous location was chosen precisely because it is such a long way from the centre of the British capital city, so that if it is attacked, the physical collateral damage to the surrounding area ‘won’t matter’, in comparison to the disaster which would occur if the Queen Elizabeth Centre opposite Westminster Abbey were to be attacked. In such a catastrophe, the ancient, venerable Westminster Abbey might be destroyed. Also, one presumes that the remote concrete dump was constructed for a purpose, namely to withstand any category of attack, even a nuclear attack.

As reported earlier, a leaflet containing three charts extracted from International Currency Review, Volume 34, #2, distributed in March, has been disseminated to relevant quarters in Washington DC and in the Virginia area. The charts show the participation of General Motors, Ford Motor Company, and General Electric in the MBS-CDO-CDS Fraudulent Finance Non-recourse Carousel. Extensive coverage of this corruption is provided in the International Currency Review presentation.

Mr Wagoner, CEO of General Motors was ‘removed’ from his post SPECIFICALLY because of GM’s participation in these transactions, we have been advised.

• A subtle point is appropriate here. Do not imagine for a single moment that there was ever any intention that Mr Wagoner should leave his post, UNTIL the participation of GM in this Fraudulent Finance activity was publicised: but given that International Currency Review Volume 34. #2 is now resident on desks and in official offices all around the world, there was nothing much they could do to de-publicise it, especially since we have distributed the leaflet with the charts showing how this scam was perpetrated and how General Motors, in receipt of colossal US taxpayer funds, had been engaged in these activities. Another component of the Octopus’s scamming activity BLOWN.

The Metropolitan Police have updated the press concerning the outcome, at least that element thereof that can be reported for public consumption, of the massive police raids on ‘Safety Lock Boxes’ located in Mayfair, Edgeware and Hampstead, previously reported by this service.

In a conversation with Scotland Yard’s Press Office on 31st March, the Editor established that 2,457 lock boxes and their contents were restored to their rightful owners, while more than 3,500 of the boxes and their contents were confiscated and have triggered massive worldwide investigations.

Bear in mind, when reading what follows, that we are NOT being told that the Lock Boxes held the stolen and other collateral used for Fraudulent Finance operations, because this subject remains taboo except with the Fifth Estate. However reading between the lines, the following summary of the police update, which appeared in The Times, London, dated 25th March 2009 [page 17], is quite revealing, under the circumstances. The Editor spoke to the Press Office to check out the report:

‘A police raid [backed by 300 heavily armed police marksmen – Ed.] on safety deposit boxes has revealed “an Aladdin’s cave of criminality” spanning murder, money-laundering, paedophilia, people-trafficking and drug-running, leading to 1,000 separate inquiries around the world’.

‘More than 3,500 deposit boxes were raided last June by officers from the Metropolitan Police’s Specialist Crime Directorate. They seized £35 million in cash, of which £1.0 million has yet to be claimed, dozens of passports, cocaine, FORGED BANKING BONDS, including one for $4.95 million, and suitcases full of gold and cannabis (marijuana). The Times has learned that the contents of some of the boxes are being investigated by the Counter Terrorism Command’.

‘Seven hundred of the box-holders are being referred to Customs for suspected tax evasion involving £15.0 million. So far, 11 people have been charged in connection with the raid(s), codenamed Operation Rize, and 40 people have been arrested’.

‘Detective Chief Inspector Mark Ponting, from the Economic and Special Crime Command, said:

‘”Some of the boxes have not been accessed for some years, including boxes that contain millions of pounds. Some belonged to prisoners hoping to pick up their stashes on emerging from jail’.

• But of course, this is only the information that’s allowed out FOR PUBLIC CONSUMPTION.

Given the arrogance of those responsible for the illegal ‘snipping’ of substantive portions of our report dated 26th March, which we restored and also reposted with the report posted on the 30th,
and given that these portions remain strictly pertinent to what is happening this week in London, we are reposting the ‘snipped’ material AGAIN, not least to make the point that if you interfere with this website, WE WILL RETALIATE. Further, as one friend put it last night on the Editor’s return:

• If they want a rest from the biting criticism which is clearly ‘hurting’, the way forward is to STOP THE CORRUPTION and to PAY OUT THE HIJACKED RELEASES instead of complaining about all this EXPOSURE. The exposure is a specific consequence of the corruption: so, to bring an end to the exposure, the smart thing is to STOP THE CORRUPTION. But since THIS IS NOT HAPPENING, the exposures will continue until these crooks come to their senses (if they have any).

• It is noticeable that more and more observers are cottoning on that CRIMINALITY lies behind the global crisis. This wasn’t the case even a few weeks ago. The secret of these exposures is to focus on the fact that we are dealing with a BLACK CABAL OF HIGH-LEVEL CRIMINALS who do not appear to realise that they have been STOOD UP TO and that the British, American and external publics are less and less prepared to put up with their abuses and abominations.

• Indeed we now are being advised that the mood of the British public is only a few notches below one of UNRESTRAINED FURY at the insensitive arrogance of these serial criminalist scumbags.

• So, public relations-wise, the grandstanding for the G-20 conference ISN’T WORKING.

As a French speaker, the Editor of this service has difficulty imagining that President Sarkozy used the word ‘deliverables’ with the intention that it should refer to anything OTHER than the releases which have been hijacked by the reprobate US authorities for years. However as is ALWAYS the case with these two-faced, double-minded operatives, scope exists for the French President, or his hard-faced Finance Minister, to ‘explain’ later that what he meant was NOT what those ‘in the know’ THINK he meant. So although we reproduce herewith several reports of Lagarde’s interview with the BBC on Monday, it is still (slightly) open to question whether the French President meant what we and others BELIEVE he meant.

Further, the Editor has never come across the word ‘deliverables’ used in the French language like this, so the strong presumption must be that Sarkozy chose this word deliberately, in order to raise the temperature and try to FORCE resolution of the releases.

At this juncture, we prefer to quote published sources verbatim, and leave the reader to reach his or her own conclusions. As of 1:15am on April Fool’s Day, 228 sources posted on the Internet were quoting this outburst. A FEW had REMOVED the word ‘deliverables’: which, like the ‘snipping’ of our text on 29th March, effectively CONFIRMS that the ‘releases’ interpretation is correct.

This fracas ALSO demonstrates that RESISTANCE (see above) to the releases has persisted right up to the threshold of the G-20 meeting, implying an environment of absolute chaos and confusion, as is typically to be expected of rats in a sack, especially this demented strain of rats:

(1) The Daily Telegraph: Report by Henry Samuel in Paris and Toby Harnden in London: Excerpts:

‘If Mr Sarkozy’s strident demands for a new, restrictive regulatory structure were not met then he would leave an “empty chair”, the French Presidnet’s Finance Minister warned, hours before President Barack Obama arrived in London to meet Gordon Brown before the start of the summit on the global economic crisis’.

‘”President Sarkozy was very clear on that front: he said if the deliverables were not there, I won’t sign the communique”, Christine Largarde said’.

‘”It means walking away. I think he’s very determined”‘.

• Memorandum item: The authors of this report thought that Sarkozy was talking about regulation, and demonstrated that they appeared to have no clue what he was really (probably) talking about.

• FURTHER Memorandum item (inserted Wednesday 6:30pm UK time): The PRINTED edition of The Daily Telegraph today OMITTED the pointed reference to ‘deliverabes’, confirming the analysis that this was a one-off SIGNAL (typical of the Illuminati’s modus operandi) which was NOT MEANT TO RESONATE beyond the purpose for which it was intended: i.e. to send a sharp reminder to Messrs Brown Sarkozyque that they had BETTER DELIVER, OR ELSE.

(2) ABC News: Report by Karen Travers and Jake Tapper: Excerpts:

‘Tensions over how to handle the global economic crisis erupted before the G-20 summit even began, with French President Nicolas Sarkozy threatening today to walk out of the meeting if the countries do not agree to stronger international financial regulations’.

‘French President Nicolas Sarkozy’s tough talk puts him at odds with President Obama who is en route to the meeting of the world’s wealthy nations’.

‘The French President is quoted in the Paris newspaper Le Figaro vowing, “If there’s no progress in London, there’ll be an empty chair. I’ll get up and leave”‘.

‘”Yes, we will,” French Finance Minister Christine Lagarde told the BBC’.

‘”President Sarkozy was very clear on that front. He said that ‘If the deliverables are not there, I won’t sign the communiqué’… It means walking away”‘.

‘The report cited Sarkozy’s advisers as saying the French delegation would balk at a summit that produces a “false success with language that sounds good but contains no commitments”‘.

‘The BBC interview brought into public view tensions that have been simmering for weeks among European countries and the U.S. over how to deal with the economic meltdown’.

‘Sarkozy had earlier said the economic crisis was caused by “Anglo-Saxons” and is pushing for tougher regulations, including rules that would apply to money launderers, tax havens, and companies and hedge funds that could threaten the economic system’.

• Memorandum item: The authors of this report thought that Sarkozy was talking about regulation, and demonstrated that they appeared to have no clue what he was really (probably) talking about.

(3) Bloomberg: Report by Simon Kennedy and Francois de Beaupuy: Excerpts:

‘French President Nicolas Sarkozy will walk out of this week’s Group of 20 summit if his push for stricter international financial regulation flops, Finance Minister Christine Lagarde told the British Broadcasting Corporation’.

‘Sarkozy will refuse to sign any statement if he feels “the deliverables are not there”, Lagarde said in the interview. “I think he is very determined”’.

‘“It’s a bombshell to be honest,” said Philip Whyte, senior research fellow at the London-based Center for European Reform. “If such a high-profile leader would walk out of the summit, it likely would be seen as very negative on the stock and bond markets. It would highlight the disunity among the leaders when the times require a show of unity, concrete actions’. [BLAH, BLAH].

• Memorandum item: The authors of this report thought that Sarkozy was talking about regulation, and demonstrated that they appeared to have no clue what he was really (probably) talking about.

(4) The Wall Street Journal: Report by David Gauthier-Villars: Excerpts:

‘French Finance Minister Christine Lagarde said President Nicolas Sarkozy would walk away from this week’s Group of 20 meeting in London if no progress was made on global financial regulations’.

‘”President Sarkozy was very clear on that front”, Ms. Lagarde said in an interview with the BBC Television recorded on Monday and made available on the BBC’s website on Tuesday. “He said: ‘If the deliverables aren’t there, I won’t sign the communiqué’. It means walking away”‘.

‘Lagarde’s office said Tuesday that she had intended to underline that President Sarkozy is “highly determined” to achieve concrete results at the G-20 meeting’.

‘A spokesman said her comments should not be interpreted as an indication that the French President intends to leave in the middle of the meeting’.

‘Ms. Lagarde’s comment came as the U.S., the U.K. and other members of the G-20 are struggling to reach a consensus on how to tighten financial rules and boost the world economy. The U.S. and the U.K. are calling for tougher financial regulation at the national level, while France and Germany are lobbying in favor of more supra-national regulation’.

‘Asked Tuesday whether he might leave before the end of the summit, President Sarkozy said that he remained focused on working with the other G-20 members to find ways to solve the global economic crisis. “The crisis is too serious for us to hold a summit for nothing,” Mr. Sarkozy said’.

• Memorandum item: Note that in THIS report, Sarkozy is said to have watered down his threat. That REINFORCES the view that the use of the word ‘deliverables’ was intended as a signal to President Obama, who (see above) BLOCKED the releases on Monday, thereby squandering the then 72-hour Swift ‘window’ period for settlement, that Obama’s action in yet again blocking the releases was not appreciated and would be liable to have severe consequences.

HOWEVER, the releases cannot be done ‘suddenly’: ANOTHER ‘Swift’ window period of 72 hours is necessary. An undertaking by Mr Obama at the G-20 to complete the process would be absolutely meaningless, since he cynically reneged on his signed undertakings last year, as re-reported in the ‘interview’ between Obama and The Queen that was ‘snipped’ from our report dated 26th March and reposted as reported above, and with this updated report [see below]. On the basis of these considerations, we suspect that the G-20 will wind up glossing over the issue of the ‘deliverables’, having to put up with another (empty?) undertaking from President Obama to complete.

After all, it was reported to us that Obama BLOCKED the releases on Monday, thus prompting the Sarkozy outburst, or perhaps the outburst pre-empted the blocking. Either way, and given that the countries were reportedly squabbling as indicated above, the omens for the ‘make or break’ pow-wow in the Canning Town nuclear bunker looked dismal as this update was being completed.

That’s why President Sarkozy risked informing the ‘mainstream’ about what is going on, by using the word ‘deliverables’. As you can see (and you can see further by accessing the 228+ postings on this subject), THE ‘MAINSTREAM DIDN’T ‘GET IT’, as it NEVER ASKS THE RIGHT QUESTIONS.

• POSTSCRIPT: VERY INTERESTINGLY, the CURRENT BBC report OMITS the reference to Sarkozy’s remark about ‘deliverables’ and simply asserts, far down in the article almost as an afterthought, that Largarde had said that Sarkozy would walk out if he didn’t get what he wanted. This suggests that a grim rearguard operation to staunch speculation about the voluble French President’s use of the word ‘deliverables’ has been ordered, so that the entire matter remains completely up in the air. Which is JUST PERFECT for the manipulators of the World Revolution.

The talks will be accompanied by tight security, with Metropolitan Police Commander Simon O’Brien last week warning that the capital was about to see an “almost unprecedented level of activity”.


With the Lombard Odier-wrapped illicit derivatives trading programme in full swing and being showered with what ‘new money’ the crooks have been able to generate and steal, the criminal official intention is to rebuild the broken derivatives sector, with the assistance of ‘bought and paid for’ corrupt hedge fund operators and money managers (not all of whom are professional sheisters obviously), and to keep the carousel going and building, fed with new money filched from gullible investors, whether borrowed on permissive terms from the Federal Reserve or not, with a view to making the entire derivatives mountain of around $700 trillion (excluding double-counting) ‘whole’ – notwithstanding the reality that hardly any of these derivatives ‘Structured Products’ contain ANY real value at all, since almost all of them are NON-RECOURSE.

This is all explained in the latest issue of International Currency Review, and also in Economic Intelligence Review [see second white panel], as well as in the four-page leaflet containing the three main charts which is being distributed in Washington, DC, and elsewhere.

All that our latest subscriber printed materials do is to point out the stark reality of the fact that these false constructs (derivatives) are by definition totally fraudulent and devoid of value, so that retrospective attempts sponsored by the demented US Government to pass off that they contain value represents a massive, unprecedented fraud on the US taxpayer and future generations of Americans, while at the same time:

• Guaranteeing the accumulation of new mountains of debt arising from the Federal Reserve’s outrageous lending for speculative purposes; and:

• Guaranteeing a hyperinflation. Pundits are now suggesting that this phenomenon will emerge in several years’ time. The Editor’s view is that the choices made by the new bunch of fantasists in charge in Washington are so extreme, So damaging, so wrong-headed and so destabilising, that the hyperinflationary pressures will become apparent much sooner than that – WITHOUT delivering any ‘beneficial’ impact to the ‘real’ economy in the interim.

The decisions made since Obama took office are SO perverse that one is tempted to join those who insist that this is all being done on purpose. The correct answer to such empty speculation is that we don’t know whether this is the case or not.

On the basis of the Christian knowledge that the devil is the author of all lies and confusion, the Editor’s view is that these operatives are wallowing in devilish confusion and have fallen prey to diversionary, self-defeating, complex, elaborate ‘whizz-kid’, knee-jerk ‘solutions’ in a desperate bid to ‘resolve’ the colossal problem created by the corrupted money center banks themselves, which were indulging, until mid-September 2008, in unproductive, illicit, off-balance sheet speculative activity on a scale with no historical precedent.

That suggests that if it had not been for such wasteful,unproductive, untaxed, off-balance sheet speculation, many of the banks in question would be surplus to requirements.

According to Story’s First Law, ‘all organisations are run for the benefit of those who are running the organisation’. This, of course, explains why, deprived of the toys that they were playing with, the banks went on strike and have been hoarding and stealing funds ever since – precisely with a view to restarting the speculative, win-win Ponzi Fraudulent Finance that they were wallowing in prior to mid-September 2008, instead of focusing primarily on lubricating the real economy.

The smarter solution would have been to allow more than just Lehman Brothers to go to the wall. Wall Street, where the wall is, is supposed to believe in free markets, with no participant being subsidised at the expense of other participants. The new, decadent, twist is that all the relevant participants can have their corporate snouts in the trough, and to hell with the hyperinflationary consequences. The Wall Street institutions and the satellite hedge funds and other intermediaries, along with the banks, are all being subsidized AT THE EXPENSE OF THE REAL ECONOMY.

• It’s called a banker’s ramp.

And to cover all this up, the United States is now governed by a man who takes his cue from Fidel Castro and President Chavez. He thinks his gift of the gab can be relied upon somehow to save him from the devastating and very rapidly approaching adverse consequences of his perverse, wrong-headed decisions, which are holding up the recovery of the Rest of the World.

And he is using this gift of the gab to LIE to the American people that this is all about reviving the real economy, when it isn’t. It’s all about reviving the fraudulent derivatives sector carousel.


The previously reported theft of the $12.8 billion was orchestrated to achieve three objectives at the same time:

• To dissolve the multi-billion dollar claims and Court Order related to CMKM et al, and to make it clear that the CMKM Attorney(s) have signed the appropriate documentation to secure the funds held at the Depositary Trust Clearing Corporation under Court Order, and STEAL THE MONEY.

• To satisfy the ‘Payee’ et al, by authorising and signing a Presidential Executive Order (15th January 2009) – thereby circumventing public disclosure (and possible physical threat when George W. Bush was no longer President of the United States) and STEAL THE MONEY.

• To STEAL the $12.8 billion via Presidential Order/Court Claim – and funds sitting under the control of the DTCC – with the intent to send the money to Carlyle et al., without any repercussions – via Bank of America, Tyler, Texas, and then to Canada.

Some time ago we reported that Lord Myners, the City (of London) Minister in the Gordon Brown Government, had publicly suggested that City bankers engaged in Fraudulent Finance should be prosecuted. We then received a prompt message to the effect that ‘they’ would be grateful if we did not ‘go on about this’. There was no explanation, as usual.

It has since emerged that Lord Myners, who was selected to head up the British Government’s investigation into tax havens, chaired a hedge fund group operating through Jersey, Channel Islands. Jersey is used by fund managers to keep profits offshore so as to avoid British tax.

Before becoming a Government Minister, Lord Myners was appointed to head a company that took over Liberty Ermitage Jersey, controlling investments worth about $2.0 billion. Myners made his fortune with Gartmore, a prominent City fund management outfit, the Jersey, C.I., offshoot of which handled millions of pounds for more than 4,100 overseas investors.

Lord Myners was also involved with Aspen Re, a reinsurance firm located in Bermuda, thereby saving large sums in tax annually. A UK Treasury spokesman said on 23rd March:

‘All of his past business roles are a matter of public record and he has made a full declaration of the interests. The experience he brings continues to be hugely valuable to the Government at a time when we are working to restore and rebuild the banking sector’.

In other words, the British Government is relying, in part, on the toxic experience of a hedge fund manager, familiar with the Fraudulent Finance sector of course, to advise them on how to REBUILD the banking sector which has been devastated by its indulgence in Fraudulent Finance.

Maybe when he called for British bankers who have been engaged in Fraudulent Finance to be prosecuted, he was going too far for the likes of certain interests. It is normally the case that these people reinvent themselves as ‘whiter than white’ (‘Blankfeinism’), but it would appear that Lord Myners’ linen might not necessarily emerge gleaming white from the wash.

Observations from The New York Times on the latest instalment of ‘Geithnerism’ [25th March 2009]:

• Can banks that received Government bailouts use taxpayer money to bid on toxic assets, in the hope of making a profit? [Correct answer: NO – Ed.].

• Can banks sell some assets and then use the proceeds, leveraged by generous Government financing, to buy more of the same? [Correct answer: NO – Ed.].

• Might investment houses be tempted to overpay, if doing this buoys up the value of their own investments? [TARP provides for an Oversight Review Committee with clawback powers to compel restitution if too much is paid. This explains why Goldman Sachs is rushing to pay back the billions it received from the Government so that it is not bound by the TARP restrictions. No-one is asking about ‘source of funds’: whence the Goldman billions for repaying the Government? – Ed.].

• In the end, it will be the taxpayer who will be largely footing the bill.
[Not ‘in the end’: straight away – Ed.].

• Joseph E. Stiglitz, a Nobel Prize-winning economist, in an interview with Reuters, called the program “very badly flawed” and said it offered “perverse incentives” that amounted to “robbery of the American people”. [Couldn’t have said it better ourselves – Ed.].

• Bert Ely, a prominent banking consultant, said investors would be cautious because many crucial details were still missing – the size and terms of loans they would receive from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, for example, and the amount of equity they would be allowed to put in, and whether banks would be allowed to walk away if they did not like the price at auction. “Today we know a lot more than we did yesterday, right?” Mr Ely said. “I’m being facetious!”.

• Many questioned the auction mechanism to sell toxic assets off from banks’ balance sheets. Price, most experts agree, is the biggest sticking point. The banks want to sell high. Potential investors want to buy low. [There is STILL no indication of how the fake ‘assets’ that are to be bought initially, will be priced – Ed.].

• Banking executives said that that their institutions would not want to unload ‘assets’ at fire-sale prices, a step that would compel many of the banks to raise sizeable amounts of additional capital. [Even though ‘fire-sale’ prices would be much too expensive given that the assets are fraudulent to begin with and therefore worth $0. $0 + $0 = $0, usually – Ed.].

• Under the accounting rules, banks must carry securities on their books at market prices. Most financial firms have already marked down these ‘assets’ to prices that might be low enough to lure buyers. But banks need not carry ordinary loans at market value. Instead, they are allowed to hold them at their higher values until they are repaid. So, for many commercial banks, selling loans now, at distressed prices would almost certainly lead to large losses. Such losses might raise questions about how some banks will fare in a so-called stress test that Federal regulators are in the process of applying to about 20 lenders.

“I don’t see how they are going to get the banks to sell”, said an executive at a large bank.
There are going to be substantial write-downs taken to get them off the books”.
[In other words, ‘Geithnerism’ CHANGES NOTHING. It doesn’t ‘amend reality’].

After the Chinese parties had made the grave mistake of caving in to cynical pressure from the US authorities to participate in the latest instalment of ‘Geithnerism’, the Chinese would presumably have indicated their willingness for some of their funds to be used to purchase ‘toxic’ assets. The banks would have said: ‘But at what price?’ The Chinese would have responded: ‘Well if you don’t know the start-up buying price, we want our money back’. At which point the banks said: NO WAY.

APPENDIX TWO [excerpted from the report dated 24th March 2009]:

Her Majesty: Good morning, Mr President, how very nice to meet you.

President Obama: It’s a pleasure to be here, Your Majesty.

HMQ: Mr President, I was concerned to hear about a small matter of $52 billion of my guarantees that apparently went missing recently.

PO: I understand that these were restored, M’am.

HMQ: Yes, but why were the guarantees diverted or stolen in the first place? Were any of my guarantees used for purposes for which they were not intended?

PO: I don’t know M’am. I imagine not.

HMQ: Mr President, you are aware, are you not, that after my LOAN funds within a total amount of $6.2 trillion languished within your banking system within the Treasury Custodial Account network at several money center banks for 19 months, to no avail, I was compelled, on 29th January 2009, to order the withdrawal of these funds, which were made available via the Bank of England on 19th-20th June 2007 to finance the Group of Seven-Approved Dollar System Refunding Programme by means of transparent private market trading transactions?

PO: I am, M’am.

HMQ: Mr President, are you aware of the REASON that I had to order these funds to be withdrawn?

PO: Not entirely, Your Majesty. Please explain.

HMQ: Mr President, when you toured European countries last year, you signed documents in which, I understand, you pledged to release all the blocked or hijacked funds and to proceed, if I am not mistaken, with the G-7-Approved private sector Refunding Programme. I had been led to believe that, in the light of your undertakings, you would indeed honour your commitments.

PO: My advisers decided that I should adopt alternative strategies, I am afraid.

HMQ: But Mr President, a signed commitment is a signed commitment, you know! Furthermore, my own expert advisers inform me that the ‘alternative strategies’ that your officials have adopted are designed to revalidate and revalue fundamentally worthless false derivative ‘assets’ while at the same time accumulating vast new mountains of real debt with which generations of Americans will be burdened in the future – a state of affairs which could have been entirely avoided if you had implemented the Group of Seven-Approved Dollar System private sector Refunding Programme for which I provided the necessary funds on LOAN, and which you undertook to do last year.

PO: Unfortunately, M’am, I was advised that our banks would not be prepared to cooperate in the proposed G-7-Approved private sector Refunding Programme.

HMQ: But Mr President, you carry the privilege of being the most powerful human being on earth! You have the power to insist upon the implementation of what was agreed by the world’s leading financial powers in 2007 and 2008! In addition, I made available a very large sum of money pro bono publico on a LOAN basis to finance this project, which I told the Group of Seven powers in 2007 was necessary ‘for the sake of the whole of humanity’. Moreover the Group of Seven-Approved private sector Refunding Plan would have cost the US Treasury NOTHING, while showering it with windfall tax revenues for a long time to come! What on earth persuaded you to disregard this very simple and straightforward solution to your problems, which are OUR problems, too?

PO: Uh, I hear what you say, M’am. It looks as though the various patchwork schemes developed by Timothy Geithner are going nowhere anyway. I’ll reconsider the situation.

HMQ: Ah, but Mr President, as you know my LOAN funds were withdrawn on 29th January after it had become clear that your Administration was not about to honour its undertakings in this regard. I am advised that there is now a proposal that the G-7-Approved Refunding Programme should be run out of London. Very conveniently, there is a provision in British tax law whereby funds that are resident within the British jurisdiction for 24 hours, are taxable.

My Government finds it most attractive that windfall tax accruals should arise from such ongoing, transparent on-the-books trading activity. Of course, since the Refunding Programme will remain an American private sector operation, your Treasury will likewise receive immense ongoing accruals from tax. So, by running the transparent private sector Refunding Programme from London, we will be able to help you, after all. Don’t you think the daffodils in my garden are gorgeous this year?

PO (looking out of the Palace window at the magnificent display of British daffodils): Yes, Your Majesty, they are gorgeous. Don’t you think so, Michelle?


LEGAL TUTORIAL: The Steps of Common Fraud:

Step 1: Fraud in the Inducement: “… is intended to and which does cause one to execute an instrument, or make an agreement… The misrepresentation involved does not mislead one as the paper he signs but rather misleads as to the true facts of a situation, and the false impression it causes is a basis of a decision to sign or render a judgment”. Source: Steven H. Gifis, ‘Law Dictionary’, 5th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2003, s.v.: ‘Fraud’.

Step 2: Fraud in Fact by Deceit (Obfuscation and Denial) and Theft:

• “ACTUAL FRAUD. Deceit. Concealing something or making a false representation with an evil intent [scanter] when it causes injury to another…”. Source: Steven H. Gifis, ‘Law Dictionary’, 5th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2003, s.v.: ‘Fraud’.

• “THE TORT OF FRAUDULENT DECEIT… The elements of actionable deceit are: A false representation of a material fact made with knowledge of its falsity, or recklessly, or without reasonable grounds for believing its truth, and with intent to induce reliance thereon, on which plaintiff justifiably relies on his injury…”. Source: Steven H. Gifis, ‘Law Dictionary’, 5th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2003, s.v.: ‘Deceit’.

Step 3: Theft by Deception and Fraudulent Conveyance:


• “FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT… The hiding or suppression of a material fact or circumstance which the party is legally or morally bound to disclose…”.

• “The test of whether failure to disclose material facts constitutes fraud is the existence of a duty, legal or equitable, arising from the relation of the parties: failure to disclose a material fact with intent to mislead or defraud under such circumstances being equivalent to an actual ‘fraudulent concealment’…”.

• To suspend running of limitations, it means the employment of artifice, planned to prevent inquiry or escape investigation and mislead or hinder acquirement of information disclosing a right of action, and acts relied on must be of an affirmative character and fraudulent…”.

Source: Black, Henry Campbell, M.A., ‘Black’s Law Dictionary’, Revised 4th Edition, St Paul: West Publishing Company, 1968, s.v. ‘Fraudulent Concealment’.


• “FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE… A conveyance or transfer of property, the object of which is to defraud a creditor, or hinder or delay him, or to put such property beyond his reach…”.

• “Conveyance made with intent to avoid some duty or debt due by or incumbent or person (entity) making transfer…”.

Source: Black, Henry Campbell, M.A., ‘Black’s Law Dictionary’, Revised 4th Edition, St Paul: West Publishing Company, 1968, s.v. ‘Fraudulent Conveyance’.


• NASD Rule 3120, et al.
• NASD Rule 2330, et al
• NASD Conduct Rules 2110 and 3040
• NASD Conduct Rules 2110 and IM-2110-1
• NASD Conduct Rules 2110 and SEC Rule 15c3-1
• NASD Conduct Rules 2110 and 3110
• SEC Rules 17a-3 and 17a-4
• NASD Conduct Rules 2110 and Procedural Rule 8210
• NASD Conduct Rules 2110 and 2330 and IM-2330
• NASD Conduct Rules 2110 and IM-2110-5
• NASD Systems and Programme Rules 6950 through 6957
• 97-13 Bank Secrecy Act, Recordkeeping Rule for funds transfers and transmittals of funds, et al.


• Annunzio-Wylie Anti-Money Laundering Act
• Anti-Drug Abuse Act
• Applicable international money laundering restrictions
• Bank Secrecy Act
• Conspiracy to commit and cover up murder.
• Crimes, General Provisions, Accessory After the Fact [Title 18, USC]
• Currency and Foreign Transactions Reporting Act
• Economic Espionage Act
• Hobbs Act
• Imparting or Conveying False Information [Title 18, USC]
• Maloney Act
• Misprision of Felony [Title 18, USC] (1)
• Money-Laundering Control Act
• Money-Laundering Suppression Act
• Organized Crime Control Act of 1970
• Perpetration of repeated egregious felonies by State and Federal public employees and their Departments and agencies, which are co-responsible with the said employees for ONGOING illegal and criminal actions, to sustain fraudulent operations and crimes in order to cover up criminalist activities and High Crimes and Misdemeanours by present and former holders of high office under the United States
• Provisions pertaining to private business transactions being protected under both private and criminal penalties [H.R. 3723]
• Provisions prohibiting the bribing of foreign officials [F.I.S.A.]
• Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act [R.I.C.O.]
• Securities Act 1933
• Securities Act 1934
• Terrorism Prevention Act
• Treason legislation, especially in time of war.

• Please be advised that the Editor of International Currency Review and associated intelligence services cannot enter into email correspondence related to this or to any of the earlier reports.

We are a private intelligence publishing house and have no connections to any outside parties including intelligence agencies. The word ‘intelligence’ on this website and in all our marketing material is used for marketing/sales purposes only and has no other connotations whatsoever: see ‘About Us’ on the red panels under the Notes on the Editor, Christopher Story FRSA, who has been solely and exclusively engaged as an investigative journalist, Editor, Author and private financial and current affairs Publisher since 1963 and is not and never has been an agent for a foreign power, suggestions to the contrary being actionable for libel in the English Court.


It has now been established that the National Security Agency (NSA) works with/controls Microsoft, Norton, McAfee, and others, in pursuit of the Pentagon’s vast BIG BROTHER objective, directed from the ‘highest’ levels (not the levels usually referred to) which seek to have every computer in the world talk direct to the Pentagon or to NSA’s master computers.

This should come as no real surprise since the cynical spooks even assert this ‘in-your-face’ by advertising ‘INTEL INSIDE’, which says exactly what it means. More specifically, NSA have made great strides in this direction by having a back door built into Microsoft VISTA. Certain computers, especially those labelled with the logo of the ‘fully collaborating’ firm Hewlett Packard, have hard-core setups which facilitate the remote monitoring and controlling of personal computers by NSA, Fort Meade. We now understand that if you are using VISTA* you MUST NOT enable ‘file and printer sharing’ under any circumstances. If you say ‘YES’, so to speak, to ‘file and printer sharing’, your computer becomes a slave at once to NSA’s master computers. DO NOT ENABLE SHARING.

Unfortunately, this abomination is so far advanced that this may not be the only precaution that needs to be taken. As long as Microsoft continues its extensive cooperation with NSA and the NSC (National Security Council), the spying system which assists the criminalised structures, and thus hitherto the Bush-Clinton ‘Box Gang’ and its connections, with their fraudulent finance operations, NSA may be able to steal data from your computer. The colossal scourge of data theft is associated with this state of affairs: data stolen usually include Credit Card data, which the kleptocracy regards as almost as good as real estate for hypothecation purposes. Even so, you can make life very much more problematical for these utterly odious people by NOT USING U.S.-sourced so-called Internet Security and anti-virus software. Having been attacked and abused so often, we offer a solution.

We use a proprietary FOREIGN Internet Security program which devours every PC Trojan, worm, scam, porn attack and virus that the National Security Agency (NSA) throws at us. We are offering this program (CD) to our clients and friends, at a premium. The program comes with our very strong recommendation, but at the same time, if you buy from us, you will be helping us finance ongoing exposures of the DVD’s World Revolution and the financial corruption that has been financing it.

The familiar US proprietary Internet Security programs are by-products of US counterintelligence, and are intended NOT to solve your Internet security problems, but to spy on you and to report what you write about, to centralised US electronic facilities set up for the purpose. You can now BREAK FREE from this syndrome while at the same time helping us to MAINTAIN THE VERY HEAVY PRESSURE UPON THE CRIMINALISTS WE HAVE BEEN EXPOSING, by ordering this highest quality FOREIGN (i.e., non-US) INTERNET SECURITY SOLUTION that we have started advertising on this website. This offer has been developed in response to attacks we have suffered from the NSA nerds who appear to have a collective mental age of about five years, judging by their output.

• To access details about the INTERNET SECURITY SOLUTION, just press THE LIVE LINK YOU HAVE JUST READ, or else press SERIALS in the red panel below. This opens up our mini-catalogue of printed intelligence publications. Scroll right down to the foot of that section, where you will see details of this service. When you buy this special product, you will also, as we clearly state above, be paying a special premium by way of a donation to help us finance these exposures.

The premium contains a donation for our exposure work and also covers our recommendation based on the Editor’s own experience that this INTERNET SECURITY SOLUTION will make your Internet life much easier. Some versions have a ‘Preview before downloading’ feature.

*VISTA: Virtual Instant Surveillance Tactical Application.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s