HODGES CORRESPONDENCE TO THE HIGHEST LEVELS

chrisstory

LETTERS ON THE CRIMINAL BLOCKING OF THE RELEASES TO THE BRITISH MONARCHY, OBAMA AND MR TIMOTHY WILLIAMS, HEAD OF INTERPOL, WASHINGTON, D.C.

Saturday 19 June 2010 23:36

MISPRISION OF FELONY: U.S. CODE, TITLE 18, PART 1, CHAPTER 1, SECTION 4:
‘Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some Judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both’.’Seeing what’s at the end of one’s nose requires constant effort’. George Orwell.

• 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 on the US/German/French official criminality underlying this crisis.

• BOOKS: Edward Harle Limited has so far published FIVE intelligence titles: The Perestroika Deception, by Anatoliy Golitsyn; Red Cocaine, by Dr Joseph D. Douglass, Jr.; The European Union Collective, by Christopher Story; The New Underworld Order, by Christopher Story; and The Red Terror in Russia, by Sergei Melgounov. All titles are permanently in stock.

• We sell books DIRECT ONLY. We also supply to bookstores.

• ADVERTISEMENT: Details of the INTERNET SECURITY SOLUTION software offered by this service in conjunction with a donation can be accessed immediately: See the Home Page World Reports Limited serials catalogue by clicking World Reports Limited and scrolling to foot of page. Scroll to the foot of THIS page to read our Ad. for the INTERNET SECURITY SOLUTION.

• By Christopher Story FRSA, Editor and Publisher, International Currency Review, World Reports Limited, London and New York. For earlier reports, press the ARCHIVE. Order your intelligence subscriptions and ‘politically incorrect’ [i.e., correct] intelligence books online.

• CMKM/CMKX CASE DOCUMENTS:
Press Archive for this report [29th January 2010]
Case Number CV10-00031 JVS (MLGx):
SERVICE OF CMKM.CMKX $3.87 TRILLION SUIT VS. S.E.C.
You can also access the CMKM/CMKX text at: http://viewer.zoho.com/docs/paKdda
The biggest lawsuit in world legal history: The phantom share giga-scandal.

• AS PREVIOUSLY STATED, OUR LANDLINES ARE CLOSED BECAUSE OF U.S. HARASSMENT.
WE CAN BE CONTACTED VIA EMAIL, FAX OR VIA THE WEBSITE ‘CONTACT US’ FACILITY.

• FOR LATEST INFORMATION ON OUR INTELLIGENCE PUBLICATIONS, SEE SECOND PANEL.

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

NEW REPORT STARTS HERE:

EXPLANATION FOR THE PUBLICATION OF THIS CORRESPONDENCE
This report consists exclusively of correspondence from Mr A. Clifton Hodges, lawyer for Mr Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., his corporations Pennsylvania Investments, Inc, registered in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and Cottrell Securiries Limited, registered in England, and for victims of the Securities and Exchange Commission scam against CMKX shareholders.

The correspondence is published in date order without commentary for the benefit of Chinese official and other parties because we are informed that efforts have been made by the usual nefarious US sources to obfuscate, obscure, deny, mask, dismiss or otherwise detract from the manifest importance of these letters, not least given the identity of their recipients and the information contained therein.

MEMORANDUM TO MI6: It has become apparent to us via special sources that you place trust in certain American operatives. Have you not yet understood that a trustworthy, reliable US operative is a contradiction in terms and does not exist? We perceive that operatives trusted by yourselves to achieve results are themselves engaged in doing deals ‘behind your back’, and thereby in effect treating you with scorn and derision.

How is it that this veteran observer can see this clearly and you cannot? You should stop taking risks with these people. None of them can be trusted, and there are no exceptions to this rule. Surely you can understand this by now.

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

(1): HODGES TO HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN: 26 April 2010:

HODGES AND ASSOCIATES
A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION
4 EAST HOLLY STREET
SUITE 202
PASADENA
CA 91103

Telephone: (626) 564-9797
Facsimile: (626) 564-9111

A. Clifton Hodges
James S. Kostas
Donald W. Ricketts*
Of Counsel

April 26, 2010

Most urgent: Hand delivered

Her Majesty the Queen

Buckingham Palace
London SW1A 1AA

Re: U.S. Dollar Refunding Project

Your Majesty,

I write to you in my capacity as legal counsel for Pennsylvania Investments, Inc. and its President, Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S. As you are aware Mr. Cottrell and his wife are the beneficial owners of Pennsylvania Investments, Inc. and have requested that I communicate some urgent concerns regarding the subject U.S. Dollar Refunding Project.

I am advised and understand the following:

• In 2007, funds aggregating 6.2 Trillion dollars were made available pro bono publico by and on Your Majesty’s behalf for the purpose of this Project.

• The International Group of Seven (G-7) agreed to this refunding program at their meeting in Northern Germany in June, 2006 and reaffirmed their support in 2007.

• These funds, to date, have not been deployed for the purpose for which they were intended.

• Through the good offices of Christopher Edward Harle Story, FRSA, from the period September, 2008 through December 29, 2008, previous arrangements for conducting this program were revised and reorganized such that Mr. Michael C. Cottrell would be wholly in charge of the project.

• Based upon advice received in 2009 Mr. Michael C. Cottrell is to be in charge of the refunding project pursuant to the information and proposal set forth in two notarized affidavits dated December 29, 2008 and March 3, 2009.

• I am advised that Your Majesty has previously received and approved these terms and conditions.

• Premised on this history, Mr. Cottrell, again through the good offices of Mr. Story, has established a firm in London to conduct the refunding operations denominated “Cottrell Securities Limited”.

This correspondence and request is premised upon the above facts.

Certain matters have come to the attention of Mr. Cottrell and myself which have caused considerable consternation as finalization of the refunding project has neared closure. I write to you on Mr. Cottrell’s behalf out of concern that certain of these activities may be taking place without your knowledge and in contravention of your desires, and in violation of agreements made on your behalf at the G-7 meetings in 2006, 2007 and 2008.

Mr. Cottrell has prepared an affidavit, which was duly notarized on March 31, 2010, which sets forth the initial events surrounding the ongoing attempts to bring this matter to conclusion; I will not repeat them here as a copy of such affidavit is included as an attachment. Since March 31, 2010 various actions which have been ongoing each and every day have suggested, at least initially, that successful conclusion was imminent. However, as of the date of dictating this correspondence (April 23, 2010) neither I nor Mr. Cottrell are confident that this matter will conclude as originally designed, promised and intended without intervention from your authority.

Let me hasten to apologize for the presumptive, perhaps arrogant, tone of this correspondence and submission to you. However, this is a matter of such enormous public import, I thought it my duty as a citizen of the world community to bring this issue to your attention. In the event that additional information is necessary and/or desired, please feel free to contact me or Mr. Cottrell directly. Thank you for your kind consideration.

Sincerely,

HODGES AND ASSOCIATES

[Signed]

A. CLIFTON HODGES

ACH/gm

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

(2): HODGES TO HRH THE DUKE OF EDINBURGH: 28 April 2010:

HODGES AND ASSOCIATES
A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION
4 EAST HOLLY STREET
SUITE 202
PASADENA
CA 91103

Telephone: (626) 564-9797
Facsimile: (626) 564-9111

A. Clifton Hodges
James S. Kostas
Donald W. Ricketts*
Of Counsel

April 28, 2010

For the urgent attention of the Chief of Staff:
His Royal Highness the Duke of Edinburgh
Buckingham Palace
London SW1A 1AA

Dear Sirs

I write with respect on behalf of my clients Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., of Erie, Pennsylvania, USA, and his corporations: Pennsylvania Investments, Inc., registered in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and Cottrell Securities Limited, registered in England and Wales.

I have been repeatedly advised by Lindell H. Bonney that the Basel List contains a Line Item providing for a loan for on-the-books trading purposes in the sum of $6.2 Trillion Dollars in the aggregate, for use to finance the long-since approved Dollar Refunding Program requested of the G-7 financial powers by her Majesty the Queen ‘for the sake of the whole of humanity’.

These sources have repeatedly confirmed to me, as Mr. Cottrell’s Attorney, that the Line Item funding is to be deployed for this purpose by Mr. Cottrell’s firm Pennsylvania Investments, Inc.

The matter has likewise been confirmed on several occasions directly to Mr. Cottrell, prior to my appointment as his Attorney.

The Dollar Refunding Program must ORIGINATE in the private sector, so that no corresponding PUBLIC DEBT is created on the other side of the balance sheet. Unfortunately, the US authorities have resisted this sound financing concept (the ONLY solution on the table) and seek to conduct the Dollar Refunding Program (on which the whole world depends) themselves, via the US Treasury, et. al., thereby generating a vast, open-ended further overhang of completely unnecessary official/public debt on the other side of the balance sheet.

Obviously, since the debt accumulated will be 100%, whereas any tax raised from such trades will not exceed, say, 35%, this severely exacerbates the US official debt overhang.

Such a course will therefore most certainly lead to US and global financial and economic disaster by rapidly accelerating the degradation of the US dollar and thereby inducing a Weimar-style hyperinflation.

On the well-known principle that ‘good money’ replaces ‘bad money’, and long since recognizing that the US authorities were unwilling to follow the sound path recommended by Her Majesty, Mr. Cottrell arranged for the formation of Cottrell Securities Limited, based in London, to handle the necessary fully taxable on-balance sheet trades.

A schematic plan (Figure 5A, Private Funding USD Refunding Loan) showing how the taxable trades will operate, is enclosed as the second sheet with the papers submitted herewith. The tax payable to the British authorities will be remitted along with any tax payable to the US authorities, directly to the British Treasury. Under the Bretton Woods Agreements, tax accrued abroad can be remitted by the ‘foreign’ country’s Treasury to its counterpart in the receiving country.

The enclosed documents are itemized in the list presented as the first sheet with these papers. Documents dated 6th September 2008, 29th December 2008 and 3rd March 2009, sent via an intermediary, may not have arrived as intended; so on 16th June 2009, Mr. Christopher Story resubmitted the papers, and also reported the possible diversion of previously submitted documents to Thames Valley Police.

With this package, I have arranged for everything that we believe to be pertinent to this matter to be provided all together. Unfortunately it has been necessary, due to the resistance mentioned above, to itemize details of what has been happening behind the scenes. We would prefer not to have had to do this, but were left with little choice in the matter.

The purpose of this letter, apart from providing you with these materials, is to seek confirmation that the advice repeatedly proffered to me and to Mr. Cottrell by William H. Bonney will now be acted upon. In this connection you will of course be well aware that international financial affairs are now in almost permanent turmoil, and that further delay, due to the aforementioned resistance, in implementing the sole sound formula risks the integrity of our financial and real economies and most regrettably of the supreme British authority itself.

I would therefore be most grateful for a positive response at your earliest convenience, so that matters can start to be brought under control by the means originally recommended by Her Majesty.

Sincerely Yours,

HODGES AND ASSOCIATES

[Signed]

A. CLIFTON HODGES

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

(3): HODGES TO PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: 14 May 2010:

HODGES AND ASSOCIATES
A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION
4 EAST HOLLY STREET
SUITE 202
PASADENA
CA 91103

Telephone: (626) 564-9797
Facsimile: (626) 564-9111

A. Clifton Hodges
James S. Kostas
Donald W. Ricketts*
Of Counsel

May 14, 2010

MOST URGENT
VIA FACSIMILE ONLY (202) 456-2461

Honorable Barack Obama
President of the United States of America
Whitehouse
Washington, D.C.

Dear Mr. President:

I write to you this morning because people within your current administration continue to frustrate dissemination of the World Global Settlements; I am advised today that Mr. Leon Panetta [CIA DCI] participated in this act on May 14, 2010. I represent some 50,000 shareholders who are to be paid a settlement which consists mainly of monies collected from banks, brokerages, hedge fund corps, market makers, the Depository Trust Corporation/Federal Reserve, and various billionaire “naked-shorter” individuals, as well as some monies due from the SEC for damages.

These various monies collected have been held far longer than they should have been, and were swept into the World Global Settlements, thereby delaying payment even further. Taxes were paid into the U.S. Treasury due on these “Settlements” on December 30th and 31st; distribution of these settlement funds could not legally be withheld past midnight of February 14th, 2010.

The continued holding of these settlement funds results in the violation of more laws such as “banking fraud”, “trust fund violations”, and, in times of war, “International Financial Terrorism”, These charges are not at the discretion of the government to overlook in the name of withholding monies that are not its property, nor its right to hold – especially given that now the Treasury is in “DEFAULT” and owned in large part by the Chinese government.

I am aware you have issued an “Executive Order” giving the diplomatic parties of Interpol, the Chinese, the Swiss, and the U.K. (MI6), the means to enforce, with all due power, dissemination of the “Settlements”, They clearly are relying on your power to assist this effort and to stop cabinet members of your staff and CIA factions from blocking the Global World Settlements.

They are relying on you to exhibit your inherent Presidential character such as integrity and respect for the law, and to recognize the gravity of delaying such an important event intended to rescue not only the immediate US banking community, but to support a recalibration and refitting of various currencies and economies on a world scale necessary to abate the global collapse of economies everywhere.

We are all well aware of the “derivatives”, the Ponzi schemes of the Federal Reserve creating debt out of thin air, the real estate debacle of SIV’s and CDO’s, the “Naked Shorting” in the stock market, and the market’s overall vast manipulation for the profit of the few. The global economy needs these “Settlements” to initiate recovery, and to switch to the new asset-backed US Treasury dollars.

Mr. President, the people elected you for reasons of your promises, your apparent integrity, your conviction to help the American people uphold justice, and to return this Nation to its pre-eminent world status. Please use your good offices to ensure these “Settlements” are disseminated without further delay.

Sincerely,

HODGES AND ASSOCIATES

[Signed]”,

A. CLIFTON HODGES

ACH/gm

Cc: Lindell H. Bonney, Sr.
Clients
Bcc: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S.

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

(4): HODGES TO PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: 19 May 2010:

HODGES AND ASSOCIATES
A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION
4 EAST HOLLY STREET
SUITE 202
PASADENA
CA 91103

Telephone: (626) 564-9797
Facsimile: (626) 564-9111

A. Clifton Hodges
James S. Kostas
Donald W. Ricketts*
Of Counsel

May 19, 2010

MOST URGENT
VIA FACSIMILE ONLY (202) 456-2461

Honorable Barack Obama
President of the United States of America
Whitehouse
Washington, D.C.

Dear Mr. President:

I write to you again this morning because your immediate assistance is required to ensure prompt dissemination of the World Global Settlements.

As I have previously stated, I represent some 50,000 shareholders who are to be paid a settlement which consists mainly of monies collected from banks, brokerages, hedge fund corps, market makers, the Depository Trust Corporation/Federal Reserve, and various billionaire “naked-shorter” individuals, as well as some monies due from the SEC for damages.

These various monies collected have been swept into the World Global Settlements, resulting in a substantial payment delay.

I am currently advised and understand the following:

• A portion of the World Global Settlement funds have been collected and are presently held in the custody of a Richmond, VA, bank.

• Said funds are sufficient to cover all disbursements to be made by the authority of Lindell H. Bonney, Sr., Paymaster.

• Mr. Bonney has spent more than eight weeks over the past three months, in Richmond, for the purpose of consummating these transfers.

• Mr. Bonney has, at the direction of the Pentagon, London, et. al., recently returned to Richmond to consummate the transfers and is standing by to do so.

• Mr. Bonney has been, most recently, directed to complete his monetary transfer duties by the conclusion of this date; again, he is standing by to do so.

• Mr. Bonney was advised this morning, by the referenced bank, that the bank could not allow the transfers to be made until authority was received directly from the White House.

• I am advised that you have previously given written approval of these transfers; accordingly,
I am not aware of any further basis for delay.

I am persuaded by the above facts, that only your direct intervention will be efficacious in bringing this matter to conclusion. Mr. President, please provide your authority and direction to those who continue to frustrate completion of these World Global Settlements

Mr. President, the people elected you for reasons of your promises, your apparent integrity, your conviction to help the American people uphold justice, and to return this Nation to its pre-eminent world status. Please use your good offices to ensure these “Settlements” are disseminated without further delay.

Sincerely,

HODGES AND ASSOCIATES

[Signed]

A. CLIFTON HODGES

ACH/gm

Cc: Lindell H. Bonney, Sr.
Clients
Bcc: Michael C. Cottrell, BA, MS

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

(5): HODGES TO PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: 20 May 2010:

HODGES AND ASSOCIATES
A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION
4 EAST HOLLY STREET
SUITE 202
PASADENA
CA 91103

Telephone: (626) 564-9797
Facsimile: (626) 564-9111

A. Clifton Hodges
James S. Kostas
Donald W. Ricketts*
Of Counsel

May 20, 2010

MOST URGENT
VIA FACSIMILE ONLY (202) 456-2461

Honorable Barack Obama
President of the United States of America
Whitehouse
Washington, D.C.

Dear Mr. President:

I write to you again this morning because your immediate personal assistance is required to ensure prompt dissemination of the World Global Settlements.

As I have previously stated, I represent some 50,000 shareholders who are to be paid a settlement which consists mainly of monies collected from banks, brokerages, hedge fund corps, market makers, the Depository Trust Corporation/Federal Reserve, and various billionaire “naked-shorter” individuals, as well as some monies due from the SEC for damages. I have also been involved in the representation of other payees awaiting this distribution and have, in such capacity, been in direct communication with the UK Royal Monarch.

I am currently advised and understand the following:

• A portion of the World Global Settlement funds have been collected and are presently held in the custody of the Bank of America in Richmond, VA.

• Said funds are sufficient to cover all disbursements to be made by the authority of the Paymaster who has now spent more than eight weeks over the past three months, in Richmond, VA, for the purpose of concluding these transfers.

• The Paymaster authority has, at the direction of the Pentagon, London, et. al., recently returned to Richmond to consummate the transfers; he was advised yesterday morning at Bank of America that the bank could not allow the transfers to be made until one additional signature was obtained.

• Accordingly, on May 19, 2010 an agent of Interpol began a hand-carry trip through Little Rock, Arkansas, to Charleston, South Carolina, and then on to Richmond, Virginia; the hand-carried item was presented to the Bank of America officer this morning.

• The Bank of America officer then advised the Paymaster authority that Mr. Leon Panetta had instructed Bank of America that no World Global Settlement funds were to be disbursed without express personal approval from the President of the United States.

• I have previously been advised that you had given specific written authorization of these transfers when you visited the Richmond Bank of America several weeks ago.

As I advised yesterday in my communication to you, I am persuaded by these facts, that only your direct intervention will be efficacious in bringing this matter to conclusion.

Mr. President, please provide, once again, your specific written authority and direction to those who continue to frustrate completion of these World Global Settlements.

I would very much appreciate your written confirmation that you will do so without delay; accordingly, I will withhold further communication to the UK Royal Monarch and distribution of this correspondence to my clients until 4:30 PM EDT today.

Mr. President, the people elected you for reasons of your promises, your apparent integrity, your conviction to help the American people uphold justice, and to return this Nation to its pre-eminent world status. I implore you to use your good offices to ensure these “Settlements” are disseminated without further delay.

Sincerely,

HODGES AND ASSOCIATES

[Signed]

A. CLIFTON HODGES

ACH/gm

Cc: Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II
Lindell H. Bonney, Sr.
Clients
Bcc: Michael Cottrell, B.A., M.S.

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

(6): HODGES TO THE RT. HON CHRISTOPHER GEIDT: 21 May 2010:

HODGES AND ASSOCIATES
A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION
4 EAST HOLLY STREET
SUITE 202
PASADENA
CA 91103

Telephone: (626) 564-9797
Facsimile: (626) 564-9111

A. Clifton Hodges
James S. Kostas
Donald W. Ricketts*
Of Counsel

May 21, 2010

MOST URGENT
Hand Delivered

The Rt. Hon. Christopher Geidt, CVO, OBE
Buckingham Palace
London SW1A 1AA

Re: U.S. Dollar Refunding Project

Dear Honorable Christopher Geidt:

I enclose copies of three letters which I have recently sent to President Obama relating to the matters referenced in the papers which were delivered to the Palace under cover of my earlier letter dated April 28, 2010. I verily believe that the information contained in this correspondence bears directly on the subject Project and the delays being experienced in its inauguration.

Accordingly, I am requesting your assistance once more in having these letters placed in the appropriate Palace hands at your very earliest convenience.

Thank you very kindly in advance for you help; it is truly appreciated by many, many people.

Your efforts on our behalf will indeed have a very significant impact on the future financial health of the world.

Sincerely,

HODGES AND ASSOCIATES

[Signed]

A. CLIFTON HODGES

ACH/gm
Enclosures

Cc: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S.
Christopher Story FRSA

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

(7): HODGES TO PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: 27 May 2010:

HODGES AND ASSOCIATES
A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION
4 EAST HOLLY STREET
SUITE 202
PASADENA
CA 91103

Telephone: (626) 564-9797
Facsimile: (626) 564-9111

A. Clifton Hodges
James S. Kostas
Donald W. Ricketts*
Of Counsel

May 27, 2010

MOST URGENT
VIA FACSIMILE ONLY (202) 456-2461

Honorable Barack Obama
President of the United States of America
Whitehouse
Washington, D.C.

In re: World Global Settlements

Dear Mr. President:

I write to you again this afternoon in furtherance of my previous recent correspondence regarding prompt dissemination of the World Global Settlements.

As I have previously stated, I represent some 50,000 shareholders who are to be paid a settlement which consists mainly of monies collected from banks, brokerages, hedge fund corps, market makers, the Depository Trust Corporation/Federal Reserve, and various billionaire “naked-shorter” individuals, as well as some monies due from the SEC for damages. I have also been involved in the representation of other payees awaiting this distribution and have, in such capacity, been in direct communication with the UK Royal Monarch.

I am currently advised and understand the following:

• A portion of the World Global Settlement funds have been collected and are presently held in the custody of the Bank of America in Richmond, VA.

• Said funds are sufficient to cover all disbursements to be made by the authority of the Paymaster who has now spent more than eight weeks over the past three months, in Richmond, for the purpose of concluding these transfers.

• The Paymaster authority has, at the direction of the Pentagon, London, et. al., been present at the Bank in Richmond every day this week to complete the transfers.

• This morning he was advised by “both sides” that each desired this matter to be concluded as soon as possible and that he should therefore remain available to enter the Bank and consummate the transfers.

• As of 6:00 PM EDT, the Paymaster authority personally advised me that you personally, Mr. President, wanted and had directed that these funds be held throughout the coming Holiday weekend.

• I have previously been advised that you had given specific written authorization of these transfers and confirmed the same verbally just this week.

Mr. President, I sincerely hope that my information is incorrect; because, as I am certain that you are aware, your personal involvement in delaying this distribution is an ultra vires act which exposes you to personal liability for the sums involved and for accruing interest thereon. I would certainly not want to see you personally involved in the future denouement of this matter.

As I have previously advised in my communications to you, only your direct intervention will be efficacious in bringing this matter to conclusion. Mr. President, I implore you to facilitate conclusion of this matter forthwith; there is simply no legal basis for any further delay.

Please act consonantly with your previous statements and promises.

I would very much appreciate your written confirmation that you will do so immediately; accordingly, I will withhold public distribution of this correspondence until 8:30 PM EDT today.

Sincerely,

HODGES AND ASSOCIATES

A. CLIFTON HODGES

ACH/gm

Cc: Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II
Lindell H. Bonney, Sr.
Clients
Bcc: Michael C. Cottrell, BA. MS

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

(8): HODGES TO THE RT. HON CHRISTOPHER GEIDT: 28 May 2010:

HODGES AND ASSOCIATES
A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION
4 EAST HOLLY STREET
SUITE 202
PASADENA
CA 91103

Telephone: (626) 564-9797
Facsimile: (626) 564-9111

A. Clifton Hodges
James S. Kostas
Donald W. Ricketts*
Of Counsel

28 May, 2010

MOST URGENT
Hand Delivered

The Rt. Hon. Christopher Geidt, CVO, OBE
Buckingham Palace
London SW1A 1AA

Re: U.S. Dollar Refunding Project

Dear Honorable Christopher Geidt:

I most recently wrote to you on May 26, 2010 to solicit the assistance of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II in securing the release of funds being held in the U.S. which are required for implementation of the U.S. Dollar Refunding Project. I write to you again in furtherance to that subject, on behalf of my clients Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., of Erie, Pennsylvania, USA, and his corporations: Pennsylvania Investments, Inc., registered in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and Cottrell Securities Limited, registered in England and Wales.

As of the afternoon of May 28, 2010, I am currently advised and understand the following:

• World Global Settlement funds have been collected and remain in the custody of the Bank of America in Richmond, Virginia.

• Said funds are sufficient to cover all disbursements to be made by the authority of the Paymaster who has now spent more than eight weeks over the past three months, in Richmond, VA, for the purpose of concluding these transfers in accord with the BASEL agenda.

• I became aware on May 27, 2010 that President Barack Obama had personally intervened in the scheduled May 27 release of funds, and had instructed that the funds be held until after the U.S. Memorial Day Holiday.

• As any further delay in disbursement of these funds will engender considerable harm to many, and is without any legal basis, I wrote to President Obama putting him on notice and soliciting his cooperation. [A copy of that letter is attached].

• My letter to President Obama was distributed to all parties dealing with the World Global Settlement funds, to both political parties in Washington, D.C., to the Democratic Caucus and its counsel, to the Black Caucus and its counsel, and to President Obama’s priest.

The letter was also submitted to the British Royal Monarchal Power through your good offices; Mr. L.H. Bonney, Sr. has also verified that a copy of the letter was submitted to, and received by, Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II through MI-5 and MI-6.

• Counsel for the Black Caucus immediately recognized that a criminal offense had been committed; he advised that he would directly inform the President by reading the letter to him on Air Force One today, as well as advise the President of his personal responsibility, over the four day weekend, for costs in the “Billions of USD”. Said counsel also stated that “if release [of the funds] was not taken care of today – they [the Black Caucus] would wash their hands of him [President Obama]”.

• Vice President Biden was also informed of the May 27, 2010 letter, provided a copy, and discussed the veracity of President Obama taking directions from former President G.H.W. Bush; he indicated that President Obama’s citizenship status was being used as very effective leverage against the President.

• Vice President Biden also admitted that he was personally compromised, and therefore unqualified to succeed President Obama in the event that the President’s tenure is attacked.

|• It now appears that it is only a matter of time before formal process is instituted to remove President Obama from office; however the “Succession List” has now been severely compromised by the failure to complete distribution of the subject funds.

• I was advised at noon time this date that the on-site Paymaster authority, Mr. L.H. Bonney, Sr, had confirmed at Bank of America that no communication had been received from President Obama regarding authorization for release of the Settlement funds; accordingly, he was returning to Ohio.

• Prior to Mr. Bonney’s departure he further advised that all collected funds were in a “locked-down” mode, and that all else is now in written form for further use in resolving the issue of final distribution of these Settlement funds.

[Insertion by the Editor:
However $1.8 trillion was stolen from the funds as will be reported in the subsequent analysis].

As I have previously indicated, I am persuaded by these facts, that only the direct intervention of the Royal Monarchal Power will be efficacious in bringing this matter to conclusion. To secure release of these Settlement funds, it is now imperative that the Royal Monarchal Power exercise that power, as a U.S. Treasury lien-holder, to effectuate timely resolution.

Any further delay will not only jeopardize the severely stressed world financial condition, but will certainly serve to encourage those seeking even further delay.

This is a matter which now clearly seems can only be concluded at such time as the Royal Monarchal Power utilizes the power which has been granted, to effect closure through direct means. I apologize in advance for having to involve you further in this situation; however, circumstances dictate that direct intervention is now an imperative.

Thank you very kindly in advance for your help; it is truly appreciated by many, and will indeed have a very significant impact on the future financial health of the world.

Sincerely,

HODGES AND ASSOCIATES

A. CLIFTON HODGES

ACH/gm
Enclosures

Cc: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S.
Lindell H. Bonney, Sr.
Christopher Story FRSA

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

(9): HODGES TO MR TIMOTHY A. WILLIAMS, DIRECTOR OF INTERPOL,
WASHINGTON, DC: 10 June 2010:

HODGES AND ASSOCIATES
A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION
4 EAST HOLLY STREET
SUITE 202
PASADENA
CA 91103

Telephone: (626) 564-9797
Facsimile: (626) 564-9111

A. Clifton Hodges
James S. Kostas
Donald W. Ricketts*
Of Counsel
June 10, 2010

MOST URGENT
Sent Facsimile
and U.S. MAIL

Mr. Timothy A. Williams
Director
INTERPOL Washington
United States National Central Bureau
Washington D.C. 20530

Re: World Global Settlements

Dear Mr. Williams

I write to you on a most urgent basis to solicit the assistance of INTERPOL in securing the release of funds now being held in the U.S. for distribution to some 20 line item trustees/payees as defined by the recent BASEL conferees, which distribution has been pending now since January, 2010.

I write to you as counsel for Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., of Erie, Pennsylvania, USA, and his corporations: Pennsylvania Investments, Inc., registered in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and Cottrell Securities Limited, registered in England and Wales, and as counsel for some 50,000 shareholders of CMKM Diamonds, Inc.

As of noon time on this date, I am advised and understand the following:

• World Global Settlement funds have been collected and remain, inter alia, in the custody of the Bank of America in Richmond, Virginia.

• Funds sufficient to cover all disbursements to be made by the authority of the Paymaster have been confirmed this date to remain in the custody of Bank of America.

• The Paymaster authority, Mr. Lindell H. Bonney, Sr., has spent more than eight weeks over the past three months, in Richmond, for the purpose of concluding these transfers in accord with the BASEL agenda.

• Mr. Bonney and his associates have returned to Richmond this date for the purpose, again, of concluding these transactions; they were then advised by the U.S. Senate Banking Committee Chairman and the U.S. Senate Finance Committee that such transfers could not proceed as they continue to be blocked by Mr. Leon Panetta, among others.

• I have previously written to President Barack Obama and to Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II; copies of this correspondence are attached hereto for your information and review.

• Any further delay in disbursement of these funds will engender considerable harm to many, and is without any legal basis. I hereby urge your assistance and request intervention by the several plane loads of INTERPOL agents who have been sworn to assist in ferreting out financial misdeeds, and bringing the miscreants to justice.

I am persuaded by these facts, that the direct intervention of INTERPOL is absolutely required, from this time forward, to assist the Paymaster authority in fulfilling his instructions to finish these settlement payments, and to finally bring this matter to conclusion. Release of these Settlement funds, which has now been delayed for nearly six months, must be made forthwith.

It is now imperative that this matter be concluded; further delay is simply unacceptable. Such delay not only puts all of us in jeopardy, it encourages and emboldens those who seek to destroy not only these Settlements but the entire world structure.

I respectfully demand that INTERPOL act consistent with the charter given to them by President Obama in his December, 2009 Executive Order, and subsequently by the Attorney General of the United States. Circumstances now dictate that direct intervention is a must. Thank you in advance for your help, and your willingness to support the U.S. Constitution; it is appreciated by many, and will indeed have a significant impact on the future financial health of the world.

Sincerely,

HODGES AND ASSOCIATES

A. CLIFTON HODGES

Enclosures:
Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II; dated April 26, 2010
His Royal Highness the Duke of Edinburgh; dated April 28, 2010
President Barack Obama; dated May 14, 2010
President Barack Obama; dated May 19, 2010
President Barack Obama; dated May 20, 2010
The Rt. Hon. Christopher Geidt; dated May 21, 2010
The Rt. Hon. Christopher Geidt; dated May 26, 2010
President Barack Obama; dated May 27, 2010
The Rt. Hon. Christopher Geidt; dated May 28, 2010

Cc: LaTonya Miller, Public Affairs, USNCB
Lindell H. Bonney, Sr.
Dana Wilcox
Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S.
President Barack Obama
Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II
David Cameron, UK Prime Minister.

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

THE FOLLOWING DATA HAS BEEN PUBLISHED AT THE FOOT
OF MOST OF THESE REPORTS FOR THE PAST THREE YEARS++:

• COMPILED BY U.S. SECURITIES EXPERT MICHAEL C. COTTRELL, B.A., M.S..

LIST OF U.S. STATUTES, SECURITIES REGULATIONS AND LEGAL PRINCIPLES OF WHICH THE CRIMINALISTS, ASSOCIATES AND ALL THE MAIN FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS REMAIN IN BREACH:

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, Hauppauge: 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:

THEFT BY DECEPTION:

• “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:

• “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’.

U.S. SECURITIES REGULATIONS OF WHICH INSTITUTIONS
HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO BE IN BREACH [SEE REPORTS]:

• 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.

U.S. LAWS ROUTINELY BREACHED BY THE CRIMINAL OPERATIVES AND INSTITUTIONS:

• Annunzio-Wylie Anti-Money Laundering Act
• Anti-Drug Abuse Act
• Applicable international money laundering restrictions
• Bank Secrecy Act
• 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.

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
NOTICES:

BEWARE OF MALICIOUS IMITATIONS: It has come to our notice that certain websites have been in the habit of copying reports from this site, attributing the reports to the Editor of this service, but at the same time AMENDING AND INSERTING TEXT NOT WRITTEN BY THE EDITOR.

• This is a very old, malevolent US counterintelligence DIRTY TRICK.

Therefore, you should be advised that the GENUINE ORIGINAL REPORT is, by obvious definition, accessible ONLY FROM THIS WEBSITE. If you come across an article elsewhere that is attributed to the Editor of this service, you should refer to the ORIGINAL ARTICLE HERE and you should bear in mind that the illegally duplicated article may contain text that was NOT written by the Editor of this service, but which was inserted for malicious purposes by counterintelligence.

Likewise, although we haven’t yet had time to elaborate this issue, we have taken drastic steps around the world to close off the malicious piracy of our books. One technique used by several disreputable sites (in the United States, the Netherlands and Switzerland) is to copy our title(s) and (a) to display an image of the front cover WITHOUT THE ISBN DATA at the top of the cover; and (b) to DELETE THE COPYRIGHT PAGE. In so doing, the criminal pirates proclaimed that they knew perfectly well that they were/are engaged in theft and can be prosecuted for stealing copyright.

• 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.

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
ADVERTISEMENT: INTERNET SECURITY SOLUTION
YOU CAN ORDER THIS DIRECT FROM THIS WEBSITE. Summary:
Press Internet Security Solution or go to the World Reports Limited serials catalogue and scroll down until you come to this product. Then proceed through the simple and ultra-safe ordering procedure [Visa or MasterCard only]. Send a donation as you order this RECOMMENDED solution.

NON-U.S. INTERNET SECURITY SOLUTION CD AVAILABLE: FAR BETTER THAN NORTON ETC
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. The program has an invaluable ‘Preview before downloading’ feature.

• It is suitable for PC’s but not for Mac computers. As with all such programs, the License is renewable at a modest fee annually. This is done on-line in the usual way [with the supplier direct].

Save

$47 TRILLION LIEN AGAINST U.S. TREASURY AND FED

cropped-chrisstory

SHOWDOWN TAKES A DECISIVE TURN AS THE CHINESE AND MI-6 TURN THE SCREW

Monday 14 December 2009 02:30

LIEN EXECUTED AGAINST TREASURY AND FEDERAL RESERVE IN THE SUM OF $47 TRILLION

SPECIAL CONFIRMATION OF THE LIEN OBTAINED BY THIS SERVICE

NEW ADDENDUM BELOW: NUMBER OF 9/11 VICTIMS MUCH HIGHER THAN STATED

U.S. HIJACKING OF THE FOREIGN SOVEREIGN FUNDS

SOVEREIGN FUNDS PLACED INTO ‘LOCKDOWN’ ON 10-12 SEPTEMBER 2008

BRITISH MINISTERS APPEARED TO HAVE NO IDEA ABOUT THIS BACKGROUND

KISSINGER AND BUSH ASSOCIATES ARRESTED

‘NOBODY WANTS TO DISCUSS KISSINGER’

KISSINGER IS/WAS CONTROLLER OF DVD LONG-RANGE STRATEGIC DECEPTION

KISSINGER ASSOCIATES EXECUTED BY M1-6

MASSIVE AUDIT OF SETTLEMENTS TRANSACTIONS

THE ‘WORLD SUITS’ THAT ARRIVED IN THOSE EIGHT PLANES

SETTLEMENTS PAYOUTS TO THE COUNTRY RECIPIENTS

GEITHNER TOLD TO HAND OVER CODES ‘OR YOU’RE HISTORY’

SAUDI ARABIA COMPLAINING ABOUT NOT BEING PAID

SOME UPDATED BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE OPPOSITION

PLANNED PARALLEL FRAUDULENT FINANCE ISSUANCE
OF NOTES ‘WORTH’ $1.12 QUADRILLION* TO ‘MOP UP’ DERIVATIVES OVERHANG

Note: Quadrillion = One Thousand Trillion*.

CORRUPT WALL STREET FIRMS LINED UP TO ISSUE THE GIGA-NOTES

TRADING PLATFORMS PREPARED IN READINESS FOR THIS ABOMINATION

ISSUERS WILL BE ARRESTED FOR SECURITIES AND BANK FRAUD

BRITAIN IS A CORRUPT LEAKY SIEVE THAT URGENTLY NEEDS FIXING

NEW HSBC DIVISIBLE NOTE ‘WORTH’ $1.5 TRILLION

PROBLEM NOW TOO IMMENSE TO BE IGNORED ANYWHERE

UNPRECEDENTED MESS CREATED BY THE BRITISH LABOUR GOVERNMENT

NOBODY IS INTERESTED IN THE DISCREDITED GLOBALIST AGENDA

NEIL KASHKARI INDULGES IN REWRITING OF ‘TARP MOMENTS’

FINE-TUNING ON THE BASIS OF OPINION POLL FINDINGS

LOW LIFE AT WESTMINSTER: THE EXPENSES SCANDAL

THE U.S. TREASURY’S WHOLLY UNNECESSARY NEW GIGA-INDEBTEDNESS

PAUL VOLCKER DERIDES ‘STUNNED’ BANKERS

IGNORING THE ONLY SOUND SOLUTION = FINANCIAL TERRORISM + WILFUL SABOTAGE

TOTAL COLLAPSE OF THE BUSH-CHENEY AGENDA

AMERICANS LOSE OUT AT IRAQI OILFIELD AUCTION

OBJECT LESSONS FOR THE ARROGANT U.S. INTELLIGENCE AND MILITARY POWERS

‘GREECE IS NOT DUBAI AND BRITAIN IS NOT GREECE’

MISPRISION OF FELONY: U.S. CODE, TITLE 18, PART 1, CHAPTER 1, SECTION 4:
‘Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some Judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both’.

BOOKS: Edward Harle Limited has so far published FIVE intelligence titles: The Perestroika Deception, by Anatoliy Golitsyn; Red Cocaine, by Dr Joseph D. Douglass, Jr.; The European Union Collective, by Christopher Story; The New Underworld Order, by Christopher Story; and The Red Terror in Russia, by Sergei Melgounov. All titles are permanently in stock. We sell books DIRECT.

Globalist hegemony ideology and practice are 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. Also, the Editor’s study entitled The European Union Collective, which proves that the EU is a long-range strategic entrapment operation to reduce European countries to satrap status within a German empire using economic strategy for relentless economic warfare purposes, can be bought here.

Please Make a Donation, if you feel able to do so, to help finance Christopher Story‘s ongoing global financial corruption investigations. Your assistance will be very sincerely appreciated and will make a real difference, hastening the OVERDUE resolution of the worst financial corruption and linked financial fallout in world history. Just press Make a Donation, which is live, and it takes you straight to our ultra-safe ordering system, which accepts Visa and MasterCard. Or press the live Donate link at the top right-hand corner of this page. See also the ADVERTISEMENT below.

See the SECOND WHITE PANEL ON THE HOME PAGE for updated information on our very latest subscription-based print publications, including Economic Intelligence Review, Arab-Asian Affairs, Soviet Analyst and Global Analyst. The updates provide outline summaries of the subjects covered, most of which are immediately relevant to these reports, which supplement the serials.

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

By Christopher Story FRSA, Editor and Publisher, International Currency Review, World Reports Limited, London and New York. For earlier reports, press the ARCHIVE. Order your intelligence subscriptions and our ‘politically incorrect’ intelligence books online from this website.

NEW REPORT STARTS HERE:

LIEN EXECUTED AGAINST TREASURY AND FEDERAL RESERVE IN THE SUM OF $47 TRILLION
Following further intransigent obstruction, the Chinese parties who obtained the necessary World Court Writ of Execution and Lien on the US Treasury and the Federal Reserve, duly exercised their powers and imposed the Lien on or around 6th December 2009. The Lien against the Treasury is in the sum of $47 trillion, which is approximately the aggregate identified by this service in 2007.

As happened shortly after the ‘lockdown’ of the $14.0+ trillion sovereign funds including the $6.2 trillion LOAN money provided by the British Monarchical Power [referenced again below] on 10th-12th September 2008, when the Editor’s voicemail received a message consisting of a recording of three actual gunshots, two specific threats, mentioned in an Update to the previous posting, were received on Sunday 6th December 2009, the date on which the Lien is believed to have been implemented. Transcriptions of these threats are given in Note 1 below (1) .

SPECIAL CONFIRMATION OF THE LIEN OBTAINED BY THIS SERVICE
We have obtained special confirmation of the foregoing Lien intelligence, otherwise, self-evidently, we would not have published this information. Furthermore, we have taken extra precautions to ascertain whether publishing this would be liable to ‘cause any difficulties’, and we have been advised that no impediment to publishing it has even been hinted at, although the fact that we possess the information ‘is known’. Indeed you will have observed that we have waited for a number of days in order to be sure that this shattering intelligence is fully confirmed.

We have been emphatically and authoritatively advised, since 10th December, that it is. We obtained reiterated confirmation of this intelligence, from New York, on 12th December.

U.S. HIJACKING OF THE FOREIGN SOVEREIGN FUNDS
Within the $47 trillion is the previously mentioned $14.0+ trillion, and that aggregate in turn embraces the above-noted $6.2 trillion of funds stolen from the British Monarchical Power by the criminal US Government, to which frequent reference has been made in this column. Those funds were transferred by the Bank of England to the criminal enterprise, Bank of New York Mellon (as it became, effective 1st July 2007), on 19th-20th June 2007 under levy, as we reported at the time.

Instead of disbursing the funds for the on-the-books Dollar Refunding Programme, as required by the sovereign LENDER, the named institution was party to a conspiracy involving other US criminal enterprise financial institutions, to divert and steal those real funds for use as a ‘platform base’ for leveraged financing operations to buttress their self-serving financial carousel.

SOVEREIGN FUNDS PLACED INTO ‘LOCKDOWN’ ON 10-12 SEPTEMBER 2008
After this had become fully apparent, and in response to this Editor’s strenuous recommendation on 6th September 2008 that the $6.2 trillion, in particular, was being abused in this manner, and that this state of affairs was intolerable – and further, that irrespective of the consequences, the only language these criminals would ever understand would be the removal of the funds from access by them and their associates – the entire $14.0+ trillion (within which total resided OTHER, non-British, sovereign monies) were placed into ‘lockdown’ (i.e. beyond the reach of the criminal operatives at the US Treasury and elsewhere) on 10th-12th September 2008 – a development that triggered the extreme crisis that overwhelmed London and New York at the beginning of October.

Coincidentally or not, scalar Hurricane IKE which developed on 13th September 2008 was probably intended to destroy the oil refineries and offshore oil platforms in the Houston area – the heart of the US oil industry. A sudden and temporary collapse of oil prices then followed, as did a quadruple witching day for commodities on Friday 19th September. Certain parties who had probably hoped to ‘make a killing’ that week, were wiped out instead.

BRITISH MINISTERS APPEARED TO HAVE NO IDEA ABOUT THIS BACKGROUND
It has since become apparent that the British Government appeared to have NO CLUE as to these background circumstances concerning the ‘lockdown’ of the $14.0+ trillion, given the subsequent statements by Ministers such as the City Minister, Lord Myners, that the financial system was within hours of disintegration at a critical stage that October.

A few days after the $14.0+ trillion was placed into ‘lockdown’, the Editor’s voicemail was enlivened (on the morning of 20th September) by a recording of three actual gunshots, as we reported at the time [see above]. This was an intelligence operation, as the recording could not be recaptured after being played the first time.

The Editor subsequently received special protection during his visit to Washington and New York for the Annual Meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank in October 2008.

KISSINGER AND BUSH ASSOCIATES ARRESTED
On 8th December 2009, sources advised us that ‘a number’ of associates of Godfather George H. W. Bush and of the triple-agent Dr Henry (‘Heinz’) Kissinger were arrested on that date. Earlier we learned that three close associates of Bush 41 had been arrested: although the total was changed to five within 24 hours.

However despite several further, entirely separate, sources telling us that Kissinger is in jail, we have been specifically advised (as of 12th December) by authoritative inside sources that this IS NOT CONFIRMED. The position here is that when the authoritative source was asked to confirm this information, it was NOT confirmed. (This may be because he is ‘no longer with us: see below). Had the source been able to confirm it, he would have done so, in conformity with the etiquette that we are told nothing officially: but if we establish information independently and then ask whether it is true, we are told: confirmed, not confirmed, or: we can neither confirm nor deny what you say.

For the time being, therefore, while we were naturally inclined to accept the accuracy of these reports about Kissinger, we cannot confirm them at the time of posting. Likewise, a report that Godfather Bush Sr.’s financial sorcerer-in-chief, Dr Alan Greenspan, was also arrested, cannot be confirmed at this time, either.

However you will recall that we have reported on two separate earlier occasions that Greenspan was arrested: and both those reports stand. Greenspan REMAINS under arrest, but is thought to be tagged. He may thus appear on TV talk shows as though nothing ever happened, which is NOT TRUE. On Sunday 13th December, Greeenspan was seen jabbering away as usual on NBC.

‘NOBODY WANTS TO DISCUSS KISSINGER’
Concerning Kissinger, we are told that ‘nobody wants to discuss Kissinger’. Now why would this be? Is it because this thoroughly nasty piece of work commands an army of paid assassins? Why are ‘authorities’ reluctant to talk about him? [Possibly because he IS dead – Ed.].

Possibly because, as we have reported, Kissinger is or was the actual controller of the long-range pan-German Abwehr strategic deception and penetration of the United States, effectively Bush Sr.’s handler-controller, and a top ‘Black’ operative serving several foreign intelligence masters simultaneously, and the ‘Black’ international demonic master, as well. Kissinger is believed to have been the German who arrived at the satanic mass held in the Chapel of St Peter and St Paul in the Vatican that is described in detail in the Editor’s book The New Underworld Order.

Those insiders who are reluctant to talk about this evil man may well be concerned that, as the unravelling accelerates, the full horror and depth of the long-range Nazi penetration will be exposed – taking many US operatives down, as the veil of secrecy surrounding the Nazi Fifth Column and its US collaborators is stripped away for the American people to see.

KISSINGER IS/WAS CONTROLLER OF DVD LONG-RANGE STRATEGIC DECEPTION
As previously reported, and as is also explained in the Editor’s study The New Underworld Order, Kissinger persuaded President Gerald Ford (real name: Leslie Lynch King) to sack William Colby as Director of Central Intelligence and to substitute George H. W. Bush, a CIA operative of German Jewish ethnic background ‘present at’ the assassination of President Kennedy, who had taken steps to base the dollar on silver and to curtail the activities of the US Intelligence Power.

Kissinger is believed to have taken over from Admiral Wilhelm Canaris, who was not hanged on 9th April 1945 at Flossenberg in accordance with the Nazi disinformation legend, but continued the war against the Main Enemy ‘by other means’ (Lenin).

Specifically, Canaris surfaced and based his subsequent US subversion operations in the State of Oklahoma. As a result, the files of resident Nazis holding details of the entire Nazi penetration were stored in Oklahoma City – uncoincidentally in the Murrah Building, which was blown up into the sky in the Oklahoma City Bombing. This background and the importance of the Nazi intelligence chief in the German-occupied USSR, General Reinhard Gehlen, who had persuaded the willingly gullible US Establishment that Stalin was preparing to invade Western Europe with 225 divisions, when in fact he had precisely one and a half divisions that were mechanised, the rest being horse-drawn – and was bogged down imposing oppressive régimes on his newly acquired satellites in Europe – is also elaborated in the Editor’s book, as is the little-known reality that the Cold War was postulated by Nazi General Reinhard Gehlen as the cover behind which the Nazi International would continue its subversion operations against the ‘Main Enemy’ – Britain and the United States.

FACT: Documents stored in the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City also included Clinton drug-trafficking investigation materials. There was no truck and no truck bomb: hi-tech was used.

KISSINGER ASSOCIATES EXECUTED BY M1-6
At about 1:00pm New York time on 13th December, the Editor learned that prominent associates of Kissinger and two corrupt bankers ‘working for’ Kissinger have been ‘executed’, and that these horizontalisations were performed by MI-6 – it is believed, on Saturday 12th December 2009.

This development sent a sharp message inter alia to Timothy Geithner, who blocked the payouts to the country recipients at 9.30 am on Friday 11th December, despite the fact that President Obama had signed off for the countries to be paid, on Wednesday 9th December. As indicated elsewhere in this report, Geithner has been reported to us to be in quote ‘very serious trouble’ unquote.

These executions will also send a message to the Nazi Continuum to the effect that any further criminal sabotage and disruption will not be tolerated by the powers that still really matter in this world, and that key elements within the ‘Main Enemy’ have at long last woken up from their 64-year slumber in the face of this Nazi onslaught, with a vengeance.

MASSIVE AUDIT OF SETTLEMENTS TRANSACTIONS
Execution of the Chinese et al. Lien against the US Treasury and the Federal Reserve has been accompanied by the most monumental collective auditing operation in US history, undertaken by personnel who arrived on those seven aircraft [see preceding report, and below]. The background to this, in part, is that certain Bush-appointed so-called ‘Trustees’ are reported to have had side obligations, to redirect funds on settlement to Bush 41, Clinton 42 and Bush 43.

One purpose of the international audit, therefore, is to prevent any such corrupt diversions taking place. Any Trustee or banker/associate found engaged in such activity would be/has been arrested.

THE ‘WORLD SUITS’ THAT ARRIVED IN THOSE EIGHT PLANES
Recall that on 2nd December 2009, seven aircraft (plus one plane consisting of Interpol personnel) arrived from abroad packed with ‘world suits’ to enforce the Settlements and to back up the World Court’s Writ of Execution and Lien issued to recover the officially hijacked and stolen Chinese and sovereign real funds. As we p;artly reported, the planes disgorged representatives of the payee countries, dignitaries, their special advisers, bankers, auditors and intelligence personnel onto US soil, accompanied by further heavily armed enforcement cadres to supplement the work of the 72 armed enforcement operatives who had arrived in the United States, as a kind of ‘advance party’, in November. An eighth aircraft, packed with Interpol officials, also arrived in the United States.

Shortly after these arrivals, the officials and other personnel were sworn in, over a period of two days, at the US Department of Justice, in conformity with the requirement under international law that such designated personnel must be sworn in on the territory of the country against which the World Court’s Writ of Execution and Lien has been handed down.

It is apparent that the Chinese and sovereign parties refrained from exercising the Lien (or Liens) to start with, on the forlorn assumption that the US official criminal operatives who were holding the whole world to ransom would finally succumb to common sense and would now cease to block the releases. This did not happen, so the Chinese and sovereign parties exercised the Lien in order to put an end to this desperate game of cynical bluff.

SETTLEMENTS PAYOUTS TO THE COUNTRY RECIPIENTS
On his arrival in the United States in the evening of 11th December, the Editor learned that Timothy Geithner, the US Treasury Secretary, attempted, at 9.30 a.m. New York time on that date, to prevent payments to the country payees, after President Obama had signed off on the country payments on Wednesday 9th December 2009. Like Rahm Emanuel, Geithner evidently thought he could deceive the President of the United States and go behind his back, with impunity. On Sunday evening [see below] he was disabused, we believe, of that delusion.

We then received conflicting reports on this matter; but it transpired, nevertheless, that some of the country payees were paid on that date, and that related payout operations would continue all night and all day on Saturday 12th December – when more recipient countries were paid. This had obvious implications for further progress in the days immediately ahead.

GEITHNER TOLD TO HAND OVER CODES ‘OR YOU’RE HISTORY’
We were also repeatedly informed that Mr Geithner is quote ‘in very serious trouble’. On 13th December, we learned that a confrontation with Geithner of the utmost severity would occur at 8.00pm on that date, notwithstanding that, following the executions of Dr Kissinger’s associates by MI-6 – NOT by the Chinese, but by British intelligence – Settlement payouts involving the country recipients had reportedly been proceeding, albeit in a somewhat jerky fashion.

At this meeting, Geithner was to be told to give up certain information and banking codes on the spot, or he would ‘be history’. We question whether this meeting, attended no doubt by Chinese, MI-6, Interpol and other enforcers, will have taken place in a plush, carpeted environment.

SAUDI ARABIA COMPLAINING ABOUT NOT BEING PAID
It was also stated that while some countries had been paid, Dubai and Saudi Arabia have NOT been paid – which, at first glance, strongly implied that those countries which have failed to cooperate, have colluded in the fraudulent derivatives operations and have shown no inclination to clean up their acts, may be being penalised.

We have completely separate reason to believe that the Saudi authorities have all along conducted themselves, shall we say, ‘in a less than candid’ manner in the overall context of this crisis.

However Saudi Arabia and Dubai were never in fact on the list of countries to be paid. They are essentially ‘Mr Cheney’s problem’. The Saudis are believed to have been at the receiving end of certain promises (delivered by the Bush-Cheney apparat), and they were reported to us on Sunday 13th December to be ‘furious’ at being excluded. The phrase ‘long spoon’ springs to mind here.

SOME UPDATED BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE OPPOSITION
Even so, given past experience, you will not be surprised to learn that notwithstanding all of the above, pockets of late resistance to the releases persisted right up to these developments, even though we were told, as indicated, that Timothy Geithner, the US Treasury Secretary, was quote ‘in very severe trouble’ unquote. We were also informed late on Friday 11th December 2009 that ‘very heavy threats’ had been issued by enforcement, one obvious recipient of such threats (‘perform or else’) being Geithner. Likewise we have also been told that several batches of people who ‘stood in the way’ were horizontalised during the week ending 11th December. The ‘very heavy threats’ obviously went unheeded among Kissinger’s associates: hence the summary executions by MI-6.

Among the associates of Kissinger thought to have been horizontalised earlier were two of his bodyguards. One may well ask, why does/did Kissinger need a bodyguard or minder? This is a legitimate question, and the answer is the same as the answer to the question: why did Bush 43 need a whole army of sharpshooters, thuggists and other armed ‘protective’ personnel, when he visited London? Because these people are organised criminal gangsters; and gangsters, being in permanent fear of their lives, need all-year-round, 24/7 protection.

Standing back from the situation, the ghastly reality is that the United States is unique in the world, in that it does not have a legitimate government like other countries. It has had an ‘administration’ in lieu of a government for about 150 years, and this administration has long since been penetrated by organised criminal elements masquerading as legitimate appointed and elected officials.

Moreover the criminalised ‘administration’ is itself directly controlled by one of the monsters it has spawned, namely the vast Intelligence Power – which, with its brainwashed and brutalised Military Power, has a vested interest in the continuation of this ‘Black’ status quo in general, and with the perpetuation of the illicit financial mechanisms it has developed in order to be able to finance itself and its ‘Black’ operations independently of Congress, in particular.

That is why the arrogant US Military Power no longer even bothers to deny that its soldiers now stand guard over Afghani opium crop fields, some of which are protected by specially constructed high breezeblock walls. This ‘Black’ crop today supplies 92% of the world’s illegal opium, so that Afghanistan under the corrupt US-led invasion force now accounts for most of the heroin that is consumed in North America and Europe.

Given that the so-called ‘Taliban’ (of whom no-one had heard prior to the invasion in 2001) had virtually eliminated the entire Afghan opium crop after they came to power, it is crystal clear that the entire purpose of this scandalous war was to reverse that achievement and to seize control over the heroin business, not least in order to ensure continued liquidity ‘on the books’ in the interbank market. Disgracefully, the British Ministry of Defence continues to ignore our repeated request for a formal written explanation, leaving nothing out, of what British troops are dying in Afghanistan for; while pictures of military funerals of our young men continue to appear on the front and inside pages of British newspapers.

Note, incidentally, that bland reports of this scandal appear from time to time MINUS any outrage.

The key reason for this is that the ‘mainstream’ and Internet sources addressing this issue are controlled. This is a very subtle operation. By detailing the FACTS devoid of condemnation, the impression is subliminally conveyed that nothing can be done about this truly hideous state of affairs, ‘so we’ve just got to learn to live with it’. But they said the same about the Fraudulent Finance crisis earlier in this decade: and look what’s happened!

PLANNED PARALLEL FRAUDULENT FINANCE ISSUANCE
OF NOTES ‘WORTH’ $1.12 QUADRILLION* TO ‘MOP UP’ DERIVATIVES OVERHANG
Nevertheless it comes as no surprise that, even as the Chinese and sovereign ‘owners’ of the Writ of Execution, the Lien(s) and therefore of the Treasury, the Federal Reserve and the United States itself, carry out the necessary Treasury audit and have been standing ready, in case of continued default, to start the process of sequestering Americanassets around the world, a last-ditch, wholly incredible, ABSOLUTELY DESPERATE illegal DIALECTICAL plan is being hatched, quite possibly with the connivance of certain ‘bad eggs’ among Chinese intelligence cadres, to ‘mop up’ and capture the entire derivatives overhang through the issuance of new USD Notes ‘worth’ $1.12 quadrillion*, to be exchanged for the derivatives overhang ‘assets’.

No doubt Geithner was to be told to drop this idiocy at the unpleasant meeting arranged for 8.00pm on Sunday 13th December, at which figures MORE SENIOR THAN GEITHNER were to be present.

That suggested that the meeting would be attended by National Security Council operatives (the NSC being in reality ABOVE the Government, in conformity with the Leninist state system as well), the US Secretary of State (Mrs Clinton, who has been ‘cooperating’ of late and divulging sensitive information to appropriate authorities, including special judicial recipients), and President Obama himself – overseen by the Lien Principals (Chinese personnel, MI-6, Interpol and Swiss operatives, accompanied by heavily armed enforcers).

Alternatively, indications that Geithner had been summoned to a meeting, or would be taken to a meeting, by people ‘more senior than Geithner himself’, which is what we were told, may actually have been an oblique reference to Chinese and MI-6 operatives, since both are SENIOR TO ALL MEMBERS OF THE OBAMA GOVERNMENT by virtue of the Lien. These operatives would certainly either be heavily armed, or will have been accompanied by heavily armed personnel authorised to liquidate Geithner on the spot, should he have failed to cooperate [see below].

CORRUPT WALL STREET FIRMS LINED UP TO ISSUE THE GIGA-NOTES
It is reported to us, even as the Settlement payouts proceed, that the intended Notes are/were to be issued via JP Morgan Chase and other familiar Wall Street names, in a rash, desperate, last-gasp attempt to ‘resolve’ the derivatives problem in one fell swoop – using a method of doing so that is criminal in the United States and will simply make the situation far worse (with the assistance of the usual ‘smoke and mirrors’ false accounting techniques). This is because 100% of fake derivatives products marketed in the United States are illegal under the 1933 and 1934 Securities Acts.

TRADING PLATFORMS PREPARED IN READINESS FOR THIS ABOMINATION
We understand that large numbers of platforms for trading have been prepared in readiness for the launch of this colossal Note issuance, the assumption being that with this new development, and with trading henceforth even taking place on the books (a ‘line’ which expert advisers dismiss as being ‘not true’), everything will be nice’n Basel-II and Basel-III compliant, so there won’t be any need for further controversy or debate about legitimacy.

Wrong.

First, as noted, marketing and undertaking transactions in derivatives securities are illegal in the United States under the 1933 and 1934 Securities Acts [see Legal Notes below]..

Secondly, representations (that we have heard) that the trading via these new platforms is to take place on the books are absolute bunk, since such trades are illegal in the United States: hence, by definition, they CANNOT be undertaken on the books.

Thirdly, the situation has changed in the following respect since prior to the major discontinuity triggered by the events of 10th-12th September, which in turn triggered Madoff’s redemption calls and resulted in the knock-on exposures of Stanford, Rothstein, et al: there is now zero tolerance in the ranks of angered and frustrated US law enforcement at the arrogance of these perpetrators – a state of affairs which has arisen, in part, thanks to the much greater awareness of what has gone wrong compared even to the situation two years ago.

The other reason for this hardened zero tolerance attitude is that US law enforcement cadres have been severely buffeted, inconvenienced and messed about for years by these criminal financiers: and they have finally had enough. They want drastic action to be taken against these serpents: and the proposed illegal securities marketing ploy provides the perfect opportunity for this to happen.

We won’t rub their noses in it too much by pointing out that we called strenuously for draconian action to be taken, two years ago. The process started then, but it was disgracefully aborted.

ISSUERS WILL BE ARRESTED FOR SECURITIES AND BANK FRAUD
Hence it is further reported to us – and we would especially ask you to take careful note of this – that US Law Enforcement is now waiting patiently for this colossal Fraudulent Finance operation to proceed, because the intention is to charge the perpetrators forthwith with US securities and bank fraud. The matter was put to us on 12th December 2009 as follows:

‘US Law Enforcement are waiting for this to occur because they can’t wait to put shackles on these guys and frogmarch them to jail’ – as we would hope, in front of the TV cameras.

It may be speculated (but we do not know) that the Carlyle Group, Black Rock, HSBC, Barclays Capital, Warren Buffet, etc., are all involved in this exercise: in which case their officers who turn out to be perpetrators of and participants in this intended giga-securities scam will be cuffed and hauled off to face the Courts, while those among their number operating in the United States will finally learn the hard way all about the life cycle of the North American cockroach.

It is understood that the mood of zero tolerance has even reached corrupt locations such as London, where law and financial markets enforcement have been adopting a progressively harder-line stance in the face of endemic white collar crime, in recent months.

BRITAIN IS A CORRUPT LEAKY SIEVE THAT URGENTLY NEEDS FIXING
The problem is that derivatives products are not illegal in other relevant countries – in Britain, for example. They SHOULD be: and the fact that NO STEPS have so far been taken in London to bring British securities market practice into line with the US legislation (which is at last being enforced, unlike the situation up to 2009), reveals straight away that the British authorities are double-minded and criminally complacent in the face of this crisis.

NEW HSBC DIVISIBLE NOTE ‘WORTH’ $1.5 TRILLION
Thus, the extremely wayward British-Chinese institution HSBC is launching or has launched a new Divisible Note ‘worth’ $1.5 trillion, which may be a component of the $1.1 quadrillion* Note issuance that we have hereby exposed. As has happened on numerous earlier occasions, it can reasonably be expected that this exposure – of the intended $1.12 quadrillion* US Note issuance, contrary to the US Securities Acts of 1933 and 1934 [see Legal Notes ] – will kill this latest wheeze stone dead.

The fact that HSBC is launching a colossal $1.5 trillion Divisible Note, and the still volatile situation following implementation of the Lien against the Treasury and the Federal Reserve by the Chinese and sovereign injured parties, strongly implies that elements within the Chinese contingent are not behaving in a straightforward manner and may even be double-crossing the British Monarchical Power – which, in turn, would necessitate an appropriately vigorous response from The Queen’s MI-6 representatives who are overseeing Her Majesty’s interests in the United States.

No doubt the summary executions of ‘friends of Dr Kissinger’ will have sent a message here.

It is also thought possible that tensions between the Bush Crime Family, the Clintons, and elements of the Chinese, may have reached explosive proportions. The new generation of Chinese seem to want to have their money paid out up front. Suffice it to say that in the light of this advanced phase of prospective obstruction, the green light has been awarded to this service for a comprehensive exposure of US and international financial criminality across a wide spectrum of perpetrators, and that you will be hearing further from us on this subject as soon as is practicable.

PROBLEM NOW TOO IMMENSE TO BE IGNORED ANYWHERE
The Editor recently wondered (out loud) whether reports of the series of US Government single-bid contracts placed since 1999 with the Halliburton subsidiary of Kellogg, Brown and Root (KBR) to construct detention camps at undisclosed locations within the United States might ironically wind up catering not so much for ‘potential terrorists’ and those who dislike US official corruption, but rather for the very large number of US attorneys, bankers, brokers, accountants, traders and others who are and have been engaged in multiple Fraudulent Finance operations, Ponzi schemes and criminal thefts and confiscations of private property on an industrial scale.

That may not have been the original intention, but it could be the ironical end-result.

UNPRECEDENTED MESS CREATED BY THE BRITISH LABOUR GOVERNMENT
And the reason for this turn of events is that the problem is now so immense that it cannot be ignored, even outside the United States – where chaotic and disreputable governments like the British Government have made and continue to make a catastrophic mess of everything that they touch – working to agendas that have nothing to do with the priorities of the population, and (in the British context) compounding the domestic financial crisis by ring-fencing sacred political cattle like ‘schools’n’ospitals’ while continuing with permissive expenditure on frivolities such as the colossal overhang of make-work Quasi-Governmental Organisations (Quangos), and burdening the next two generations with sky-high taxes to pay for the never-ending catalogue of official bungling.

Following Chancellor of the Exchequer Alastair Darling’s Pre-Budget Report to Parliament on 9th December, the Institute for Fiscal Studies in London pointed out that the political ring-fencing of the ‘schools’n’ospitals’ sacred cows would mean that all other British Government Departments will soon be facing ‘severe cuts’. The Institute said that in real terms, the ‘cuts’ would average 19.2%, and would affect defence expenditure, higher education, transportation and housing (2) .

Over the next five years, the Chancellor plans to borrow an extra £707 billion – piled on top of the state’s existing debt, so that by the end of 2013-2014, the British Government will be crippled with debts of around £1.5 trillion, more than Britain’s current total annual output.

British Gross Domestic Product (GDP) will have contracted by 4.75% this year in real terms (and no-one really knows the real rate of inflation, which is much higher than officially reported), while the country’s debts are ballooning. The official (Darling) assumption that the UK’s annual growth rate will have reverted to around 3.5% by 2011, on which his projections of the debt schedule are based, are considered to be ridiculous by respected observers and by the International Monetary Fund, so the fiscal and financial shambles is likely to be far worse than has been officially predicted (3).

NOBODY IS INTERESTED IN THE DISCREDITED GLOBALIST AGENDA
None of this comes as any surprise to Britons who have lived through the chaos created by earlier Labour Governments. Notoriously, they typically have no clue what they are doing, and they leave the country in a far worse mess than when they assumed power.

While waiting at Heathrow for his flight to New York on 11th December, the Editor watched Gordon Brown on a screen engaging in dry drivelspeak at yet another sterile European Union Collective meeting. As these people do, he evidently assumed that the dull, empty words he was laboriously reading from a gobbldegook prepared script would be liable to grip his passive audience. In reality, NOBODY IS INTERESTED IN THE INTERNATIONALIST AGENDA, and nobody is paying attention to what these manipulators are shoving down our throats day in, day out.

This is of course dangerous, because it suggests that the World Revolution can proceed anyway, since humanity suffers from EGO (Eyes Glaze Over) at the interminable globalist garbage spewed out from Brussels, Copenhagen, and wherever the next sprachfest is to be hosted. On the other hand, given the meticulous attention paid by the controllers of the World Revolution to what they spout for public consumption, it is also paradoxically the case that these people CARE WHAT WE THINK OF THEM. Which is not a lot.

FINE-TUNING ON THE BASIS OF OPINION POLL FINDINGS
We know that this is the case anyway, because opinion polls are the mechanism used by these manipulators to gauge public opinion, to ‘test’ revolutionary ‘solutions’ and initiatives, and to provide feedback so that the manipulators can try to fine-tune elements of their agenda so as to steer through identified minefields.

But the problem these fools face is that the longer they try to oppress humanity with their mad and malevolent scheming, the more obvious does it become that great swathes of the populations are refusing to take this gibberish, such as the lies underlying ‘Climategate’, in accordance with the manipulators’ self-serving presumptions, which usually mask nefarious intentions.

The one response that these people cannot handle, as Lenin himself taught, is exposure.

LOW LIFE AT WESTMINSTER: THE EXPENSES SCANDAL
In Britain, the truly farcical mess that has been made of the ongoing Westminster parliamentary expenses scandal – probably orchestrated to discredit the Westminster Parliament altogether, although the parallel expenses corruption at the European Parliament is infinitely worse – has revealed, to a disgusted general public, that British parliamentarians are a money-grubbing, deceitful and greedy lot who have no qualms about milking the system.

It has also revealed that those in charge of parliamentary expenses are themselves stupid and unbelievably muddled and incompetent. When this Editor bought a small print works (for his sins) in 1981, he closed down ALL expenses immediately and permanently.

Not long afterwards, the union shop steward knocked on the Editor’s door, saying:

‘Chris, can I have a word?’.

CS: ‘Sure. Please come in and sit down’.

Shop steward: ‘What are we going to do about expenses and parking?’

CS: ‘I have absolutely no idea’.

THE U.S. TREASURY’S WHOLLY UNNECESSARY NEW GIGA-INDEBTEDNESS
And in the United States itself, the Obama Administration is continuing mischievously to behave as though it can somehow sail through its own colossal expenses scandal, the US official debt crisis – involving the creation of trillions of additional and WHOLLY UNNECESSARY US Treasury debt in the background that its permissive spending decisions have inflicted upon all future generations of American taxpayers as a consequence of its criminal intent to perpetuate the Fraudulent Finance carousel by hanging on to the stolen real funds, including the $6.2 trillion LOAN allocated pro bono publico by the British Monarchical Power as an arms’-length gesture in June 2007 so as to assist the United States out of its difficulties.

PAUL VOLCKER DERIDES ‘STUNNED’ BANKERS
On 8th December, Paul Volcker, the former Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board (before its custodian became the corrupt financial sorcerer, Dr Alan Greenspan, who appeared on NBC on Sunday 13th December as though he has no arrest tag on his ankle and remains in a position of hands-on influence, which we understand is not true: he can’t interfere with anything any more) surfaced at a conference held in Sussex, UK, where he berated bankers for failing to grasp the magnitude of the financial crisis caused by marketing fraudulent securities, and belittled their self-interested suggested reforms. Furthermore, he cast doubt on the familiar grandiose claims that financial innovation has been beneficial to the economy.

Attacking the use of (deliberately) complex ‘financial products’ such as Credit Default Swaps (CDS), Volcker, who, despite several threats to resign, remains Chairman of President Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board, told the Future of Finance Initiative, a conference organised by the Wall Street Journal, held in a Sussex country house hotel:

‘I wish someone would give me one shred of neutral evidence that financial innovation has led to economic growth – one shred of evidence’.

Mr Volcker told the assembled delegates, who had been discussing how to rebuild the financial system, to ‘wake up’. He said that Credit Default Swaps (CDS) and Collateralised Debt Obligations (CDOs) had taken the economy ‘right to the brink of disaster’, adding that the economy had grown at faster rates during the 1960s, when none of these exotic fabrications existed (4) . In other words, Volcker was saying precisely what this service has been preaching for the past several years.

According to reports, the complacent banking attendees were just ‘stunned’. They haven’t been reading this column, of course, but have instead conferred only among themselves – which means that they have simply shared each other’s shabby or corrupt ideas. They are way behind the curve.

When one ‘stunned audience member’ suggested that Mr Volcker did not ‘really’ mean that bond markets and ‘securitisation’ had contributed ‘nothing at all’, Paul Volcker replied: ‘You can innovate as much as you like, but do it within a structure that doesn’t put the whole economy at risk’.

On the populist issue of bankers’ obscene remuneration (paid for out of funny money profits derived from Fraudulent Finance operations), the former Fed Chairman said:

‘Has there been one financial leader to say this is really excessive? Wake up, gentlemen. Your response, I can only say, has been inadequate’ (5) .

Unfortunately, after perusing the reports of this conference, the Editor failed to observe a single reported use of the words ‘corruption, ‘fraud’, ‘Ponzi’ and their obvious derivatives.

After the $1.12 quadrillion* giga-Note issue has been launched (if it survives this posting), we may at last begin to hear these words – which are the ONLY words that matter in this context – employed with greater frequency. Perhaps, then, the ‘mainstream’ will belatedly begin to report on this crisis with less of its familiar head-in-the-sand duplicity.

Since certain of our faithful readers have for a long time been sending these reports to selected journalists at key ‘mainstream’ media organisations, they know all about everything we write about. But they are too scared to write about it themselves.

NEIL KASHKARI INDULGES IN REWRITING OF ‘TARP MOMENTS’
Nor should one underestimate the capacity of people who ought to know better for defensive amnesia or sheer self-delusion. On 8th December, the technical ‘architect’ of the supposed US banking bailout was reported to have revealed the chaos behind the scenes at the US Treasury during the period when the fudgists were preparing the so-called Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP), after the events of 10th-12th September (see above).

Neel Kashkari, aged 37, whom the criminal financier Henry M. Paulson had selected to oversee creation of the TARP arrangements, told The Washington Post that one colleague ‘screamed in panic over the imploding financial system’ – while yet ‘another almost died of heart problems’. Specifically, one Government economist screamed… ‘Oh my God, the system’s collapsing’. Don Hammond, the chief compliance officer for TARP, was rushed to hospital after suffering a heart attack, having worked for 18 hours a day for 40 straight days to finalise the TARP.

Interviewed at his shack in the woods in northern California – as far from the US Treasury as he could manage – Mr Kashkari, who had been a technology specialist at Goldman Sachs in June 2006 when Henry M. Paulson Jr. was selected by Bush 43 to oversee the orchestrated financial thievery, admitted: ‘We didn’t know if it [TARP] would work. We had to project confidence, hold up the world. We couldn’t admit how scared we were’ (6) .

It transpires that Mr Kashkari was charged as early as February 2008 with drafting an emergency plan in case the crisis ran out of control, as perceived by the implicated US Treasury. Given his background at Goldman Sachs, Neel Kashkari’s mindset was rooted in derivatives; so no attention was ever paid to the Cottrell Plan, which explained in very simple language how the crisis could be brought rapidly under control by adhering to the on-the-books, fully transparent and taxable Dollar Refunding Programme agreed by the G-7 financial powers in 2006 and 2007, for which the bulk of the $6.2 trillion had been provided on loan by the British Monarchical Power pro bono publico via the Bank of England on 19-20 June 2007, as we reported.

Full details of the Cottrell Plan and its implications were published on this website and in our financial journal International Currency Review.

IGNORING THE ONLY SOUND SOLUTION = FINANCIAL TERRORISM + WILFUL SABOTAGE
To have deliberately ignored the only possible sound, practical solution on the table, represented a piece of wilful sabotage equating to the deliberate waging of financial terrorism by Kashkari and his US Treasury colleagues – overseen by Henry M. Paulson Jr., who is a candidate for the title of the most corrupt US Treasury Secretary in history.

And of course the reason that the only viable solution was specifically ignored was that Paulson and his associates in the speculative Wall Street financial institutions which grew fat and bloated from handling the one-way US Treasury debt pipeline, were not interested in any sound solution which threatened to dethrone their bonanza carousel based on the marketing of Treasury debt and the open-ended Fraudulent Finance derivatives festivities. Hence, these institutions have all amply demonstrated that they are greedy, self-interested enemies of the American people.

TOTAL COLLAPSE OF THE BUSH-CHENEY AGENDA
Meanwhile we all watched spellbound as the corrupt Bush II Vice President Richard B Cheney, former controller of the Himmlerian MK-ULTRA and related satanic CIA programmes, stole vast sums of money, stashing them, in collaboration with Mrs Laura Bush, inter alia, in Dubai.

That desert state will now languish in a condition of irrecoverable desperation for eternity, with half-completed skyscraper skeletons corroding in the salt-laden atmosphere – since there is no means of deciphering who owns Dubai’s mountains of layered debt, given that this entire city is literally built on sand – that is to say, on derivative paper, all of which is fraudulent, held off the books, and therefore worth zilch in the emerging financial environment.

No doubt false hopes are being raised that Dubai will be bailed out in the backwash of the intended $1.12 quadrillion* Note giga-issue referenced above. However as this rash operation will be wholly fraudulent, and the perpetrators will (we have been told) be arrested for securities and bank fraud, any such hopes are groundless.

So what we anticipate is that Dubai will remain a colossal monument to the extreme folly of arrogant fools who thought that a new Manhattan could be constructed in the desert on the back of open-ended, and never-ending, one-way Fraudulent Finance operations. Dubai is also a monument to the progressive collapse and disintegration of the corrupt Bush-Cheney Virtual Money Utopia.

AMERICANS LOSE OUT AT IRAQI OILFIELD AUCTION
Adding to the abject failure of everything that Ex-Veep Cheney touched is the outcome of the Iraqi Government’s oilfield auction, completed on 12th December 2009 and reported on the following day. Winners of the two-day public auction of 20-year service contracts from which operators will earn a fee for each barrel of oil they produce above a Government-established baseline, included corporations from Angola, Malaysia, Turkey and China. Specifically, the Malaysian oil corporation Petronas, the Angolan firm Sonangol, and the Russian oil conglomerate Lukoil, emerged as the biggest winners from the Iraqi oilfield auctions (7).

It will of course be recalled that Cheney presided over a quasi-secret panel which identified, listed and targeted all Iraq’s oilfields, which were to have been annexed by the United States (with smaller bits and pieces for its dragooned ‘allies’), in an operation that was intended to replicate what the Americans originally had in mind for Saudi Arabia.

Assuming that the oilfield facilities are not sabotaged as they are being developed and when they come on-stream (which is a reasonable assumption, as the targets will not be Western), the official Iraqi projection is that the country’s current output of about 2.5 million barrels a day, will have risen to 12 million barrels a day by 2016, surpassing current oil production from Saudi Arabia.

OBJECT LESSONS FOR THE ARROGANT U.S. INTELLIGENCE AND MILITARY POWERS
All of which can be interpreted as an object lesson for the arrogant DVD-penetrated US Intelligence Power, which thought that it could build a new Manhattan in the desert on the basis of a régime of Fraudulent Finance fuelled by the systematic criminal pillaging of the assets of ordinary Americans by means of a myriad variants of the classic Ponzi Scheme – and a parallel object lesson, too, for the dumb, brainwashed US Military Power, whose stupid leaders thought they could seize a foreign country and its natural resources with impunity. The foreign, including British, fools who followed these maniacs in their criminal misadventures, will pay dearly for their stupidity, too.

‘GREECE IS NOT DUBAI AND BRITAIN IS NOT GREECE’
Speaking of which, the dreadful financial chaos in Greece, which was (you will readily recall) one of Cheney’s Fraudulent Finance hidey-holes, and where the Chairman of the National Bank of Greece resigned suddenly only the other day, is reflected in the spectacle of so much garbage piled up on either side of the Athens streets, in the context of a strike by garbage collectors, that people have had to walk down the middle of the street to avoid falling face-down into sacks of smelly, rotting detritus and filth. In fact, Greece is plagued by strikes all year round: once the trash people have gone on strike, the buses go on strike, followed by teachers, tax inspectors, train drivers, you name it. The country (which really means Athens) is a total, decaying mess.

Greece will have to abandon the Euro, so that it can devalue its currency to start the process of rehabilitation. It cannot survive the straightjacket of the stupid German collective currency, which will start to disintegrate as soon as Greece defects, which it will. Ireland may have to get out, too.

Without going into details here, Greece’s fiscal shambles is even worse, proportionately, than that facing Britain, a seat of global corruption, which is itself all but intractable (see above) thanks to the colossal shambles created by the discredited Labour Government. Faced with the downgrading in early December 2009 of Greece’s credit rating (a fate which also awaits the United Kingdom in 2010), Greek spokesmen have been at pains to inform anyone in the international community who will listen, that ‘Greece is not Dubai’ (8).

And apologists for the disgraceful fiscal and financial shambles in London are telling anyone who will listen abroad, that ‘Britain is not Greece’.

* QUADRILLION = ONE THOUSAND TRILLION.

ADDENDUM: NUMBER OF 9/11 MURDER VICTIMS MUCH HIGHER THAN STATED
It may be recalled that several references have been made in these reports to the stench of rotting flesh that permeated Midtown Manhattan during the second half of October 2001, when the Editor returned to our office there. This stench was still present throughout the area as late as February 2002 (when the Editor again visited New York) depending on the direction of the wind.

Given also that our attempts to obtain a list of victims killed when the Twin Towers collapsed met with stonewalling for many weeks, while Silverstein Properties couldn’t be bothered to respond, and in view of the fact that, in common with American atrocities from the assassination of President Kennedy onwards, the abominations always appear to be protected by a wall of lies, the Editor has assumed that the heavy stench of rotting human flesh must have emanated from a larger number victims than the 3,000 – which, in any case, emerged much earlier than it should have done. This is because that number was ‘released’ months before the débris had been cleared from the site.

The actual number of people murdered on 9/11 was around 12,000. One source for this information is a paralegal working for one of the law firms dealing with the 9/11 victims’ families.

This very responsible and intelligent source states emphatically:

‘They (the law firms and lawyers working with victims’ families) all know it was about 12,000’.

Notes and References:

(1): As indicated in the text, the date on which the Chinese (and the other sovereign injured parties) implemented their Lien on the US Treasury and the Federal Reserve System was almost certainly (according to our information) Sunday, 6th December 2009. It was no coincidence that this was also the date on which the Editor (as previously reported here in generic language) received two explicit threats on our voicemail system. We now publish the transcriptions of these threats.

The first threat, received at 6.17pm on 6th December, was by an oily American voice that ‘warned’ as follows: ‘Hi Mr Story, how are you today? We’ve heard that we should have a talk with you. They told us that we should come and crash your party, Mr Story. We are the ones who do the best crashes of all. Call us back on 202 666 666’.

The second threat, received at 6.42pm on 6th December, was a follow-up message from the maniac voice that has been plaguing us almost daily since February 2008 in part from a 202 (Washington DC Skype) number, representing ‘the Great Dark Lords’. He had this to say:

‘Don’t you understand, Mr Story, what part of [redacted by the Editor]’s left finger is gone? That is because he did not follow what the Mossad told him to do. It’s an ancient ritual when not following the correct procedures, when you end up losing a quarter/half of your finger. You should know that, as that’s the way they teach their minions to follow [cackle cackle]. If you notice [indistinct]’s second from right finger gone, you will know that he didn’t follow the Mossad’s plan correctly…. You poor imbecilic stupid Englishman bloke, you will be learning your lessons, too’.

At 6:55pm on 8th December 2009, the foregoing deluded ‘Useful Idiot’ working for a Psy-Ops cadre phoned with the following supplementary verbal tirade:

‘Listen, Mr Story, we’re getting tired of you… you’re such an old poof. You should realise that the world is in the hands of the great occult powers, and you should wake up to this and stop believing your stupid Christianity. You damn fool…’.

As indicated, this Psy-Ops specialist nutcase has been systematically leaving such messages on our voicemail since February 2008, when the double-cross by Wanta belatedly became apparent. Since Wanta was in touch with the Bushes and Cheney, our working assumption is that this is an MK-ULTRA variant operation – run by people who do not seem to be able to realise that this wanton and criminal harassment is not merely illegal, but has had no effect and cannot have any impact on the psychology of the Editor of this service – who has been targeted for a reason.

The Editor has in fact been so busy for so long that he simply hasn’t had time to devote resources to procuring intervention by the British and US telecommunications authorities, in the knowledge that this is a pathetic counterintelligence offensive.

It has got nowhere, and it is going nowhere – merely revealing the depths, stupidity and routine nastiness of these brainwashed Psy-Ops geomasonic cadres. Some of the messages have been beyond offensive – with one of them insulting the Editor’s distinguished late military father who fought right through TWO World Wars.

As for the uneducated assumption that the Editor does not know that the nations of the world are in the hands of Satan, this of course is hardly a revelation.

It is made plain to us in Matthew, Chapter 4, verses 8-11:

‘Again, the devil taketh him up to an exceedingly high mountain, and sheweth him ALL the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;

And saith to him, ALL these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.

Then saith Jesus unto, Get thee hence, Satan, for it is written. Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

Then the devil leaveth him. And behold, angels came and ministered unto him’.

The word ALL is capitalised to reveal the central point that 100% of the ‘kingdoms of the world’ are in the hands of Satan: not 50%, 70%, or a lesser proportion than 100%. We know that. It’s a given.

Genesis, Chapter 6, verse 5:

‘And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually’.

True Christians take this for granted, and do not need extracurricular lessons on this subject from the Devil’s minions.

(2) ‘Real cost of Darling’s spending squeeze is laid bare’, James Kirkup,
The Daily Telegraph, page 1, 11 December 2009.

(3): ‘The Treasury won’t tell us the true cost of this debt disaster’,
Jeff Randall, the Daily Telegraph, 11th December 2009.

(4): ‘Wake up, gentlemen’, world’s top bankers warned by former Fed Chairman Volcker’,
Patrick Hosking and Suzy Jagger, The Times, 9th December 2009, page 57.

(5): ‘Ex-Fed chief Volcker’s telling words on derivatives industry’,
Louise Armistead. The Daily Telegraph, 9th December 2009.

(6): ‘‘Was it real?’ Creator of US bailout revisits the nightmare’, Christine Selb, New York,
The Times, London, 8th December 2009, reporting the interview in The Washington Post.

(7): ‘Iraq Auctions Development Rights to 7 Oil Fields, Hoping for Big Rise in Production’,
Timothy Williams, The New York Times, 13 December 2009.

(8): ‘Greece Struggles to Tame Debt as its People Grow More Restive’,
Rachel Donadio and Niki Kitsantonis, The New York Times, 13 December 2009, page A4.

LIST OF U.S. STATUTES, SECURITIES REGULATIONS AND LEGAL PRINCIPLES OF WHICH THE CRIMINALISTS, ASSOCIATES AND ALL THE MAIN FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS REMAIN IN BREACH:

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:

THEFT BY DECEPTION:

“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:

“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’.

U.S. SECURITIES REGULATIONS OF WHICH INSTITUTIONS
HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO BE IN BREACH [SEE REPORTS]:

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.

U.S. LAWS ROUTINELY BREACHED BY THE CRIMINAL OPERATIVES AND INSTITUTIONS:

Annunzio-Wylie Anti-Money Laundering Act
Anti-Drug Abuse Act
Applicable international money laundering restrictions
Bank Secrecy Act
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.

ADVERTISEMENT: INTERNET SECURITY SOLUTION
YOU CAN ORDER THIS DIRECT FROM THIS WEBSITE. Summary:
Press Internet Security Solution or go to the World Reports Limited serials catalogue and scroll down until you come to this product. Then proceed through the simple and ultra-safe ordering procedure [Visa or MasterCard only]. Send a donation as you order this RECOMMENDED solution.

NON-U.S. INTERNET SECURITY SOLUTION CD AVAILABLE: FAR BETTER THAN NORTON ETC
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. The program has an invaluable ‘Preview before downloading’ feature.

It is suitable for PC’s but not Mac computers. As with all such programs, the License is renewable at a modest fee annually. This is done on-line in the usual way [with the supplier direct].

*VISTA: Virtual Instant Surveillance Tactical Application.

FURORE ERUPTS FOLLOWING OUR 17TH AUGUST REPORT

cropped-chrisstory

MASSIVE US$ DEVALUATION SWINDLE OPERATION CANCELLED

Sunday 23 August 2009 02:00

• 2ND SEPTEMBER:
A REPORT PREPARED FOR POSTING ON THIS DATE HAS BEEN ‘CENSORED’! WE HAVE BEEN REQUESTED TO POSTPONE THE REPORT FOR 48 HOURS, PENDING ‘DEVELOPMENTS’.

20TH AUGUST: 4 CRIMINAL PRESIDENTS DEMAND, AND ARE GRANTED, ‘IMMUNITY’

IN EXCHANGE FOR RELEASES, AND CEASING THEIR OBSTRUCTIONS OF JUSTICE

COLLECTIVE WORLD COURT DEMAND CONFIRMS THEY KNOW THAT THEY ARE CRIMINALS

• ADDENDUM: THERE ARE MORE THAN A DOZEN LIVE AMERICAN POWs HELD IN BURMA: Please scroll down to this Addendum, which highlights the fact that when Senator Jim Webb picked up an American in Burma recently, as reported below, HE DIDN’T DO ANYTHING TO RESCUE THE DOZEN OR MORE AMERICAN PRISONERS OF WAR WHO ARE STILL BEING EXPLOITED AS SLAVE LABOUR THERE, DECADES AFTER THE END OF MILITARY HOSTILITIES IN THE REGION.

That’s because Burma’s a key component in George H. W. Bush’s drug-related deception relative to the Golden Triangle, and nothing, but NOTHING, must EVER be allowed to destabilise that verily colossal dimension of the global crisis, must it? But when THAT explodes, as it WILL, we’ll know all about it, and the US perpetrators will indulge in a soul-wrenching whining for mercy. When THAT happens, NO MERCY MUST BE SHOWN TO THEM. THIS WARHEAD HAS YET TO DETONATE.

MISPRISION OF FELONY: U.S. CODE, TITLE 18, PART 1, CHAPTER 1, SECTION 4:
‘Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some Judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both’.

CALLING EVIL GOOD, AND GOOD EVIL
‘Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!’

‘Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!’
Isaiah, Chapter 5, verses 20-21.

‘WE’LL KNOW OUR DISINFORMATION PROGRAM IS COMPLETE WHEN EVERYTHING THE AMERICAN PUBLIC BELIEVES IS FALSE’: William Casey, Director of Central Intelligence: An observation by the late Director at his first staff meeting in 1981. This observation reveals the mentality of cynicism which infests the US Federal control structures, and the reality that these structures regard the American people with total contempt. This attitude is the opposite to the noble concept of service to the American people which ought to inspire holders of public office, and therefore represents the epitome of decadence.

The evil spirit directing William Casey got the better of him when he committed suicide in hospital some years later, ostensibly to ‘protect the President’. The fantastic verbal fantasies perpetrated on certain US websites that are operating on the basis of Mr Casey’s principle, enunciated above, should therefore be handled with extreme care. Casey warned you!

HOW TO HANDLE OUR KNOWLEDGE OF THESE EVIL PEOPLE
‘Fret not thyself because of evil-doers, neither be thou envious against the workers of iniquity.
For they shall soon be cut down like the grass, and wither as the green herb’.
Psalm 37, verses 1 and 2.

‘The wicked plotteth against the just, and gnasheth upon him with his teeth. The Lord shall laugh at him: for he seeth that his day is coming. The wicked have drawn out the sword, and have bent their bow, to cast down the poor and needy, and to slay such as be of upright conversation. Their sword shall enter into their own heart, and their bows shall be broken’. Psalm 27, verses 12-15.

‘I have seen the wicked in great power, and spreading himself like a green bay tree. Yet he passed away, and lo, he was not; yea, I sought him, but he could not be found’. Psalm 37, verses 35-36.

‘The transgressors shall be destroyed together; the end of the wicked shall be cut off. But the salvation of the righteous is of the Lord; he is their strength in the time of trouble. And the Lord shall help them, and deliver them; he shall deliver them from the wicked, and save them, because they trust in Him’. Psalm 37, verses 38-40.

• THE NEW, RECYCLED REVENGE OPTION: ‘PARTIAL PAYMENT’ DISCUSSED

• BRITISH MONARCHICAL POWER NEEDS TO REINFORCE ITS AUTHORITY

• FEDERAL RESERVE SECRETLY BUYING UP GEITHNER’S ‘TRASHETS’

• OFFICIAL U.S. TERRORIST FINANCING OPERATIONS FURTHER EXPOSED

• WHY THE MONARCHICAL POWER NEEDS TO RESPOND DECISIVELY

• IT’S OPEN WAR: THE RULE OF LAW NOW, OR INDEFINITE CHAOS

• THE FOUR CRIMINAL PRESIDENTS KNOW THEY ARE CROOKS

• ‘SOURCE OF FUNDS’ AND THE ‘MAXIMUM INCARCERATION TARIFF’

• WHEN WILL WE SEE THE GIGA-CRIMINALS ARRESTED?

• WORLD COURT GIVES 41, 42, 43 AND 44 CONDITIONAL ‘DEMANDED IMMUNITY’

• WORLD COURT MUST STOP THIS IMMUNITY ABUSE

• FURTHER FAILED ATTEMPT TO STING MICHAEL C. COTTRELL

• QUEEN MELUSINA ‘ROLLS OVER’ ON FELLOW RATS TO TRY TO SAVE HER OWN SKIN

• THE ‘CASH FOR CLUNKERS’ AND CHILD WELFARE SWINDLES

• BEHIND THE EXPLOSION AT THE DHSS BUILDING ON 20TH AUGUST

• EXTERNAL DRUG-RELATED SCANDALS LINKED TO THIS CRISIS
(A) THE AFGHANISTAN DIMENSION:
(B) THE BURMA DIMENSION:
(C) THE LIBYAN DIMENSION.

• SIMILARITY OF THIS MONUMENTAL EXERCISE TO EXORCISM

• SEE 28TH JULY POST FOR COMPARISON OF THE PARALLEL, INTERACTIVE U.S. AND SOVIET LENINIST SYSTEMS: ‘ANALYSIS OF THE GLOBAL CRIMINAL FINANCE CATASTROPHE’: ARCHIVE

• INTERNATIONAL CURRENCY REVIEW: Volume 34, Numbers 3 & 4 was published on 14th August and was being mailed worldwide on Monday 17th August 2009. It contains our devastating blow-by-blow reporting of astonishing behind-the-scenes events tearing the lawless intergovernmental environment apart, where anything goes, assets are ‘diverted’, and no-one is responsible.

However, as a specific consequence of these exposures, the net is decisively closing in on ALL criminalist financial operators, both within notorious official structures and in the international financial community, as is becoming clearer by the day. This 592-page report on what has been happening behind the scenes is now being lodged in places ‘where it matters’ around the world, which means that it is impossible for a veil to be drawn over this financial criminality, EVER.

• BOOKS: Edward Harle Limited has so far published FIVE intelligence titles: The Perestroika Deception, by Anatoliy Golitsyn; Red Cocaine, by Dr Joseph D. Douglass, Jr.; The European Union Collective, by Christopher Story; The New Underworld Order, by Christopher Story; and The Red Terror in Russia, by Sergei Melgounov. All titles are permanently in stock. We sell books DIRECT.

• Globalist hegemony ideology and practice are 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. Also, the Editor’s study entitled The European Union Collective, which proves that the EU is a long-range strategic entrapment operation to reduce European countries to satrap status within a German empire using economic strategy for relentless economic warfare purposes, can be bought here.

• Please Make a Donation, if you feel able to do so, to help finance Christopher Story‘s ongoing global financial corruption investigations. Your assistance will be very sincerely appreciated and will make a real difference, hastening the OVERDUE resolution of the worst financial corruption and linked financial fallout in world history. Just press Make a Donation, which is live, and it takes you straight to our ultra-safe ordering system, which accepts Visa and MasterCard.

• The Editor’s $35,000 Wanta bail-out LOAN money plus interest has been stolen.

• See the second white panel for details of our latest distributed intelligence publications.

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

• COPYRIGHT NOTICE REFERENCING THE STEALING OF OUR COPYRIGHTED BOOKS BY U.S. COPYRIGHT PIRATES APPEARS AT FOOT OF THIS REPORT ABOVE THE LEGAL DEFINITIONS.

By Christopher Story FRSA, Editor and Publisher, International Currency Review, World Reports Limited, London and New York. For earlier reports, press the ARCHIVE. Order your intelligence subscriptions and our ‘politically incorrect’ intelligence books online from this website.

NEW REPORT STARTS HERE:

FURORE ERUPTS FOLLOWING OUR 17TH AUGUST REPORT
Judging by the furore that erupted behind the scenes following our report dated 17th August, the international community descended on the White House like a thunderbolt – forcing a hasty retreat from the diabolical sabotage devaluation scam that had been under consideration.

In other words, exposure of that intended global criminal putsch against the American people and the Rest of the World, consigned the swindle to the White House trash bins.

MASSIVE DEVALUATION SWINDLE OPERATION CANCELLED
For, at 8.30pm on Thursday 20th August 2009, we were authoritatively informed that the massive US dollar devaluation operation had been cancelled. Apparently central banks, foreign governments, intelligence officials and international financial institutions and even the Israeli Government and the Vatican, with one accord, made it crystal clear, in language that even brainwashed White House intelligence operatives could easily comprehend, that the intended 60%-80% devaluation would be considered as an Act of Economic Warfare, and would be met with universal and uncompromisingly vigorous countermeasures. Any attempt to pay a debt in devalued trash represents, in both fact and law, a de facto repudiation of the debt, and also a default.

Had it not been for the fact that the criminal operatives have responded by seeking revenge by a means other than the drastic devaluation that they had in mind, we would by now be on the verge of developments which would have the potential for delivering the coup de grâce to the evil cabal of criminal US kleptocrats holding high office, past and present, and which will bring them lower than the communal drain into which they should have been thrust many years ago.

Moreover, in the process, a new, more stable and much less inflationary régime (over the longer term) would be brought into being. But this prospect, arising from the defeat of their devaluation swindle, has been placed ‘on hold’ until the newest scam developed by these unspeakable criminal operatives is blown out of the water.

THE NEW, RECYCLED REVENGE OPTION: ‘PARTIAL PAYMENT’
So we have to STOP here and relate the latest scamming operation they have come up with. It took the criminal operatives at the highest level – Obama, his three predecessors, Mrs Clinton, Dr Ben Bernanke, Timothy Geithner, Rahm Emanuel and Larry Summers – a few days to recover from the body blow, and to decide how to take their revenge on the fact that their scheme to devalue the dollar by between 60% and 80% had been exposed and therefore ‘blown’.

At about 7.30pm, on 21st August, we learned what they had decided to do.

As they couldn’t get their own way by smashing up all the world’s furniture simultaneously while also enriching themselves in the process, they are reported to us to have been seeking to indicate their intention to revert to the ‘partial payment’ or ‘negotiated settlements’ scenario that we first exposed in our report dated 1st July 2009 [see Archive].

BRITISH MONARCHICAL POWER NEEDS TO REINFORCE ITS AUTHORITY
Although we would sympathise with anyone who suffers from EGO (Eyes Glaze Over) given the slithering of these venemous snakes, it may now be recalled that after ‘President’ Barack Hussein Obama PERSONALLY intervened at the end of May to sabotage the Settlements, the White House and the Geithner Treasury put it about that the payees are to accept ‘Structured Settlements’ on a ‘take it or leave it basis’. And as we also pointed out in the report on 1st July:

‘In translation, this means, ‘here, take this pittance and these IOUs which may promise payment in tranches over 30 years, and be grateful, and shut up’. What this means is as follows (in the context of the horrendous fact [see below] that Bush 41, Clinton 42, Bush 43 and Obama 44 managed to obtain renewed (in the case of 41-43) ‘immunity’ from the World Court on Thursday 20th August]:

• The Representatives of the British Monarchical Power and the Chinese are placing unwarranted trust and power in the hands of Stateside operatives WHO CANNOT BE TRUSTED.

• On the contrary, these people appear to have been DOING DEALS, rewriting the Pay Orders, and CHANGING THE PAYMENT INSTRUCTIONS mandated by the injured parties [see (1) above]. [At least, that was the case until they were again caught out, on 21st August].

If we just ‘stay with this’ for a moment, this would imply inter alia that Leo E. Wanta may have been involved in some underhand arrangement to enable others to steal the money [BUT SEE BELOW]. FACT: Wanta accepted the Editor’s $35,000 two-year loan to get his probation reduced by five years and two weeks without having the resources to repay the loan and while indicating to the Editor that he would have the necessary funds available to remit on maturity – behaviour that falls under the heading of ‘Fraud in the Inducement’ [see at the foot of this report].

The objectives of any such illicit changes in the Basel-mandated Line Item payment requirements would include (a) ensuring payoffs to the corrupt US politicians; (b) ensuring that the Fraudulent Finance derivatives Ponzi operations stay in place, complete with off-balance sheet financing as though there had never been any discontinuity at all; (c) allowing the unreformed, unaudited and thoroughly corrupt Federal Reserve System, the cancer at the core of the crisis which ‘legitimises’ the endemic corruption of the big money center banks, to remain in control; and (d) PREVENTING THE LONDON DOLLAR REFUNDING OPERATION, for which arrangements have been in place since 29th May 2009, from materialising.

As previously explained, the London Dollar Refunding operation will take place transparently and above board, on the books, wholly in the private sector, with selected British and European-based institutions only (as no US financial institution can be trusted), delivering visible, cascading tax accruals both to the British and American Treasuries simultaneously. The tax payable to the US Treasury can be remitted via the British Treasury under the Bretton Woods arrangements.

Payments need to be paid so that those who will clean up this mess worldwide can get on with their appointed task. THREE YEARS HAVE BEEN WASTED. These payments MUST be made NOW.

FEDERAL RESERVE SECRETLY BUYING UP GEITHNER’S ‘TRASHETS’
Instead of which, the dim-witted official kleptomaniacs directing US financial policy are not only accumulating vast mountains of completely unnecessary debt in the background in exchange for the US Treasury’s avalanche of ‘Trashets’, but have discovered that, as we predicted in March, nobody is interested. Foreign purchases of this US trash are diminishing sharply.

Unsurprisingly, the Federal Reserve has been caught secretly buying up as much as nearly 50% of the ‘Trashets’ on offer at recent weekly Treasury auctions.

In other words, as the US analysts Chris Martenson and Jeff Nielson have recently pointed out, the authorities place their own agents at Treasury auctions, bidding on ‘own goods’ in order to drive up prices: ‘another example of the scam-mentality of the US Government – hardly a surprise, given the scam business models of their Wall Street masters’. These excellent analysts, who concur with our assessments, added, as Mr Nielson pointed out on 9th August:

‘The fact that the US Government needs to resort to such tactics is the clearest indication yet of how close the United States’ Ponzi-scheme economy is to total collapse’.

OFFICIAL U.S. TERRORIST FINANCING OPERATIONS FURTHER EXPOSED
One reason that Dr Ben Bernanke is secretly buying up Geithner’s ‘Trashets’ is to disguise from the foreign creditors who (as Martenson and Neilson have noted) ‘hold a mortgage over the US economy’ in order to try to prevent them seeing demand for the US Treasury’s trash evaporating – which realisation would cause interest rates to soar, ‘followed shortly thereafter by a downgrade to the United States’ national credit rating, which still holds the same farcical ‘AAA’ rating as trillions of dollars of Wall Street scam-products’.

But a second reason for this desperate behaviour by the complacent Dr Bernanke is that he STILL sees the Fed taking over complete financial regulatory power, even though it is rank bust.

All of which condemns Bernanke, Geithner, Clinton, Summers, Obama and the rest to accusations of Terrorist Financing, since they have explicitly rejected the CORRECT, private sector-only Dollar Refunding Solution which is alone capable of generating the needed taxable, transparent, on-the-books trading profits – in favour of the reprobate and sterile deficit-financing orgy in which these doomed operatives are wilfully and, it seems, mischievously engaged – in order to hang onto direct control so as to satisfy the greed of the controlling Intelligence Power while helping themselves to corrupt pickings, which these criminals believe they have every right to do. .

• Recall: Government cannot tax itself: so its only financial product is DEBT. In sharp contrast, the private sector generates WEALTH which the Government sector can TAX to finance its operations and debt. THIS is the principle that the American (and British) authorities SHOULD have applied, and which, perversely, they explicitly rejected for greed and control reasons – a catastrophic error of judgment (to be charitable) that will cost both them and the whole world dear.

With reference to our ‘BUT SEE BELOW’ observation added under (3) above, we are advised on unquestionable authority that Leo Wanta is not a factor in the equation, as has indeed been the case for some time, and in fact has nothing whatsoever to do with any alleged illicit variations to the delayed payout arrangements. If this is true, then the foregoing brief summary can therefore most sensibly be interpreted as representing a ‘wedge’ stance which has been developed by the flailing criminalist operatives, as they thrash around trying to find a way out of their bind, instead of doing what they should be doing – resolving matters by ceasing to interfere with the Settlements.

They cannot bear the prospect of losing control of Fraudulent Finance and of the consequences for them all personally that will arise from a belated sensible decision on their part to cease and desist from their obstruction of justice, even though they will have to swallow the fact that the releases will, inter alia, facilitate the London-located private sector Dollar Refunding operation which will refloat the US dollar, whether it is a Treasury Dollar or a Federal Reserve Note (FRN), which, in turn, will restore the US and the British public finances within two years.

WHY THE MONARCHICAL POWER NEEDS TO RESPOND DECISIVELY
All of which now forces us to use language that we have so far felt more comfortable avoiding, and we do so almost as though we are having to draw attention to our ‘fiduciary duty’ in this matter:

• Advisers to and representatives of the British Monarchical Power had better seize control of this situation immediately in order to insist and procure that the Economic and Financial Warfare that these people are waging against Britain, China and THE REST OF THE WORLD, ceases forthwith.

• Should the Four Criminal Presidents – who demanded and obtained World Court ‘immunity’ last week [see exposure details below] – renege on their undertaking, given last Thursday, to cease impeding the releases in exchange for these World Court ‘immunities’, the Writ of Execution which we are informed stands ready to be applied, SHOULD BE ENFORCED IMMEDIATELY:

• Without in fact bothering to waste yet more time returning to the World Court to have the Four Criminal Presidents’ ‘immunities’ removed, although this can usefully be implemented later. Any hesitation on this score in the context of their failing to deliver, should be eschewed and the Writ of Execution’s powers should be implemented forthwith. NO FURTHER LEEWAY OR PREVARICATION BY THESE CROOKS SHOULD OR CAN BE TOLERATED. The world cannot bear or put up with it.

• The British Monarchical Power should understand that NO DEALS OR ACCOMMODATIONS ARE POSSIBLE WITH THESE U.S. CRIMINALS. They are no different from Lenin’s criminal comrades, and they behave in an identical manner.

Specifically, Lenin taught ‘the interested’ that it is legitimate to renege on all agreements with ‘the bourgeoisie’ whenever the correlation of forces favoured ‘the revolutionaries’. These people are much worse than Lenin and his associates: neither ‘President’ Obama, this veteran CIA operative who has travelled for years on four passports, nor ANY of his colleagues, can be trusted to honour ANY undertaking. There has been no such thing as the Full Faith and Credit of the United States since Paulson single-handedly destroyed it.

• Agreeing to the World Court’s immunities from prosecution for Bush 41, Clinton 42, Bush 43 and Obama 44, as revealed below, was a bad, debilitating error and should never have happened. It is not good enough to let these people off the hook repeatedly (as they see it: but again, see below).

• As suggested above, AFTER application of the Writ of Execution, not BEFORE, the Monarchical Power should indeed apply immediately to the World Court for renewed powers and the removal of the top criminalists’ bizarre sudden ‘immunity from prosecution’ because, from what we have been advised, these crooks were (as late as the final transatlantic conversation we held on 21st August, since AFTER which payment arrangements were again believed to have been ‘adjusted’) continuing to perpetrate Economic and Financial Terrorism against the United Kingdom, the British Crown, the Chinese, the American people and the Rest of the World, and were evidently encouraged because the self-discrediting World Court had allowed this latest insult to the Rule of Law to prevail.

• And let us be quite frank here: If the British Monarchical Power does not immediately assert its power to prevent these crooks getting their own way, the British Monarchy may not survive.

IT’S OPEN WAR: THE RULE OF LAW NOW, OR INDEFINITE CHAOS
For make no mistake, this is OPEN WARFARE. If these US official criminals are allowed to get away with whatever scheme they may now pull which diverges in the slightest degree from the Basle-mandated requirements that were put in place earlier for the payments, the ‘whole of humanity’, to quote The Queen again, will suffer on an unimaginable scale.

Dr Ben Bernanke proclaimed on Friday 21st August that ‘the recession is over’. If that is the case, he needs to explain why it is that we are receiving anecdotal reports to the effect that supermarket shelves in some US areas are half empty, construction work across the nation has virtually ceased, cranes are idle, vast accumulations of containers lie empty at the docks, American manufacturing employment as a percentage of the total labour force has fallen below 9% (the lowest level ever recorded), rising job losses are worsening the United States’ spreading housing problems, the IMF is reporting that in many countries the potential exists for economies never to return to where they were prior to this criminal finance crisis being unmasked, and the only source of ‘reliable liquidity’ in the interbank market remains the proceeds of drug-trafficking (discussed below).

• Availability of funds: Informed sources advise us that Obama ‘couldn’t pay in January’ when he should have fulfilled the promises he gave internationally before becoming ‘President’ – because quote ‘there wasn’t enough money’ unquote. This issue has cropped up again, with the renewed bleating about ‘partial payment’. The underlying reality here is that vast sums have been illegally diverted, stolen, leveraged, hypothecated and otherwise exploited and alienated, with intermittent reports of monies being recovered and repatriated amid a welter of financial movements covered by ‘banking secrecy’, details of which are unknown outside the US Treasury, which is itself infested by duplicitous operatives. In the past, we have reported that Treasury Compliance Officers trying to do their jobs properly have even been threatened (under that criminal Paulson) with prosecution under the Patriot Acts if they did not cease and desist (from doing their jobs properly).

THE FOUR CRIMINAL PRESIDENTS KNOW THEY ARE CROOKS
The fact that the Four Criminal Presidents have ‘needed’ to DEMAND (see below) ‘immunities from prosecution’ from the World Court proves that these despicable operatives know full well that they are criminals, otherwise they would not ‘need’ the ‘protection’ that is supposedly to be afforded by such ‘immunities’. Therefore, we are at complete liberty to refer to these highest-level operatives as criminals without fear of contradiction, as they themselves, by their actions, have confirmed that this is the case. By definition, they have of one accord condemned themselves.

In time of war, terrorists are rounded up and given the ultimate treatment. The Four US Presidents, and the leading figures in the Obama Administration, backed by the criminalised Intelligence Power which controls all branches of the US Federal Government, the dialectical Party Power and the US Military (which sits on its backside doing nothing while these crooks pirouette before them) are, so far as the Rest of the World is concerned, indistinguishable from common Terrorists.

Money laundering and fraudulent financial operations are terrorist crimes under the anti-terrorism legislation which the Bush White House sponsored. Such legislation has been adopted in Britain and Europe, and the British Government invoked the anti-terrorism legislation to freeze the assets of Icelandic institutions last year, proving that such legislation can indeed be deployed against the perpetrators of egregious financial crimes.

• These people are perpetrators of egregious financial crimes and are holding the whole world to ransom, on the assumption that no power on earth can stop them. It is OUR job to make sure that they ARE stopped – and that their aberrations are brought to AN ABRUPT, JUDDERING HALT

‘SOURCE OF FUNDS’ AND THE ‘MAXIMUM INCARCERATION TARIFF’
Having dealt immediately above with the ‘revenge’ scenario – ‘negotiated settlements’ contrary to the Basle-mandated Line Item payment requirements, a ruse aimed inter alia at ensuring that the criminalised US legislators (including Obama) get paid contrary to the instructions of the issuers of the Writ of Execution – we will now revert to the state of affairs that can be described if and when this latest storm passes because of this exposure, like the last.

The essence of the emerging environment will, as we have repeatedly intimated, be encapsulated in the phrase ‘source of funds’. If proceeds have not been earned legitimately, funds will not be credited and investigations, likely followed by criminal proceedings, will ensue across the board. Cheques issued by offshore banks, will bounce. Funds transferred by them will not be accepted in the metropolitan centres without satisfactory explanations as to ‘source of funds’.

High-up criminals may only very recently have begun to understand the message delivered by the Judge in the main Madoff case, who handed down the maximum tariff, and is poised to repeat this exercise when Madoff’s former Chief Financial Officer, Frank DiPascali, is sentenced after pleading guilty in the second week in August to multiple financial crimes arising from his aiding and abetting of Bernard Madoff’s Ponzi operations, with the likelihood that he, too, will receive the maximum tariff – in his case, 125 years in jail. The Judge sent DiPascali straight to jail anyway, refusing him bail, despite his confession that he and others used historical data from the Internet and a random-number generator to generate bogus Madoff account statements for clients. “It was all fake. It was all fictitious, It was wrong , and I knew it was wrong”, DiPascali asserted in the seven-page plea agreement presented before the Court.

These court developments, the dark clouds surrounding the jailed Bush Sr. associate ‘Sir’ Alan Stanford and his colleagues, the 20+-year terms facing Ralph Cioffi and Matthew Tannin, senior Bear Stearns Asset Management personnel arrested for wire and securities fraud (a case coming to court in October), the new-found aggressiveness against wealthy US tax evaders that is now being displayed (disgracefully late in the day) by the Internal Revenue Service in the UBS scandal, and the case of the ex-Crédit Suisse brokers Eric Butler and Julian Tzolov for securities fraud (and in Tzolov’s case, jumping bail), send further signals to the criminal oligarchs that their game is up.

Time has indeed long been called on their endless free-wheeling bonanza orgy at the expense of others; and to suggest that, whatever last-minute wriggles over the releases they perform, their future prospects are bleak in the extreme, would be a foolish understatement. It’s ‘maximum tariff time’ for ALL CONCERNED, and Tzolov, for instance, faces 185 years in prison.

Following the latest version of the US Government’s agreement with UBS, under which Switzerland agreed to reveal the names of 4,450 wealthy Americans holding offshore accounts at UBS, Douglas Shulman, the IRS Commissioner, asserted that ‘this agreement sends an unmistakable message to people hiding income and assets offshore. The IRS will vigorously pursue tax cheats around the world’, and will obviously now turn its attention to other foreign banks which have been offering US taxpayers comparable ‘services’. A week prior to the US-Swiss accord, Liechtenstein agreed to a parallel anti-tax evasion accord with the British authorities.

WHEN WILL WE SEE THE GIGA-CRIMINALS ARRESTED?
Now as everyone who is not sitting on their brains is thinking, when are we going to learn that the criminal Godfathers – the holders of the highest offices who have abused their tenures on a scale with no historical precedent and who have all just openly admitted, with one accord, that they are criminals by their action in DEMANDING ‘immunity’ – are likewise going to be hauled before the US courts, to be advised that they, too, will be made to suffer the consequences of their serial crimes, receiving ‘maximum tariff’ sentences, after the manner of their equally despicable lesser comrades who ransacked the wealth of targeted investors on the assumption that because people at the top were ‘doing it’, they were protected as well?

• And the protection upon which they and the highest-level kleptocrats relied, of course, was the still unreformed ‘criminals’ charter’ known as the National Security Act et seq., which the cynical criminalised elements of the US intelligence community exploited ruthlessly while making sure to confuse the ‘national interest’ with their own personal self-interest and greed.

For, equipped with their Reagan Executive Order 12333 ‘intelligence corporations’, of which they owned the shares in their personal capacity, greedy US operatives fanned out across the globe, expanding the ‘opportunities’ opened up by their pillaging of the Soviet Union authorised under President Reagan [see report dated 28th July], whose corruption can certainly be compared with those of his four successors – and visiting innumerable other countries with their seedy deals.

In other words, the ransacking of the Soviet Union set a precedent for the pillaging of many other countries – including, inevitably, as the Soviets themselves ensured, the United States itself – and procured the dissemination of US organised Fraudulent Finance and Ponzi techniques all over the world, corrupting central banks and governments everywhere.

But with the extraordinary success of these exposures, expectations have been raised that it is high time (in fact it is way beyond time) that the highest-level criminals are brought to justice, and are seen to be suffering the consequences of their fraudulent activities, just like their lesser minions. People are becoming understandably ‘beyond impatient’ for this to occur.

And so, what did we learn on 20th August 2009?

WORLD COURT GIVES 41, 42, 43 AND 44 CONDITIONAL ‘DEMANDED IMMUNITY’
We were informed by impeccable sources (several) that ‘President’ Barack Hussein Obama was, after a great deal of transatlantic paper-shuffling, granted ‘immunity from prosecution’ by the World Court effective Tuesday 18th August., a FACT which, as mentioned above, naturally presupposes that ‘President’ Obama KNOWS THAT HE IS A CRIMINAL: otherwise he wouldn’t have ‘needed’ to apply for ‘immunity from prosecution’, would he?

At about 4:00pm UK time on Saturday 22nd August, the Editor was authoritatively informed that all FOUR Presidents – George H. W. Bush Sr. (41), his colleague William Jefferson Rockefeller-Clinton (42), George W. Bush Jr. (43) AND Barack Hussein Obama (44), collectively DEMANDED ‘immunity’ from the World Court IN EXCHANGE FOR THEM ALLOWING THE RELEASES TO PROCEED, and that this ‘immunity from prosecution’ was granted by the World Court on Thursday 20th August.

• It has not been explained to us why ‘President’ Obama needed to reinforce the ‘immunity from prosecution’ that he was reported to have been granted on Tuesday 18th August.

Ipso facto, therefore, ALL FOUR U.S. PRESIDENTS have acknowledged that they are criminals, which itself begs a large number of questions about their futures given the innumerable felonies that these criminal operatives have committed.

Moreover their joint DEMAND for ‘immunity’ represented the exercise of DURESS against the World Court, representing the international community, the Crown and the Chinese parties – which means that, especially if they renege on their latest undertaking now, they can expect no further leeway or accommodation from ANY aggrieved party whatsoever, even, we believe, from their own military which has quite disgracefully remained complacently on the sidelines, after successive Provosts Marshal botched the execution of their responsibilities.

Now before you all shriek, as you might understandably do, that ‘we have been here before, for heaven’s sake’, observe the following:

• All our sources were unanimous in ADDING that the big powers involved (Britain, meaning the Monarchical Power, Russia and China) had indicated that they would now have ‘no objection’, for the immediate practical purposes of procuring the releases, to such ‘immunity’ being granted, because (spoken or unspoken) all four of these now self-admitted despicable criminal financial terrorists ‘will be going to jail anyway’ [see below].

• ‘President’ Barack Hussein Obama is INCLUDED in the Group of Four Top Criminal operatives who have been granted ‘immunity’ (in his case, TWICE).

• As noted earlier, to seek immunity from prosecution implies that the individual looking for it is aware that he or she is in danger of prosecution for criminal activity, which is another way of saying that the applicant knows that they have a problem, i.e. are guilty of criminal behaviour. Therefore, Obama knows that he is a criminal operative, like his three predecessors – all of whom considered that, yet again, they needed the protection of World Court immunity, which had been stripped from them earlier. Obviously, these ‘immunities’ are strictly conditional upon performance, and this time, we do not expect that the crooks will have any rope left which would enable them to escape the consequences of any renewed failure to procure the releases.

Now, self-evidently, since World Court decisions and even the existence of its hearings are closely held intergovernmental secrets, we do not know (yet, at any rate) what any other quid pro quo for this belated ‘granting of immunity from prosecution’ may really have been.

All we know is that because crimes were committed abroad and against foreign parties, especially against the British Monarchical Power and the Chinese parties (which is by no means to downplay the pillaging of American investors who were enticed into the perpetrators’ organised criminalist Ponzi schemes), the World Court has jurisdiction to remove or impose ‘immunity from prosecution’ at will if it so chooses – implying the certainty that if these crooks ‘fail to deliver’, their immunities will immediately be revoked.

We can further deduce from all this that the Big Four World-Class Presidential Criminals, including the current ‘President’ of the United States who obviously feels the necessity for such ‘protection’, attach singular IMPORTANCE to such World Court ‘immunity’ and would therefore, conversely, be aggrieved and concerned should the ‘immunities’ be withdrawn in the event of their continuing with their routine obstructions of justice. After all, they DEMANDED their ‘immunities’.

• If you DEMAND something (not subject to negotiation) you REALLY NEED IT.

On the other hand, as this Editor mentioned to a US source, the criminal mentality would be more than likely to react to such a concession with an attitude of: ‘See what happens when we dig our heels in? We get our own way’. Which could mean that they may STILL be foolishly tempted, even now, to revert to corrupt ‘business as usual’ (having chosen not to understand the ‘maximum tariff’ message outlined above): see above for details.

WORLD COURT MUST STOP THIS IMMUNITY ABUSE
Our own view is that it is beyond a disgrace that the World Court sees fit to play fast and loose with the crimes of highly-placed persons, handing down judgments which are contradicted later with this deplorable ‘immunity from prosecution’ device.

For this confirms that, as we have maintained all along:

• In the intergovernmental sector, anything goes, assets are ‘diverted’ and stolen, deception prevails, and no-one is responsible.

• The World Court is itself corrupt, cannot be relied upon to sustain a stance based upon the Rule of Law, and is allowing the depredations of these criminals to degrade its standing and to parade the evident reality that, in the intergovernmental sector, the Rule of Law can be variable, does not automatically apply, or both of the above.

Given the huge power of this website as a consequence of these exposures, it is just possible that greater knowledge of this scandalous state of affairs may goad the World Court into cleaning up its own act – something that it would be well advised to do, considering the mass anger surrounding the financial terrorism atrocities perpetrated by these criminals, whom the World Court sees fit to let off the hook with such apparent disdain for the Rule of Law.

The World Court is hardly an appropriate forum for such truly disgraceful inconsistencies. Either it applies the Rule of Law, or it should be closed down as not fit for purpose.

It may be argued that without the World Court, the convenient (for the criminals) chaos that reigns at the intergovernmental level would be worse. However logic dictates that any such argument consumes itself, since the World Court has demonstrated that it cannot be relied upon, from one day to the next, to maintain a consistent course. A crime that is adjudged to be a crime on Monday remains a crime on the following Thursday.

However the World Court appears to take the view that the consequences for perpetrators of the crime that was considered a crime on Monday, can be varied later in the week.

• This is unconscionable humbug.

Reverting to the ‘pragmatic’ responses of the main powers involved in pressing for matters to be regularised, we understand that these powers ‘authorised’ the World Court to ‘grant immunities’ to the Big Four perpetrators, on the spoken or unspoken basis that, as indicated, ‘it is neither here nor there, because they’re all going to jail anyway’. In this connection, there are now persistent reports that the Big Four and their most notorious associates WILL INDEED find themselves at the receiving end of the harsh whip of justice, given the deliberations of the National Security Grand Juries and the insistence of external powers (especially, we understand, the British Monarchical Power’s representatives) that none of these criminals should be allowed to walk away unscathed.

• But so far, that’s what’s happening: AND IT STINKS.

FURTHER FAILED ATTEMPT TO STING MICHAEL C. COTTRELL, B.A., M.S.
In this connection, certain nefarious developments following our report here dated 17th August, reportedly involving Leo Wanta, Tom Melville and Senator Schumer, together with other first-hand indications that we have received, reinforce our belief that the corrupt politicians are not going to be remunerated for their corruption, contrary to their expectations – prompting a scramble for last-minute Pay Orders, and an extraordinary attempt to ‘sting’ Mr Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., which failed – greatly exacerbating the ‘plight’ facing the kleptocrats in the Legislative Branch, which in this context, includes former Senator Barack Obama.

• These people were not going to be paid, and they were furious. At least one attempted bribe of a senior politician to get him to intervene, has failed.

And at the same time, the jockeying for corrupt pay-offs that has been going on, seems to be the primary factor underlying the prevarications which have bedevilled the Settlements throughout 2009, especially most recently. This is exceptionally significant, because these selfish operatives and others have been wilfully holding the United States, the American people and the Rest of the World to ransom while they scrabble to try to procure payoffs for themselves, in the face of their belated realisation that they aren’t on the pay list – and to hell with everyone else.

• Hell is, however, where these people are destined to wind up.

For not the least of their problems will be the fact that any ‘deals’ that they may have tried to pull behind the scenes represent EXTORTION and attempts to obtain pecuniary reward by deception, placing each and every one of those involved in the law enforcement firing line. Since Leo Wanta has not been paid, he is in any case in no position to give any Pay Order undertakings: vide ‘Fraud in the Inducement’ – the crime that he committed when signing massive known Pay Orders, and when borrowing $35,000 from the Editor of this service for a two-year term at 7%, with which his probation was shortened by five years and two weeks [see report dated 6th August 2007, on the Wisconsin Tax Gestapo sequence].

QUEEN MELUSINA ‘ROLLS OVER’ ON FELLOW RATS TO TRY TO SAVE HER OWN SKIN
In parallel with evidence that the scalded rats are jockeying for belated Pay Orders after the stable door has been slammed shut in their faces, are indications that the notorious Mrs Queen Melusina, codename for Mrs Hillary Rodomski Clinton, the US Secretary of State, has ‘rolled over’ not just on her former Bushite associates in crime, but on others as well, including prominent legislators.

Like the discredited former British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, recall, back in the final quarter of last year, ‘rolling over’ came naturally to this duplicitous, two-faced, principle-free deception artiste – a point that the stupid CIA operatives who recruited her in the first place should have anticipated. Taking risks with an individual as slippery as this Jezebel was little short of demented.

Quite apart from any other consideration, she’s rather stupid. Any operative who, at this late stage of the exposure process, imagines that it is safe to walk into a bank in Baghdad to try to pull the stolen Katrina money, risking obvious chances of having her right shoulder weighed down by the heavy, clammy hand of a Gold Badge despatched to the institution specially for the purpose, has allowed her arrogance to blind her to reality – a familiar failing among these highest-level CIA crooks who imagined that they would always be ‘covered’ by the 1947 National Security Act et seq.

But she’s not so stupid as to waste time defending the crooks with whom she has been associated all her working life – choosing instead to ‘cooperate’, in the hope that any ‘transactional’ immunity from prosecution will be sustainable. The way things are going, that seems most unlikely. People are suddenly disappearing, and we have had at least one report to the effect that (quote) ‘things are getting bloody’. However during the week ending on 21st August 2009, the Clintons surfaced in Bermuda, supposedly for a ‘short break’ – only to leave in a hurry on Thursday 20th at the approach of the appropriately named Hurricane Bill. We are supposed to believe that they ignored the earlier hurricane warnings before travelling to that lovely tax haven, which they appear to have ‘needed’ to do, all of a sudden, in a hurry.

This visit is especially interesting because, as indicated above, all Four of the Criminal Presidents DEMANDED World Court ‘immunity from prosecution’ in unison on Thursday 20th August. Far from leaving Bermuda in a hurry because of the approach of Hurricane Bill, therefore, the likelihood is that they may have feared that the demanded ‘immunity’ might not eventuate, so that they might be arrested on British territory. Which further suggests to us that they HAD to appear JOINTLY at a bank in Bermuda in order to untangle some banking matter held in their joint names, and that they took a calculated risk that the British authorities would not get their act together and arrest them ahead of the World Court’s demanded ‘immunity’ being granted.

THE ‘CASH FOR CLUNKERS’ AND CHILD WELFARE SWINDLES
There have also been indications, too, of domestic funds being siphoned away from their intended purposes, in order, it is suspected by qualified observers, to compensate the super-corrupt US politicians for the reality that, on the insistence of the foreign injured parties who are supposed to be in the driving seat, none of these people are to be paid a cent. In this sordid connection, two disturbing developments stand out as the White House scrapes the bottom of the barrel to siphon out funds in order to finance corrupt payoffs to cronies in the Legislative Branch:

• THE ‘CASH FOR CLUNKERS’ SWINDLE: In Britain, this operation is referred to as ‘the Scrappage Scheme’, and according to recent reports, it has operated successfully, raising the level of new car sales with old cars taken in part exchange, although the bureaucratic paperwork faced by UK car dealers is burdensome. As a market intervention mechanism with practical outcomes (greater road safety, increased sales of new cars), it makes sense – except that, given the de-industrialisation of Britain due to its catastrophic participation in the German-controlled European Union Collective, the new cars are almost all imported from Germany: so the clear downside is that ‘scrappage’ has interfered with the improvement in Britain’s debilitated balance-of-payments that should rightly be associated with a domestic slump. But at least there has (so far) been no whiff of scandal.

• Unlike the parallel ‘Cash for Clunkers’ scheme in the United States, under which bureaucratic scheme automotive dealers have experienced a mini-boom in auto sales and have transacted hundreds of thousands of deals on the same ‘scrappage’ basis, whereby the dealer supposedly receives $4,000-$5,000 for each old vehicle traded for a new one.

On 20th August, the US Transportation Secretary, Ray LaHood, announced that the popular scheme will be abruptly terminated on Monday 24th August because, according to The Washington Post, the $3.0 billion allocated for the program has ‘been depleted’.

However no-one seems to know why the ‘Cash for Clunkers’ scheme has been depleted, because the automotive dealers, who are owed millions of dollars, haven’t received a single red cent.

None of the money has been paid to them. For each deal, they are required to fill in an enormous document, and there have been anecdotal reports of these documents being repeatedly rejected because of some error or other – the covert purpose of the documents being to preclude payment from the scheme to dealers altogether.

So it looks suspiciously as though the ‘depletion’ of the $3.0 billion scheme is attributable to the fact that the money, like the Katrina funds, has been STOLEN – to finance, we are advised, payouts to corrupt politicians inside the Washington Beltway.

• THE CHILD WELFARE SWINDLE (ESPECIALLY APPLICABLE TO PENNSYLVANIA):
Under a US Department of Health and Human Services decision specifically ORDERED by the Obama White House, the Federal Government has indicated that it will not be paying for such needs as the placement of unwanted or abused children in temporary accommodation (i.e., it will not now finance orphanages, specifically, we are given to understand, within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania). Instead, it is requiring that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s counties (which we know about: whether this applies in other States, we are not sure) to make due provision, out of thin air, for the necessary funding (going back to at least 2008).

• The money which SHOULD be available is reported to have ‘gone missing’: another instance of domestic funds being diverted, we are specifically informed, to finance corrupt crony payoffs.

•This will force counties to curtail or cancel contracts with providers in this field and will have the effect of children roaming the streets of some cities, as in Brazil.

Consider, therefore, the depths of the grotesque deceit surrounding a recent staged photograph of ‘President’ Obama greeting small children. Quite seriously, our responsible sources are actually telling us that this represents another ‘scraping the bottom of the barrel’ scam, as the perpetrators scour the system for cash that can be STOLEN to pay off their cronies and themselves.

• FACT: EXPLOSION AT THE DHHS BUILDING:
The very next morning after the Editor had discussed this swindle on the transatlantic telephone line, an explosion shook the Department of Health and Human Services building in Washington. Ostensibly, a ‘transformer exploded at about 9:45 am’ in what was described as the Department’s penthouse electrical room. But ‘There was no smoke or fire’, according to a spokesman cited by The Washington Post. A DC Fire official said: ‘As a precaution, we have cleared the building of about 300 occupants, and right now we continue to evaluate the building’s electrical system’.

After a 40-minute evacuation, employees returned to the building, and the electrical systems were declared to be operational. The blast occurred at around the same time in the morning as earlier, similar, explosions inside the Beltway, implying that any sabotage had been perpetrated overnight.

Unsurprisingly, the official explanations for this episode are believed to be diversionary. We are authoritatively advised that because we discussed the aforementioned DHSS swindle on the open transatlantic phone line, someone panicked and created this diversion to cover up evidence of the swindle before it exploded in the face of this duplicitous White House.

This episode is reminiscent, is it not, of earlier ‘explosions’ in DC buildings that we have reported, suspected of having been orchestrated by the Cheney Gang.

EXTERNAL DRUG-RELATED SCANDALS LINKED TO THIS CRISIS

(A) THE AFGHANISTAN DIMENSION:
Internationally, three contemporary developments appear to be related to this crisis:

The continued Afghanistan scandal: As reiterated in this space, the British Ministry of Defence had better things to do than to bother answering our open letter posted here over a year ago, in which we pointed out that we urgently needed a precise explanation of what we are doing in Afghanistan. We elaborated that if this was not forthcoming we would have to conclude that suspicions that we are operating there in order to seize and maintain control over the heroin trade, in conjunction with the criminal Americans so as to control it, are accurate.

Rather than lie to us, the Ministry of Defence chose to ignore our letter completely – a foolish and arrogant decision on their part, since this question is now, as mentioned in the preceding report, the primary issue to which the UK media are repeatedly returning. Following an issue of The Daily Telegraph which consisted of nothing but pictures of most of the 204 British troops who have died in Afghanistan and from their wounds there, further reports appeared showing disconsolate small children and war widows and relatives weeping over the coffins of British troops who have died in this war. If the wounded are included, over 1,000 families are now affected by this scandal.

Recently, a BBC programme interviewed British troops in Afghanistan. The interviewer repeatedly asked the troops the straightforward question: ‘What are you doing here?’ The soldiers answered (correctly): ‘We don’t ask questions. We just carry out orders’. The significance of this is that the BBC, which usually neglects the real issues in favour of its own statist and socialist agenda, is asking OUR question.

No-one ever receives a coherent answer to it. It would be simplicity itself for the UK Ministry of Defence to publish a succinct explanation of the purposes of British participation in this diabolical operation. When the Editor phoned the MOD in 2008, he was pushed around from official to official, until some female offered the explanation that we are in Afghanistan in pursuit of international objectives, and would I like to talk to the Foreign Office?

• Since the Foreign Office has consistently betrayed British interests ever since the Editor was born, and long before that, we did not take up that kind offer.

In January 2009, the head of UNODC (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime), Signor Antonio Maria Costa, gave an interview in the Austrian journal Profil, to which we have referred on several prior occasions. In that key interview, Antonio Costa specifically confirmed that the ONLY liquidity available in the interbank market in the second half of 2008 (meaning, we think, from around mid-September onwards) was derived from the proceeds of drug-trafficking.

• This appears to have been the first acknowledgement by an international or national official of the intimate connection between the failing international financial system and drug-trafficking, which of course is a crime against humanity.

For this reason, we consider Sig. Costa’s observation to be the most important indicator of reality EVER to have emerged from the bowels of the usually complacent and self-interested international and national official communities – because it illuminates the criminalised (drug-related) financial dimension underlying global relations, the financial crisis itself, and specific intractable trouble spots, such as Afghanistan and:

(B) THE BURMA DIMENSION:
All of a sudden, we are informed that the Obama Administration is ‘reviewing’ US policy towards Burma, which has been shut off from the Rest of the World for decades, like Cuba, formerly Iraq, Syria, Libya and Vietnam, and North Korea. With the exception of Cuba, these pariah régimes were deliberately ‘bottled up’ so that their mineral resources could not be exploited to any meaningful extent, sustaining false pricing, until it suited the interests of the drug and oil controllers to do so.

And now, all of a sudden, Burma is above the radar. Specifically, Senator Jim Webb of Virginia (an operative, of course), procured, on Sunday 16th August, the release of an incarcerated and ailing American, Jim Yettaw, who had been sentenced to seven years’ hard labour in Burma.

Senator Jim Webb is Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s East Asia and Pacific Affairs Subcommittee. The Senator dropped in on Rangoon on a flight from Bangkok on the Sunday, picked up the American, and returned to Washington, indicating that the handover had been pre-agreed. The 55-year-old Mr Yettaw, who supposedly has ‘serious health problems’, had been held in Insein Prison in Rangoon (Yangon) since his arrest in May 2009.

The American had been arrested as he swam away from the lakeside ‘safe house’ residence of the detained Burmese Opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi, where he had sheltered for two days after sneaking in uninvited. He was convicted during the week preceding Senator Jim Webb’s arrival for breaking the terms of Suu Kyi’s house arrest and related charges, and sentenced as indicated to seven years’ in prison with hard labour. Suu Kyi, who has been detained for 14 of the past 20 years, was herself sentenced to three years in prison for violating her house arrest conditions following this episode, although her new sentence was reduced to 18 months’ under house arrest by order of the head of the Burmese Junta, Senor General Than Shwe.

‘President’ Obama signalled in his Inauguration speech that his Administration would be prepared to ‘engage’ with any (pariah) Government that showed willingness to reciprocate; and in February, Mrs Melusina Clinton, in a trip through Asia, made some pointed remarks about the failure of US and international policies to influence Burmese official behaviour; and the ‘received’ view is that this is because ‘Burma is protected by China’.

But the real reason is that Burma is at the apex of the notorious ‘Golden Triangle’ and is financed by the proceeds of illicit drug-trafficking operations. If our necessary conclusion (for want of the requested official explanation) is correct – that we are in Afghanistan to help the corrupt Americans control and exploit the heroin business, the proceeds of which are used to lubricate the interbank market – and if it is indeed the case that the Afghanistan operation has gone horribly wrong (as all foreigners intermeddling in this place learn to their detriment, except that the present bunch are purposely ignorant of history, which they despise) – it would follow that Burma is being ‘softened up’ for rehabilitation, with the same underlying criminal objective in mind.

• The 18 months of Suu Kyi’s house arrest is just about the length of time that might be needed for Burma’s intended ‘rehabilitation’ to mature, although it will also cover the period of the ‘General Election’, removing the opposition leader from platforms. But the central issue is: Drug money is just about the only ‘reliable’ open-ended source of liquidity left in the interbank market.

And according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll reported on 19th August 2009, a majority of Americans consider the war in Afghanistan as not worth fighting for, while barely 25% say that more US troops should be sent there. Opinion polls are the means used by ‘the controllers’ to determine how far they can push unpopular policies. They now have their answer.

Hence Burma.

ADDENDUM: THERE ARE MORE THAN A DOZEN LIVE AMERICAN POWs HELD IN BURMA. One of these is Daniel Hubbs, US Navy. The living Prisoners of War were provided to Burma by Laos for contract slave labour to work on certain road projects. Specifically, the latest bridge project located in the Saiyabori Louang Namtha area in Laos links with the Burma road projects which connect up with the northern end of the new bridge, which has also been constructed by the same slave labour group using American Prisoners of War.

However Senator Jim Webb didn’t, apparently, see any need to rescue these ageing US POWs who have been ruthlessly abused as slave labour in conformity with the gigantic drug-related deception perpetrated by Godfather George H. W. Bush whereby US and other former military are held in the region illegally decades after the ending of hostilities.

• This dimension of the global financial-drug criminalism crisis has yet to explode in the faces of these criminals; and it will. When it does, we will observe what happens during exorcism, which is not elaborated upon in the segment on exorcism below. During that procedure, three phases are usually observed: first, a prolonged and ominous silence; next, the terrorising; and finally, the most soul-wrenching whining for mercy. The DEMAND by the Four Criminal Presidents that we cite in this report straddled, it seems, the second and third phases of the ‘exorcism’.

• We can expect to hear a great deal more soul-wrenching whining for mercy, not least when the POW scandal explodes. It has the potential to bring down governments, starting in Washington.

(C) THE LIBYAN DIMENSION:
In a sequence of grim events which continues the strand of international tension surrounding the bombing of Pan-Am 107 that crashed over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988, the Scottish Administration, which under the devolution arrangements reached in 1999, is in charge of prisoners in Scotland, released Abdenbaset Ali Mohamed al Megrahi, from long-term jail on 20th August.

The reason given for the release by Kenny MacAskill, the Scottish Justice Minister in the Scottish Nationalist Government who himself has a murky past, was ‘mercy’ and ‘humanity’ in the face of the Libyan’s fatal prostate cancer and the fact that he is supposed to have only three months to live. If the only man to have been convicted for the Lockerbie atrocity is ill, this did NOT appear to be the case from the close-up photographs of his half-covered face as he walked unaided up the steps to his Libyan plane at Glasgow Airport.

This episode has to be read upside down. First, dealing with the Scottish Minister’s own agenda, the decision showed that Scotland can take decisions with major international consequences in the teeth of American opposition (after a sharp phone call from Queen Melusina herself, no less).

Thus the devolved Scottish Nationalist Administration contrived to propel itself abruptly onto the international stage, causing satisfaction among the Nationalists and discomfort everywhere else.

More to the point, the Scottish Minister sidestepped the possibility that al Megrahi’s conviction could have been overturned on appeal, which the Libyan suddenly dropped on the preceding Friday. Mr MacAskill stated that ‘I can only base my decision on the medical advice I have before me’, adding that the decision had been taken for reasons of mercy and compassion ‘and for these reasons alone’. But, as the perceptive Daily Telegraph analyst, David Blair (no relation) pointed out:

‘If so, why did the Libyan suddenly drop his appeal last Friday? Why did his lawyers then go to court and win judicial approval for this decision (to release him) on Tuesday? If Mr Megrahi’s plight as a prisoner struck down by terminal illness was the only factor in Mr MacAskill’s mind, these moves would have been unnecessary’.

‘Once the doctors had reported on the severity of Mr Megrahi’s prostate cancer, he could have expected to go free on the strength of the mercy and compassion which Mr McAskill has hailed as the ‘defining characteristic of Scotland and the Scottish people’. Once back in Libya, Megrahi could have sought to clear his name by persisting with his appeal’.

‘Instead, the evidence suggests that an implicit deal was struck. Mr Megrahi won his freedom, in return for dropping the proceedings that could have been highly damaging for the reputation of Scottish Justice. So Mr MacAskill, a lawyer, has saved his legal system from embarrassment while placing Scotland’s Government on the world stage. He has also thumbed his nose at Washington’ which, nowadays, nobody cares much about. And ‘with admirable skill, he has taken the decision that yields the maximum political gain’.

But while that ‘takes care’ of the Scottish dimension, the deeper implications here are not hard to discern. First, as The Daily Telegraph’s analyst pointed out, ‘one important voice in this saga has been strangely silent. Despite Megrahi’s fate having significant implications for relations between Britain and Libya, London has had nothing to say’.

But in November 2008, Britain and Libya concluded a ‘Prisoner Transfer Agreement’ which, of course, was agreed with this particular transfer in mind. Libya nowadays is the location, too, of British Petroleum’s largest exploration project. And since Britain is supposed to be the United States’ ‘closest ally’, the White House, like a really good friend, should be happy for the United Kingdom that things are working out so awfully nicely.

But The Daily Telegraph’s front page headline on 21st August read: ‘Obama’s fury as Lockerbie bomber flies home to Libya’, as the President ‘led growing international condemnation’ of the Scottish Administration’s decision, which had in fact been facilitated by London last November via the foregoing bilateral agreement.

Since we know, from our experience in watching ‘President’ Obama ignoring and riding roughshod over the interests of the American people in pursuit of a truly perverse Terrorist Deficit Financing agenda including self-enrichment, that the occupant of this White House is no more interested in the problems facing Americans than his three notorious self-interested predecessors, the alibi that Obama was speaking on behalf of the grieving and bereaved families of the victims of that atrocity, carries no conviction. So why, then, was Obama described as being ‘furious’?

Here’s why. The Scottish Judicial system was indeed likely to declare that the conviction of the Libyan intelligence operative was unsafe. So he would have been released by the court. And why was it unsafe? Because, as we separately exposed in our Arab-Asian Affairs report several years ago, the Libyan Government was made the ‘fall-guy’ for a crime that it did not sponsor – a reality that emerged when Mr Tony Blair’s ‘diplomacy’ resulted in the sudden rehabilitation of Libya in exchange for a (false) Libyan admission of guilt and Libya purportedly abandoning its quest for weapons of mass destruction, which was accompanied by Libyan comments that the admission of guilt had been agreed for pragmatic purposes only, i.e. ‘under duress’.

• FACT: The Libyan leadership took the pragmatic decision that it would put up with the cynical Western stipulation that it should accept guilt for the atrocity that it did not commit (in order to assist the Americans with their Bush-linked cover-up imperative), on the principle that ‘we are hideously unpopular anyway, so admitting responsibility makes no difference’.

• FACTS: Pan-Am 107 routinely transported drugs sourced from the Beka’a Valley in Lebanon, to the United States. The drugs were transferred to the aircraft daily at Frankfurt Airport. This drug-trafficking operation, handled by controlled cells associated with Palestinian groups, was reported to have had links with the Bush Crime Syndicate.

The release of Mr al-Megrahi leaves the matter of Libyan involvement up in the air but at the same time removes the protective blanket that exploited Libya as cover for the real perpetrators of that atrocity, which reflected a dispute for control over this source of illicit drugs (needed to finance the interbank market, as discussed above).

Therefore, Obama’s ‘fury’, given that he ‘works with’ the Bush Crime Syndicate, or what remains of it, reflects annoyance that America’s ‘closest ally’ has disregarded such sensitivities – which, given the way that we are being treated these days by the Americans, should come as no surprise.

SIMILARITY OF THIS MONUMENTAL EXERCISE TO EXORCISM
Some observers of these events, especially (through no fault of their own) any ‘latecomers to the party’, indicate that they are often baffled by the endless twists and turns, the ying-yang switches or, more precisely, the dialectical reversals of which these narratives bear record.

And they bear record of these extraordinary events for eternity, because we have had to republish these reports in our financial journal International Currency Review, so that they are available for study and analysis both now and in the future – ensuring that a veil can NEVER be drawn over this criminality at the highest levels of the American Government, aided and abetted by stupid foreign accomplices who were too greedy or blind to see what was happening.

But another way of looking at the up-and-down switches purveyed in these narratives would be to compare what we are observing, with exorcism. Now the Editor’s late friend, Father Malachi Martin, who died in July 1999, was an exorcist, and taught the Editor about this process. His remarkable book ‘Hostage to the Devil’ [Reader’s Digest, 1976; HarperSanFrancisco, ISBN 0-06-065337-X, 1992] describes the exorcism of five Americans, whose cases the Author selected because of the type of their demonic infestations which this expert considered to represent the most common categories of demonic possession prevailing in the United States in the first half of the 1970s.

Malachi Martin taught the Editor the remarkable and mysterious fact that the ONLY Name to which Evil Spirit (a phrase used to define either single or multiple possession; and most possessions are multiples) is that of Jesus Christ. At the mention of His Name, Evil Spirit is invariably terrified – a momentous fact repeatedly revealed in the Gospels, if only we have the humility to understand.

The spirits within the possessed who pleaded to be released into the Gadarene swine, knew who He was and pleaded for ‘mercy’. And before being exorcised, the possessed recognised Jesus for who He is and ran towards Him and fell down at His feet and worshipped Him:

‘But when he saw Jesus afar off, he ran and worshipped Him. And cried with a loud voice, and said: What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of the most high God, that thou torment me not?’.

‘For He said unto him, Come out of the man, thou unclean spirit. And He asked him, What is thy name? And he answered, saying, My name is Legion: for we are many’.
[Mark, Chapter 5, verses 6-9].

In this sequence, we learn two important things. First, the mysterious reality, in this context, of the interchangeability of the singular and the plural (a mystery first manifested in the Book of Genesis). While Evil Spirit considers himself to be one, he also acknowledges that he is like a dog covered in lice: the possessed has multiple ‘familiars’. The second point (of paramount importance) is that Evil Spirit(s) have a name (names). In order to exorcise them, their name(s) must be called.

This explains why we repeatedly mention the perpetrators of these crimes BY NAME: because, in order for their perversity to be capable of any explanation at all, it is prudent to assume that they are possessed: otherwise they would be susceptible to reason, which they are not (which is why negotiating with them is a complete waste of time: as Lenin taught, all their agreements are to be reneged upon at their own perverse will).

Another famous exorcism, which appears at the beginning of the Gospel of Mark, illustrates the extraordinary mystery of the fact that Evil Spirit recognises and responds ONLY to the Name of Jesus Christ – a verified fact so remarkable that it serves as a compelling reason for faith that Jesus Christ is precisely who He is, and that the Word was indeed made flesh for our salvation. When the Editor learned and understood this, all his naïve doubts collapsed.

In Mark Chapter 1, verses 23-26, we read:

‘And there was in their synagogue a man with an unclean spirit; and he cried out, Saying, Let us [plural] alone, what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? Art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art, the Holy one of God. And Jesus rebuked him [singular], saying, Hold thy peace, and come out of him. And when the unclean spirit had torn him, and cried out with a loud voice, he came out of him’.

But the exorcist cannot achieve the appropriate outcome if he himself is tainted, has lapsed from his faith in the Lord, and is behaving sinfully. If he attempts an exorcism without having what the ancient Jews would have described as ‘purified himself’ (through prayer, repentance and partaking of Holy Communion), he may find that he is in very great danger during exorcism.

• Because Evil Spirit will quickly ascertain where his weaknesses lie, and will at once exploit them to defeat the exorcism process, harming the exorcist as well.

The classic example of this is written in Acts of the Apostles, Chapter 19, verses 13-16:

‘Then certain of the vagabond Jews, exorcists, took upon them[selves] to call over them which had evil spirits the name of the Lord Jesus, saying, We adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth’.

‘And there were seven sons of one Sceva, a Jew, and chief of the priests, which did so’.

‘And the evil spirit answered and said, Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but WHO ARE YOU?’

‘And the man in whom the evil spirit was, leaped on them, and overcame them, and prevailed against them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded’.

This report illustrates the further extraordinary fact, known to exorcists, that the possessed may display almost superhuman strength when aroused. The possessed may even be able to pick the defeated exorcist up and throw him physically around the room, or even out of an open window. Therefore, exorcism must never, ever, be attempted other than by a properly prepared exorcist-priest who is ‘in Christ’ and can deploy His Name to cast the Evil Spirit(s) out, without physical or mental or spiritual danger to himself and others.

We can now apply the above metaphor to our experience in teasing out the truth behind the endless twists, turns, dialectical deceptions, ‘bait and switch’ operations, and other heinous abominations familiar (unfortunately) to readers patient enough to absorb these narratives.

Thus there have been many occasions when Evil Spirit has got the better of ‘the exorcists’ – those seeking to enforce the Rule of Law – and has accordingly gone on to perpetrate further, seemingly endless, ever more brazen crimes, despite the reality that he/they are cornered and have no hope of escaping from the hell that they have created for themselves and everyone else.

This reflects the fact that, by definition, the ‘exorcists’ have often been at a disadvantage when confronting the devious minds of these criminals – who, however, have only a restricted box of tricks available to them, in conformity with the spiritual reality that Satan operates within God’s universe, not the other way round.

So there have regrettably been many occasions when a position of clear advantage gained by the ‘exorcists’ has subsequently been squandered by their carelessness, arrogance, fatigue, or other factors that have set back the resolution of this crisis, and have thus temporarily encouraged the criminalist operatives to carry on with their financial crimes on the naïve assumption that they have always got away with it, so why should this ever change?

However what ‘latecomers to the party’ may not realise is that stupendous progress against this criminality has been made since 2005-2006, after Leo Wanta was successfully used as the ‘lever’ with which the can of worms has been ‘successfully’ prised open. Naturally, this has represented a catastrophic failure for the usurping Intelligence Power, which had assumed that it was invincible, and could never be outmanoeuvred.

In conclusion, those who (no doubt thankfully for them) have missed the earlier chapters of this horrendous narrative [but see the Archive], should understand that, as a direct consequence of these exposures of the condoned and embedded financial criminality, previously complacent law enforcement has been well and truly aroused from its slumber, the criminal operatives are on the run, they are turning on each other like rats in a sack, and they WILL be decisively defeated.

Try a little faith.

LIST OF U.S. STATUTES, SECURITIES REGULATIONS AND LEGAL PRINCIPLES OF WHICH THE CRIMINALISTS, ASSOCIATES AND ALL THE MAIN FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS REMAIN IN BREACH:

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:

THEFT BY DECEPTION:

• “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:

• “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’.

U.S. SECURITIES REGULATIONS OF WHICH INSTITUTIONS
HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO BE IN BREACH [SEE REPORTS]:

• 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.

U.S. LAWS ROUTINELY BREACHED BY THE CRIMINAL OPERATIVES AND INSTITUTIONS:

• Annunzio-Wylie Anti-Money Laundering Act
• Anti-Drug Abuse Act
• Applicable international money laundering restrictions
• Bank Secrecy Act
• 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.

ADVERTISEMENT: INTERNET SECURITY SOLUTION

NON-U.S. INTERNET SECURITY SOLUTION CD AVAILABLE: FAR BETTER THAN NORTON ETC
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. The program has an invaluable ‘Preview before downloading’ feature.

*VISTA: Virtual Instant Surveillance Tactical Application.

DEVALUATION SWINDLE TO SAVE THEMSELVES – AND PROFIT

chrisstory

SPITEFUL RETALIATION PLANNED AGAINST THE QUEEN AND THE CHINESE

Monday 17 August 2009 01:00

MASSIVE, RECKLESS U.S. DOLLAR DEVALUATION ‘ACT OF WAR’ UNDER CONSIDERATION

AMERICANS AND THE REST OF THE WORLD TO BE SWINDLED IN THE PROCESS

COLOSSAL U.S. TREASURY HEDGE-CUM-SLUSH FUND TRADING OPERATION
TO BE ESTABLISHED FOR OPEN-ENDED BRIBERY AND CONTROL PURPOSES

FORCED TREACHEROUS NORTH AMERICAN UNIFICATION (VIA A COMMON CURRENCY)?

MISPRISION OF FELONY: U.S. CODE, TITLE 18, PART 1, CHAPTER 1, SECTION 4:
‘Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some Judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both’.

CALLING EVIL GOOD, AND GOOD EVIL
‘Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!’

‘Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!’
Isaiah, Chapter 5, verses 20-21.

‘WE’LL KNOW OUR DISINFORMATION PROGRAM IS COMPLETE WHEN EVERYTHING THE AMERICAN PUBLIC BELIEVES IS FALSE’: William Casey, Director of Central Intelligence: An observation by the late Director at his first staff meeting in 1981. This observation reveals the mentality of cynicism which infests the US Federal control structures, and the reality that these structures regard the American people with total contempt. This attitude is the opposite to the noble concept of service to the American people which ought to inspire holders of public office, and therefore represents the epitome of decadence.

The evil spirit directing William Casey got the better of him when he committed suicide in hospital some years later, ostensibly to ‘protect the President’. The fantastic verbal fantasies perpetrated on certain US websites that are operating on the basis of Mr Casey’s principle, enunciated above, should therefore be handled with extreme care. Casey warned you!

• WARNING: THIS ANALYSIS IS INTENDED TO PRECLUDE WHAT IT MAINLY REPORTS

• CORNERED U.S. CRIMINALS CONTEMPLATE THE SAMSON OPTION

• MALEVOLENT INTENDED SLAP IN THE FACE FOR THE QUEEN

• WHO BENEFITS? STEP FORWARD, COVERT SOVIET ‘BLOWBACK’ SPECIALIST,
SOVIET MILITARY INTELLIGENCE-PREMIER VLADIMIR VLADIMIROVICH PUTIN

• THE DIABOLICAL SABOTAGE PROPOSAL DECONSTRUCTED AND EXPOSED

• ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES ENTAIL EXTREME RISKS

• GLARING RISKS TO GLOBAL STABILITY AND PEACE

• APPLYING RATIONAL ANALYSIS TO IRRATIONAL CRIMINALS IS STUPID

• COVERT SOVIET ‘BLOWBACK’ IN RETALIATION FOR THE U.S. RANSACKING OF THE USSR

• SOVIET ‘BLOWBACK’ AIMED AGAINST THE CHINESE AS WELL

• IMMEDIATE FOREIGN CURRENCY CONSEQUENCES

• WHAT THIS SABOTAGE OPERATION ACHIEVES, AS THEY SEE IT

• DECONSTRUCTION OF THE CONTEMPLATED OFFICIAL SWINDLE

• MATHEMATICS UNDERLYING THE CONTEMPLATED SWINDLE

• SOME PROBLEMS THAT THE CRIMINAL CADRES DISCARD

• HOWEVER THE ROOF IS ALREADY FALLING IN ON THE CROOKS

• RECKLESS BORROWING TO CONTINUE WHILE THE HEDGE/SLUSH FUND
DEPLOYS THE TRILLIONS FOR ILLICIT TRADING PURPOSES

• OFFICIAL ADHERENCE TO THE STERILE ‘RESTART DERIVATIVES MARKETS’ MANTRA

• THE SABOTAGE PLOT IS ‘A NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUE’!

• RECAPITULATION OF RECENT ESCALATING FATEFUL EVENTS

• U.S. ‘WAR ON TERROR’ SUDDENLY CANCELLED

• OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE AND TERRORIST OPERATIONS

• ‘INSTANT RESULTS’ DELUSIONS, AND A PREDICTION

• THE LONDON LOCK BOX WEAPON THAT THEY CAN’T SIDESTEP

• SENATOR SCHUMER’S TELEPHONE CALL TO LEO WANTA

• THE NEW WISCONSIN TAX LIABILITY FIASCO

• EMBARRASSING ‘SOURCE OF FUNDS’ PROBLEM AVERTED

• RELATED INFORMATION THAT APPEARS TO BE RELEVANT

• THE RECENT BEHAVIOUR AND ACTIVITIES OF THE CLINTONS

• URGENT BUSINESS FOR MANDELSON IN CORFU

• EUROPHILIAC MANDELSON SUDDENLY CHANGES HIS E.U. TUNE

• ROTHSCHILD, MANDELSON, OSBORNE AND DERIPASKA – AGAIN

• TENSIONS BETWEEN RAHM EMMANUEL AND BINYAMIN NETANYAHU

• AND FINALLY: THE AFGHANISTAN ISSUE BOILS OVER

• THE DOCUMENTATION THAT WE FLAGGED EARLIER

• SEE 28TH JULY POST FOR COMPARISON OF THE PARALLEL, INTERACTIVE U.S. AND SOVIET LENINIST SYSTEMS: ‘ANALYSIS OF THE GLOBAL CRIMINAL FINANCE CATASTROPHE’: ARCHIVE

• INTERNATIONAL CURRENCY REVIEW: Volume 34, Numbers 3 & 4 was published on 14th August and was being mailed worldwide on Monday 17th August 2009. It contains our devastating blow-by-blow reporting of astonishing behind-the-scenes events tearing the lawless intergovernmental environment apart, where anything goes, assets are ‘diverted’, and no-one is responsible.

However, as a specific consequence of these exposures, the net is decisively closing in on ALL criminalist financial operators, both within notorious official structures and in the international financial community, as is becoming clearer by the day. This 592-page report on what has been happening behind the scenes is now being lodged in places ‘where it matters’ around the world, which means that it is impossible for a veil to be drawn over this financial criminality, EVER.

• BOOKS: Edward Harle Limited has so far published FIVE intelligence titles: The Perestroika Deception, by Anatoliy Golitsyn; Red Cocaine, by Dr Joseph D. Douglass, Jr.; The European Union Collective, by Christopher Story; The New Underworld Order, by Christopher Story; and The Red Terror in Russia, by Sergei Melgounov. All titles are permanently in stock. We sell books DIRECT.

• Globalist hegemony ideology and practice are 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. Also, the Editor’s study entitled The European Union Collective, which proves that the EU is a long-range strategic entrapment operation to reduce European countries to satrap status within a German empire using economic strategy for relentless economic warfare purposes, can be bought here.

• Please Make a Donation, if you feel able to do so, to help finance Christopher Story‘s ongoing global financial corruption investigations. Your assistance will be very sincerely appreciated and will make a real difference, hastening the OVERDUE resolution of the worst financial corruption and linked financial fallout in world history. Just press Make a Donation, which is live, and it takes you straight to our ultra-safe ordering system, which accepts Visa and MasterCard.

• The Editor’s $35,000 Wanta bail-out money has been stolen.

• See the second white panel for details of our latest distributed intelligence publications.

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

• COPYRIGHT NOTICE REFERENCING THE STEALING OF OUR COPYRIGHTED BOOKS BY U.S. COPYRIGHT PIRATES APPEARS AT FOOT OF THIS REPORT ABOVE THE LEGAL DEFINITIONS.

By Christopher Story FRSA, Editor and Publisher, International Currency Review, World Reports Limited, London and New York. For earlier reports, press the ARCHIVE. Order your intelligence subscriptions and our ‘politically incorrect’ intelligence books online from this website.

NEW REPORT STARTS HERE:

CORNERED U.S. CRIMINALS CONTEMPLATE THE SAMSON OPTION
It’s not speculation. It’s at the detailed planning stage. Sabotage against the whole world is being officially contemplated at the highest US level, meaning the White House: and it has been under consideration there for months.

It’s reckless, it’s irresponsible, it’s futile, it’s irrational, it’s sterile, it’s perverse, it’s the product of criminal minds, it’s wrong-headed and muddled, it’s motivated by spite, hatred and jealousy, it is destined to be wholly counterproductive and to yield ‘unexpected consequences’, it will severely aggravate international tensions, it will decimate US living standards, it will generate developing domestic hyperinflation, it will restore the Federal Reserve to unhealthy solvency, it will provide the US Treasury and the Fed with colossal corrupt resources with which to operate a new,secret, permanent and unmonitored hedge-slush fund ‘bribery and control piggy bank’, it will trigger the defensive ‘unification’ (under duress) of North America, it will destroy the Chinese miracle, it will drive all foreign currencies to hopelessly uncompetitive levels thereby pushing the Rest of the World, including Britain, Europe and Japan, into the Grandfather of all Depressions, it will provide the Chicago-based criminal clique and the Clinton-Rockefeller branch of the CIA crime-intelligence apparat, following massive setbacks for the Bushes, with unchallengable ‘supremacy’, and, given that Financial Warfare is the precursor of physical warfare, it will eventually lead to a World War.

• It’s an almost exact duplication of the financial background to the events of 1932 and 1933.

MALEVOLENT INTENDED SLAP IN THE FACE FOR THE QUEEN
Most deliciously from the perspective of the criminal American mental defectives concocting this monumental officially contemplated provocation, it will spite Her Majesty The Queen, the primary victim – thanks to very bad advice now thought to have been proffered by Jacob (Lord) Rothschild, previously a friend of the Monarch – of thefts and scams perpetrated by the Bush wing of the US criminal-intelligence kleptocracy.

In other words, what is being officially contemplated and planned by the Obama White House is retribution and revenge against the powers that are forcing the releases – amounting to bare-knuckle Economic and Financial Warfare against, not least, the United States’ supposedly ‘closest’ ally, the United Kingdom.

When the Editor of this service heard about all this, he exclaimed: ‘Well, I have always considered the so-called ‘Special Relationship’ to be absurdly one-sided, excessively weighted in favour of the United States, and prone to restraining appropriate British responses to the multiple injuries that the United States routinely inflicts upon Britain, often motivated by jealousy and spite. The ‘Special Relationship’ should be closed down until the American authorities have cleaned up their act’.

WHO BENEFITS? STEP FORWARD, COVERT SOVIET ‘BLOWBACK’ SPECIALIST,
SOVIET MILITARY INTELLIGENCE-PREMIER VLADIMIR VLADIMIROVICH PUTIN
And so the chief prospective beneficiary, apart from the Obama White House (but not the American people) will be Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, the Soviet Military Intelligence (GRU) chief tasked with the objective of engineering an immense ‘Blowback’ operation against the United States, Britain and China consequent upon the rape and pillaging of the Soviet Union that was perpetrated under the Reagan and Bush Administrations by US operatives, including the operative Leo Wanta, and by Chinese elements, spearheaded by Wanta’s ‘partner’, Howie Kwong Kok.

• This ‘Blowback’ offensive has been explicitly trailered in successive issues of Soviet Analyst, edited and published by the Editor of this service [see serials component of this website].

But first, let us recall, for reference later, two extraordinary observations by primary criminal CIA leaders, that have recently been verified:

• The remark attributed to the veteran operative Barack Hussein Obama (1) , the CIA-‘President’ of the United States: ‘I am the leader (= King) of the whole world’. This arrogant observation, which was leaked through the tight control blanket that has become necessary to ‘filter’ what Mr Obama says these days, reflects his knowledge of what follows.

• The remark attributed to George H. W. Bush Sr., which surfaced in June 2009, to the following effect: ‘We are making so much money, we’ll carry on trading until August’. Which of course implied that BEYOND August, leeway for the Bush Crime Family to continue its criminal finance operations would cease, and that THIS WAS KNOWN BY THE BUSHITES IN ADVANCE: which is indeed fully consistent with recent reports from our sources that the power of the Bushites has been severely curtailed in recent weeks, not least because the criminalist CIA operative Mrs Hillary Clinton has ‘rolled over’ on them. The impression we gained is that the Bush-linked elements were ‘allowed’ a further, and final, period for their trading operations, so that what they were doing could be closely monitored for the last time – which is ironic, since their off-balance sheet funds will be worthless in the context of the intended ‘on-the-books-only’ régime.

• Those Bush funds that have not yet been sequestered, that is.

THE DIABOLICAL SABOTAGE PROPOSAL DECONSTRUCTED AND EXPOSED
We refer to a diabolical scheme, hatched at the highest levels of the United States’ unreformed criminal Government, to spite and ‘get back at’ the external powers which have forced the US kleptocrats into a corner so tight that they can’t even sit down to breathe: namely, the Chinese authorities, and the British Monarchical Power (to be distinguished from the feckless British Government). The following elements of this scheme have been identified:

• Claw back an estimated $75 trillion, in the name of the ‘President’ of the United States, obtained from off-balance sheet derivatives accounts held in London, especially the Delmarva Timber Trust accounts and possibly the Iraqi Rafidain Bank sub-accounts accumulated by George H. W. Bush’s former trading ‘partner’, Saddam Hussein, whom Bush subsequently double-crossed (as he always does, or vice versa).

• Drag our heels on the Settlements payments value dated for Friday 14th August 2009 so that, as always, nobody knows what we intend or what we have in mind, so that nobody has time to take effective defensive action against our proposed sabotage coup.

• Remit the payments ‘under duress’ (on the basis of: ‘Sure, we’ll pay you, but we’ll take most of it back straight away’) as late into our schedule as we can get away with, so that nobody will have to convert their ‘real’ dollars into foreign currency in time to avoid what follows [see below].

• Close the banks on a rotating basis (in late August, while Congress is in recess and powerless to protest), during which periods of closure the banks’ accounts will be adjusted to cater for:

• A massive devaluation of the US dollar, by between 60% and 80%, and/or the introduction of a two-tier dollar, with the external version drastically devalued.

• Answer furious foreign criticism of the devaluation with the riposte:
‘You asked us to pay you. We’ve paid you. Now we’ve devalued, there’s nothing you can do about it’ (unspoken: as we have clawed back most of what we paid you ‘under duress’ in the face of the international community’s pressure and the Writ of Execution).

• As a consequence of these manoeuvres, steal a profit of between 60% and 80% overall, retaining the bulk of the $75 trillion, to be deployed as the base for an internal hedge fund to be operated without checks and balances between the corrupt US Treasury via the Federal Reserve Interbank Settlement Fund, which has no oversight, with selected corrupt foreign central banks.

Conclusion:
Thereby perpetrate a coordinated, deadly and deliberate slap in the face against The Queen and the Chinese, in revenge and malevolent retaliation for their having forced the US kleptomaniacs into a corner, imposing terms and deadlines which the criminal operatives had no intention of meeting but from which, nevertheless, they could not ultimately escape.

ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES ENTAIL EXTREME RISKS
Rational analysis would prompt the conclusion that this diabolical sabotage devaluation scheme cannot proceed because of the ghastly domestic economic consequences.

These would include, after existing stocks are exhausted:

• A near doubling almost overnight of the price of gasoline.

• Sharp increases in the prices of all imported goods.

• Rolling bankruptcies in the residual US manufacturing sector, which would be decimated by the near doubling of imported ‘just-in-time’ supplies of raw materials, components and spare parts.

• Rapidly escalating unemployment from coast to coast.

• A massive drop in the level of US imports, triggering:

• A steep decline in US living standards across the board within a matter of weeks.

• Depending on the depth of the associated slump, escalating inflation as much higher prices for imports, including oil, drive overall inflation through the roof.

• Similar consequences in Canada if the Ottawa Government is foolish enough to go along with any associated project for a single North American currency. Canada must decide: does it go with the doomed US criminal kleptocrats, or does it hold onto its reputation for common sense? The signs are that the Harper Government is about to commit treason against the Canadian people, given that the Canadian Prime Minister joined Presidents Caldera and Obama in Mexico two weeks ago, where the demented plans for this sabotage operation were agreed upon.

• Uncontrollable demographic and immigration consequences associated with any incorporation of Mexico within this mad equation. Indeed CIA-‘President’ Obama has just indicated that there are to be no changes to Mexican immigration arrangements until 2010, ‘or later’.

GLARING RISKS TO GLOBAL STABILITY AND PEACE
As for the external economic consequences, the Rest of the World would be thrust into the Grandfather of all Depressions, triggering political unrest everywhere, causing governments to collapse like ninepins, and ensuring the unification of the whole world against the recalcitrant United States, with grave consequences for already precarious world peace.

What remains of the now pointless UK-US ‘Special Relationship’ would disintegrate, British troops would need to be withdrawn forthwith from Afghanistan [see below], while the European Union and its Collective Currency would fall apart under the resulting strains.

Would these criminals also risk the US dollar, however it emerges, ceasing to be employed as the international denomination currency, and the currency in which oil payments are remitted?

The answer to this question, for the time being, must be: if they are desperate enough, why not? Since they are concerned exclusively with saving their own skins, getting out of the criminal mess they have created which is now engulfing them, and profiting (they hope) as a consequence, why should they care? When has any evidence emerged that these criminals have anything other than their own sordid interests in mind?

• Note: There are unconfirmed reports of some arrests since the ‘drop-dead deadline’ but we have been unable to obtain reliable back-up information – one reason for the gap since we last reported (although we have no contract with anyone to report at all, and do so only when the Editor finds the time between his publishing commitments [see above]).

APPLYING RATIONAL ANALYSIS TO IRRATIONAL CRIMINALS IS STUPID
Rational people would say that none of this makes any sense at all, and rational people would be quite right. But we aren’t dealing with rational people.

We are dealing with a US Treasury Secretary who, having belatedly realised that he has made an unprecedented dogs’ dinner of his brief, shouts and uses filthy language at a meeting attended by two distinguished senior female US agency officials – a flawed Treasury Secretary who collaborated in criminal finance operations while serving as President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York with his discredited criminal operative predecessor, Paulson, and is wedded to Paulson’s agenda.

We are dealing with a controlled, multiple-handled CIA operative masquerading as ‘President’ of the United States whose elevation above his pay-grade has gone to his head and who now thinks he is King of the Whole World (based on the contemplated putsch scenario).

We are dealing with a profoundly corrupt US Intelligence Power which stands ready to pull off ANY malevolent operation it can, in order to retain its usurped power to finance its ‘Black operations’ and its oppressive existence and hegemony beyond the control of Congress – and to ensure that life is made ‘worthwhile’ for US legislators and domestic and foreign targets, thanks to the CIA’s access to an immense portfolio of ill-gotten gains which can be deployed for open-ended bribery purposes. None of these accusations, by the way, has ever been disputed.

COVERT SOVIET ‘BLOWBACK’ IN RETALIATION FOR THE U.S. RANSACKING OF THE USSR
And we are dealing with Soviet Military Intelligence (GRU), the guardian of the covert Soviet Union, which is tasked with orchestrating the subtle, inevitable ‘Blowback’ operation against the United States, now that the covert Soviets have exploited US and Western greed by permitting Western oil corporations to refurbish the Soviets’ previously debilitated oil and gas sector.

For Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin works through controlled Russian mafiya cadres operating out of Chicago – the primary domestic seat of this coordinated de facto offensive against the American people, and the location of the corrupt Chicago FBI office, the co-conspiring banking institutions, organised criminal syndicates, and other elements of the underworld linked to the ‘Clinton’ head of the Octopus, all of which Boris Uvarov, the Leninist ‘Serious Crimes Prosecutor’, may have had in mind when, anticipating the intended covert Soviet ‘Blowback’, he warned the late Claire Sterling, author of ‘Thieves’ World’ (2) (who died suddenly after her second interview with FBI agents following the publication of that book by Simon and Schuster in 1994) (3), that:

‘Naturally, it’s wonderful that the Iron Curtain is gone, but it was a shield for the West. Now we’ve opened the gates, and this is very dangerous for the Rest of the World. America is getting Russian criminals; and Europe is getting Russian criminals. They’ll steal everything. They’ll occupy Europe. Nobody will have the resources to stop them’.

‘You people in the West don’t know our mafiya yet. You will, you will’.

SOVIET ‘BLOWBACK’ AIMED AGAINST THE CHINESE AS WELL
As for the assault on the Chinese in retaliation for their participation in the ransacking of the Soviet Union, the critical element here is that Russia and China have recently signed a five-year energy agreement providing for massive deliveries of Russian energy products to China.

As a consequence of any drastic US dollar devaluation, China’s $1.0++ trillion of real cash dollars is reduced to, say, $200 billion, but the oil price remains unchanged (pending the global depression) or prices have been fixed under the accord. Russia is also affected because China’s economy implodes, necessitating a revision of the agreement.

IMMEDIATE FOREIGN CURRENCY CONSEQUENCES
A drastic US dollar devaluation such as is being contemplated by these madmen sends the pound sterling to a trading range of $2.64-$2.97, the Euro to a trading range of $2.29-$2.57, the Japanese yen to ¥38.9-¥19.1, the Swiss franc to SFr0.612-SFr0.306, and the price of gold to anything between $1545 and $1740 per fine ounce.

Which makes no sense whatsoever, EXCEPT on the assumption that we are dealing with a nest of cornered rats determined to extricate themselves AT ANY COST from the box that encases them due to their own serial recklessness and criminal behaviour. And given the systematic flouting of the Rule of Law, of all residual standards of integrity and proper behaviour, and the destruction of the Full Faith and Credit of the United States that these unfettered operatives, protected by the recalcitrant Intelligence Power, have perpetrated in recent years – the twists and turns of which have been extensively recorded here and, for the permanent record, in successive issues of our journal International Currency Review (3) – the appropriate and necessary assumption that must be made, pending evidence to the contrary, is that the rats will do ANYTHING to save themselves.

WHAT THIS SABOTAGE OPERATION ACHIEVES, AS THEY SEE IT
And not only, on the above scenario, do the criminal rats imagine that they may save themselves, but they believe that they can pull off the following achievements:

• The United States has re-established itself as the most powerful country in the world, and every other country in the world has been ripped off overnight. If the 155 countries were indeed paid on or around 6th August, as we were told occurred (although given subsequent developments, this still seems to be in doubt), what they were paid winds up being worth, at best, not much more than one-fifth of what was remitted to them.

• The Bush Crime Family element of the Syndicate has essentially been closed down, with bank accounts in Europe, China and elsewhere sequestered. They have ‘had their day’. Recalling that rats fight each other inside the sack and that there is never any love lost between thieves, that theoretically leaves the field clearer for their rivals. Unconfirmed reports from several sources indicate that Mrs Hillary Clinton, under National Security Grand Jury pressure [see below], has ratted on her main criminal associates, the Bushite wing of the Syndicate, in exchange for the US Secretary of State’s transactional or apparent ‘permanent’ immunity from prosecution.

• However given that a number of sealed indictments against this Jezebel have existed for several years and can be unsealed at any time, and given also that the Clintons have been heavily involved in criminal financial operations against foreign parties, especially HM The Queen, with the crimes in question committed outside the United States, the word ‘immunity’ has no meaning in this context – because the US National Security Grand Juries’ requirements cannot be sidelined.

• One reason for THAT is that, since the crimes have been committed against foreign parties, the Grand Juries have to report their findings and recommendations to the World Court. The National Security Grand Juries’ findings are sealed until the charges are read in open court.

• Our ‘insider’ sources do not deny that Grand Jury indictments against George W, Bush, former Vice President Cheney and other notorious high-level criminalist operatives may be imminent.

• Soviet Military Intelligence has achieved its long-range objective of paying both the Chinese and the Americans back for the Financial Warfare that they waged jointly against the overt Soviet Union. This is unlikely to be of concern to the Obama White House.

• The Federal Reserve has been made whole, which is why Dr Ben Bernanke now looks so smug, stroking his beard, when he appears before Congressional Committees and ‘town-hall meetings’ these days. Not only does he know that many of the legislators facing him are being blackmailed, are blackmailable, bribed or otherwise compromised, but he is also aware that none of them can do anything whatsoever to interfere with this operation, the strings of which he is in charge of pulling.

• As indicated above, The Queen, who appears to be quietly resolved that none of the criminals should be financially rewarded for their criminal behaviour, will have been well and truly swindled, yet again – following the stealing of her gold, and the subsequent further diversion and stealing of her $6.2 trillion LOAN levied funds sent over by the Bank of England to the Bank of America on the 19th-20th June 2007 which were then hijacked by the Bank of New York Mellon (BoNY Mellon), one of the most insidious of the US criminal financial enterprises.

Specifically, while the $6.2 trillion LOAN money will finally have had to be disgorged along with any payouts, in the face of the immense pressure exerted on the White House consequent upon the events since 1st April culminating in the Chinese ultimatum expiring on 7th August and the World Court Writ of Execution, the subsequent (or contemporaneous) devaluation of the dollar will have reduced the value of these LOAN monies to between $2.48 trillion and $1.24 trillion.

• That ‘takes care’ of, and sabotages, the Dollar Refunding Programme to be conducted from London, by sharply reducing the funds available for this purpose. Neutralisation of the London-based Dollar Refunding Programme has been a primary objective of the malevolent strategists ever since they realised that arrangements had been made, from the end of May 2009, for the Refunding to take place from the British capital. Thus the dollar devaluation represents a direct, insidious and malevolent attack against, and a further swindling of, the British Crown, with obvious longer-term consequences for the so-called ‘Special Relationship’ which the American official criminals have single-handedly destroyed: another covert Soviet objective achieved.

• The US authorities can maintain, now, that US institutions are Basel-II and Basel-III (4) compliant, since under the new banking régime, the off-balance sheet sector has been closed down in the metropolitan centres. But the top US criminal strategists don’t care, because they have overnight established with the stolen money their own on-the-books internal hedge and slush fund operation which can and will now be engaged in limitless high-yield trades with corrupt foreign central banks without checks and balances and beyond all scrutiny due to the Federal Reserve’s control of the Federal Reserve Interbank Settlement Fund – which, like the Federal Reserve Board itself, is not audited (hence Dr Beard’s pointed opposition to Rep. Ron Paul’s initiative for the Federal Reserve to be audited). Technically, the Treasury’s hedge/slush fund, although based on stolen money, will qualify as on-the-books, and will therefore be compliant with the international financial community’s standards as promulgated via the Bank for International Settlements.

• Furthermore, consistently with the above, due to the devaluation, hundreds of trillions of dollars miraculously appear on the books, suddenly compliant with Basel-II and Basel-III, in the context of the massive devaluation that has taken place.

The most obvious precedent is the dollar devaluation under President Nixon in 1973-74.

• The US Treasury has achieved what Geithner’s criminalist predecessor, Paulson, aimed for, namely the establishment of the Treasury’s own hidden hedge and slush fund, giving insiders power over the whole world because:

• By exploiting trading ‘opportunities’ via the Federal Reserve Interbank Trust Fund with other corrupted central banks around the world, the US Treasury will now be empowered to generate colossal hidden financial resources ad infinitum, with no oversight – funds with which the secret structures of the US criminal Government will be re-empowered, and there will be no sanction on earth capable of countering the consequent global abuses that will arise.

• Would this secret hedge and slush fund coexist, operating in the background without checks and balances, while the US Treasury continues to borrow more and more, just like an intoxicated gambler in a casino borrowing from the bank? Sure! Such debt financing is the lifeblood of some of the better-known US criminalist financial institutions: so what will have emerged is a neat, two-tier system – involving the establishment and exploitation of the colossal new internal hedge-cum-slush fund, and a parallel continuation of a reckless deficit financing operation which in turn ‘legitimises’ the US tax régime, which is essential for population control purposes.

DECONSTRUCTION OF THE CONTEMPLATED OFFICIAL SWINDLE
We can deconstruct the sabotage plot by breaking down this monumental swindle into stages:

(1) Trillions of derived ‘mirror money’ is taken from Delmarva Timber Trust accounts and possibly also Saddam Hussein’s Rafidian Bank sub-accounts in London into the US Treasury under the command and control of the White House.

(2) Pay out these funds, ‘laundered’ through the sovereign power, via the unaudited and secretive Federal Reserve Interbank Settlement Fund controlled by Bernanke.

(3) Deposit funds in the clearing banks.

(4) Shut the banks down (ordered by the regulator – the Federal Reserve) by groupings of Fed districts (e.g. starting with the region incorporating the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, to capture Bank of America, Richmond, and proceeding to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, to capture the big money center banks). During shutdowns, exchange existing dollar balances for a new currency* and revalue all accounts.

(5) Devalue the dollar by between 60% and 80% and reduce the payments (made under ‘duress’) directly via the devaluation (precedent: the Vault Cash Act of 1959: Operation Mongoose).

(6) Take the colossal differential back to the US Treasury/White House for financing the secret internal hedge-cum-slush fund which will ‘keep the boys happy for evermore, both at home and abroad’ (provided the corrupt recipients can find a way of hiding such slush money in the future, which under the quote ‘cleaned-up’ unquote regime, could be a severe ongoing problem for them).

(7) Issue a new currency*, not on the basis of 1:1 as happened in the 1960s, but on the basis of 1:5, or 1:6. or 1:7 (with the colossal differential, as indicated in (6) above, going back to the US Treasury and the White House for financing the unmonitored hidden self-enrichment slush fund trading operations with selected corrupt central banks, ad infinitum).

*Note: Whether the new currency would consist of US Treasury-issued dollar Notes or not, is unknown (anecdotal reports referencing the ‘Amero’ and other alternatives being unconfirmable). But the nature of the US currency, which could continue as the existing dollar in format and name, without any of the foregoing parameters being affected at all, is not important for the purposes of illustrating here how the vindictive sabotage scam against the Rest of the World and the American people would be implemented.

(8) Of course we should add that the subsequent step would be for the entire cabal of criminalist operatives to be strung up on George Bush Senior’s notorious lamp posts; and from what we are hearing, it wouldn’t take much for such revolutionary fervour to be unleashed.

(9) Implementation of this giga-heist would guarantee a domestic and global conflagration, leading to World War. Under cover of any such upheaval short of World War and the physical obliteration of Washington, DC, the criminals get back to their corrupt business as usual.

MATHEMATICS UNDERLYING THE CONTEMPLATED SWINDLE
The mathematics of this contemplated sabotage operation are also instructive. If the $75 trillion of stolen derived ‘mirror money’ brought over from London is devalued so that one dollar becomes 20 cents, i.e. on a ratio of 1:5, the net receipts to the collective of bank clients becomes $15 trillion, while the illegal gain to the criminal US Treasury ( viz., STOLEN MONEY) becomes $60 trillion.

If the devaluation ratio is 1:6, so that one dollar becomes $0.1667, the net receipts by the collective of bank clients becomes $12.5 trillion, while the illegal gain to the criminalist US Treasury (STOLEN MONEY) becomes $62.5 trillion.

As for the mainly UK sovereign $6.2 trillion earmarked for the US Dollar Refunding operation to be conducted out of London, a devaluation ratio of 1:5 yields $1,240 billion of LOAN funds to the UK client, and $4,960,000,000,000 of illegal gain STOLEN by the criminal US Treasury – representing a deliberate revenge attack on Her Majesty The Queen.

SOME PROBLEMS THAT THE CRIMINAL CADRES DISCARD BY DOING THIS
Overall, the criminal strategists have rid themselves of the following problems: in one operation:

(a) They have paid the hijacked funds ‘under duress’ to a limited constituency of recipients.

(b) They have stolen most of what they have paid back in the process. Note: Our assumption is that the payments are made in pre-devaluation funds, but we suppose that they could even be done in post-devaluation funds, although that would invite immediate anti-US economic sanctions.

(c) They have sidestepped the immense ‘source of funds’ problems arising from the tax payable for instance on the $4.5 trillion, and the tax payable by the corrupt politicians and other recipients, which would attract IRS attention given the watchful climate generated by these exposures.

(d) They may believe that they have ‘deleted’ Wanta’s obligations (Pay Orders and payables) and binding commitments made in open defiance of Fraud in the Inducement law (which doesn’t get Wanta off the hook, but it ‘feels better’).

(e) They have circumvented The Queen’s presumed insistence under the Writ of Execution that none of the corrupt politicians, operatives and others are to receive any payments at all (hence Schumer’s phone call on 11th August to Wanta, to that effect: see below).

• Note: This also explains why certain ‘recipient’ parties thought to have political payees on their ‘books’ are apparently not being paid.

HOWEVER THE ROOF IS ALREADY FALLING IN ON THE CROOKS
Given imminent National Security Grand Jury developments, and the further freezing of Bush Sr. accounts in Europe and China, our sources have separately been willing to confirm several reports which imply that the criminal strategists may shortly discover that they cannot control events AT ALL. For instance, investigations by the Turkish Government into immense US corruption through the Central Bank of Turkey focus on criminal finance operations exploited by the Worldwide Trust through a bank in Northern Cyprus, a territory recognised only by Turkey. Also involved in those operations was Bank Leumi le-Israel and the American-Turkish Council.

That a further stupendous collapse of ‘toxic’ derivatives is imminent, with severe implications for a number of large banks, has likewise been confirmed by our sources, in the context of a realisation that the Treasury is about to discover that nobody at home or abroad, is going to remain prepared to purchase its ‘Trashets’ as the banking sector sags under the dead weight of derivatives fraud. We did anticipate such a developments several months ago, and we indicated that this would occur in the third quarter of 2009 – a prediction that is being proved correct.

Specifically, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) shut down Colonial Bank, based in Alabama and Florida, which had $25 billion in ‘assets’, on 14th August, switching that bank’s 346 branches to the North Carolina bank BB&T. The failed bank, which acknowledged in July that there was ‘substantial doubt’ that it could survive as an independent business, admitted a few days prior to its enforced closure that it was under investigation for mortgage fraud, and also that a separate investigation was ongoing into its accounting practices in connection with an application for funds from the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP).

Colonial Bank’s offices, and those of Taylor, Bean & Whitaker, another US mortgage lender, were raided by Federal agents two weeks earlier. Four other banks also failed on 14th August, including Community Bank of Nevada, Las Vegas, two smaller institutions in Arizona, and one in Pittsburgh. On 16th August, it was reported to us that five large US banks were expected to fail at any moment, delivering another body blow to the Geithner Treasury’s crass and failing attempt to re-start the collapsed derivatives sector.

And against this background, the compromised Mrs Clinton, who has ‘rolled over’ on the Bushites and other criminal names, and is therefore temporarily ‘protected’ by her questionable ‘immunity’ for the time being, is now being intensively questioned by forces pressing home the Rule of Law, headed by the New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, to fill out gaps in their investigations into the criminal records of many of the high-level crooks we have exposed in these reports – Dr Alan Greenspan; the former US Treasury Secretary, Henry M. Paulson; the former Department of Homeland Security chief, Michael Chertoff; former Clinton-era Treasury Secretary and guardian of the Clintons’ ill-gotten funds at Citibank, Robert Rubin; the current US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner (because the Federal Reserve Bank of New York is under investigation); the New York Fed’s Stephen Friedman; and other US criminal operatives fingered in these reports and by other observers. Among thefts being investigated are illegal transactions by Chinese Ming crooks and US Treasury collaborators of both US and Chinese sovereign funds, we understand.

Given such pressures (of which the foregoing list is merely a brief current sample), the diabolical devaluation sabotage swindle that is being planned can be interpreted as a desperate stratagem comparable to a planned jail break by cornered prisoners – a Houdini ‘escape’ plan that will make the plight of the perpetrators far worse than it already is, because of faulty execution.

RECKLESS BORROWING TO CONTINUE WHILE THE HEDGE/SLUSH FUND
DEPLOYS THE TRILLIONS FOR ILLICIT TRADING PURPOSES
While the trillions of stolen dollar funds are used to finance the hidden, illicit trading operations to be conducted between the internal hedge fund operated within the corrupt US Treasury with the cooperation of the Federal Reserve and the only-too-willing corrupt foreign central banks, the US Treasury is to continue its reckless borrowing operations in exchange for ‘Trashets’ that nobody wants (and foreigners have ceased buying), as usual.

This is the time of year when the US Treasury Secretary writes a letter to Congress, requesting it to consider ‘as a matter of urgency’ raising the Statutory Debt Limit. On 17th February 2009, under 123 Stat 366, the Statutory Debt Limit was raised to $12,104.0 billion, compared with the ceiling level of $5,500 billion in 1996. On 7th August 2009, the aggregate value of the Federal debt outstanding AS REPORTED (a throughly misleading figure, as we have separately explained), stood at $11.7 trillion.
Given that over Fiscal Years 2009 and 2010 (ending on 30 September) the reckless Barack Obama Government expects to issue $3.4 trillion in new junk ‘Trashets’ debt (make that $4.0 trillion) – and that the ‘President’ is pushing a diversionary Leninist health care programme which, if enacted, will saddle Americans not only with ‘death care’ (euthanasia) arrangements, but with colossal costs that will run out of control – the US Statutory Debt Limit will have to be raised towards the $15.0 trillion mark even while the secret internal Treasury hedge fund starts its hidden trading operations.

On 11th August, the Congressional Oversight Panel was reported by Reuters to have told the US Treasury that it should consider expanding ‘programs to cleanse troubled assets from banks’ balance sheets, if current efforts fail to restart markets or if economic conditions worsen’.

OFFICIAL ADHERENCE TO THE STERILE ‘RESTART DERIVATIVES MARKETS’ MANTRA
So here we have official confirmation of (a) the reality that, as discussed in these reports, the Paulson-Geithner Treasury foolishly, in defiance of advice proffered by the former Fed Chairman, Paul Volcker, thought that it could ‘restart’ derivatives trading on the scale to which everyone had previously been accustomed, following the discontinuity that occurred on 10th to 12th September 2008, when the $14.0+ trillion previously referenced (including the $6.2 trillion of LOAN funds) were placed, on our recommendation, into ‘lockdown’; and (b) the fact that attempts to restart derivatives operations on the former scale have, as we predicted, almost completely failed.

Mind you, the Congressional Oversight Panel hasn’t understood much, either, as its latest report contained the following fatuous jargon-riddled sentence: ‘The Treasury must assure robust legacy securities and legacy loan programs or consider a different strategy to do whatever can be done to restart the market for those assets’. When the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

But this needn’t cause any surprise, since ‘the Establishment’ on both sides of the Atlantic got everything so profoundly wrong, because of its involvement in the corruption, that all sense of intellectual cohesion, let alone integrity, has long since been lost.

For instance, the Bank of England’s credibility and authority have both been decimated over the past two years – given that the Bank’s Inflation report for August 2007 was even then still parroting the received, consensus wisdom that securitisation had made the banking system safer and more resilient, because it had procured that a great deal of financial risk was no longer on the banks’ balance sheets. Yikes!

The fact that what was happening was illegal and criminal was evidently not an issue that featured on the Bank of England’s radar back then – because, of course, as we reported at that time, the Bank of England was itself heavily engaged in Fraudulent Finance operations conducted through the Birmingham back office operations fronted by Carl Daniels, remember? Recall, too, that in 2007, we reported that the late Sir Eddie (Lord) George, the former Governor of the Bank of England, was arrested, like his discredited American counterpart, Dr Alan Greenspan, for his involvement in questionable off-balance sheet financial engineering activities.

THE SABOTAGE PLOT IS ‘A NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUE’!
And here’s another key point. A devaluation is a national security issue! So, hey presto, all of a sudden, rampant US official criminality is enveloped more than ever within the national security blanket – accounting for the reported information ‘blackout’ that has been applied for several weeks now, as the perpetrators fronted by the operative Obama decide what on earth to do for their own advantage, and how to do it.

But so far as ‘foreigners’ are concerned, such a prospective malevolent and deliberately spiteful devaluation of the US dollar on the scale that is being contemplated represents a de facto ACT OF ECONOMIC WARFARE against Britain and the the Rest of the World, and therefore very legitimately necessitates conscientious investigative analysis by journalists such as the Editor of this service.

RECAPITULATION OF RECENT ESCALATING FATEFUL EVENTS
As previously reported, the CIA-‘President’ of the United States, a veteran Agency operative who reportedly travelled on British, Indonesian, Kenyan and US passports with 22 years of service in the Agency, was served by the Chinese on Sunday 1st August 2009 with a hand-delivered letter, confirming a ‘drop-dead deadline’ of Friday 7th August for implementation of the World Court Writ of Execution requirement the Settlement payouts to be finalised.

The Chinese letter became necessary after tensions rose between the US and Chinese delegations during the bilateral (G-2) meetings in Washington in late July, when 150 Chinese officials fanned out all over the US geomasonic capital, ostensibly to tackle innumerable bilateral issues.

In reality, what happened at the main G-2 sessions was that the two sides read out their respective position papers, with no real consensus on key issues being reached at all. Moreover the Chinese authorities issued further warnings to the effect that they were not about to purchase US ‘Trashets’ as required by the US Treasury, while also demanding that the US Treasury increase its issuance of Treasury Inflation Protected Securities (TIPS). This represented, in effect, a rebuff to the arrogant and foul-mouthed US Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner.

In the course of the subsequent week, the servants of the British Monarchical authority, assisted by the Chinese parties, were reported to us to have taken complete control of the Settlements payout process so that the resolution, as then understood, was supposedly taken plainly into the hands of the injured parties. Confirmation of this crucial fact was indeed obtained from numerous sources, including sources inside the Federal Reserve System.

As an immediate result of this development, the International Monetary Fund was reported to us to have paid the long outstanding monies into the hands of the 155 payee countries on Thursday 6th August (5) . These payments were released as a direct consequence of the assumption of total control over the resolution by the British Monarchical authority served inter alia by MI-6.

U.S. ‘WAR ON TERROR’ SUDDENLY CANCELLED
And in a tell-tale development, it was also announced on Thursday 6th August at a US State Department Press Conference that the United States is not engaged in fighting a war on terror.

So, all of a sudden, the 60-year war announced by the previous White House had ceased to exist. This ‘retrospective adjustment’ had suddenly become necessary, it would seem, because, as we ourselves have repeatedly stated, the high-level perpetrators of the financial crimes that have been exposed, are themselves engaged in Economic and Financial Terrorism against the American people and the whole world. With the ground having shifted so violently under their feet, it had suddenly become necessary to draw a veil over that reality.

OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE AND TERRORIST OPERATIONS
Earlier, as previously reported here, steps were put in place to procure the arrest of between 200 and 260 senior US figures should any of them stand in the way of completion of the releases. This warning was reportedly made as explicit as possible. But for the avoidance of any residual doubt, Senators, and top elected and appointed officials, were advised that ANY ONE of their number who stood in the way would be arrested, whatever their status, inter alia for OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE and for committing TERRORIST ACTS.

• This information was repeated with particular emphasis by impeccable sources to the Editor on the evening of 11th August. Since then, we have been repeatedly told the same thing.

‘INSTANT RESULTS’ DELUSIONS, AND A PREDICTION
Given the attendant news ‘blackout’, some impatient people lacking perspective have appeared to assume that perceived consequences of compliance or non-compliance may have been aborted.

Such responses reflect a shallow understanding of the truly momentous developments that are unfolding behind the scenes, and an inability to grasp the subtlety with which the cancer of this organised criminality is being cauterised.

To expect instant results in a situation as complex and as fraught with conflicting disinformation strands as this, with National Security Grand Jury involvement in the background, is to expose a level of naïveté that is surprising and uncalled for, given the multiple twists and turns that we have recorded as this historically unprecedented crisis has matured since we started reporting it in 2006.

Although, having written nearly 2,000,000 words on this crisis since 2006, the Editor cannot always remember what we said when, he recalls that we have reported our expectation that the entire can of worms will be spilled out for the whole world to see.

We now reiterate this prediction: the unravelling process will continue, and the US perpetrators of endless financial criminality, including former and probably also present holders of high office, will be exposed – as will the murderers of the 3,000+ people on 9/11.

The unravelling process that has been kick-started is now unstoppable. The government machine grinds slowly, but it grinds to dust. Impatience for results, given the abominations that have been committed and are still intended, is understandable, but futile. What matters is that the unravelling and exposure process CANNOT BE STOPPED.

In this connection we are proud to have been able to place a most detailed record of the twists and turns of the criminalists’ behaviour on permanent record, in our journal and on this website, for the whole world to refer to and study both now and in the future. There is no way that the filth can be brushed under ANY carpet: not even if the most drastic steps are resorted to as the latest batch of criminal operatives seeks to save itself and to avoid consignment to the bowels of the US Gulag.

THE LONDON LOCK BOX WEAPON THAT THEY CAN’T SIDESTEP
Notwithstanding all of the above, it suddenly emerged at around 6.00pm UK time on 11th August that a number of Senior US Senators had taken it into their heads to indicate that they intended, even at this late stage, to torpedo the ongoing Settlements process.

In particular, certain Senators were monitored stating that they ‘will not allow’ a certain Line Item payment to be made. The Line Item payment in question is the payment which will facilitate the on-the-books, private sector Refunding for the Dollar, which will save the United States from collapse assuming the diabolical sabotage plan outlined above is aborted – and will protect the Europeans from the consequences of the Euro being handed the high-explosive parcel which would sink the Euro because it will be unable to handle the derivatives overhang (see below).

What predictably emerged was rearguard resistance by certain (especially some Chicago-linked) Senators who are living in a criminalised dreamland of their own. These people may even have been unaware that the United States ceased to be in the driving seat in early August and that they have no residual power to influence the course of events one way or another. One purpose of this report, therefore, is to advise these people, and anyone who may be listening to them, that they are talking nonsense. The Settlements process cannot be stopped, unless the forgoing risky sabotage process is implemented: as it was put to us on 11th August; ‘Those days are long gone’.

Furthermore – and this is a point that these Senators may have conveniently and very foolishly overlooked – the raids by the Metropolitan Police on the ‘Safety Lock Box’ locations in Mayfair, Edgeware and Hampstead, London, on 2nd June 2008 equipped the British Power, and therefore also the National Security Grand Juries, with comprehensive evidence of all senior US figures and holders of high office, together with their bankers, intermediaries and associates, who have been and are engaged in these Fraudulent Finance operations which, under a state of war, equate to committing Economic and Financial Terrorism. (Hence the State Department’s sudden cynically laughable abolition of the ‘War on Terror’).

And given that the Writ of Execution issued by the World Bank in satisfaction of the non-US primary injured parties is binding under international law, and cannot be interfered with under American law because the crimes were committed OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES, belated rearguard attempts to impede the Settlements process not only render Senators and others standing in the way liable to arrest and imprisonment as stated above, but also render them vulnerable to remedies under international arrest warrants for committing ACTS OF FINANCIAL TERRORISM AGAINST THE BRITISH MONARCHY AND THE WHOLE WORLD.

SENATOR SCHUMER’S TELEPHONE CALL TO LEO WANTA
On Thursday 6th August, the calendar of payees was adjusted in accordance with the requirements imposed by the Bank for International Settlements, Basel, so as to accord with the requirements of the British Monarchical Power and the Chinese in conformity with the Writ of Execution.

On 11th August, Senator Schumer personally telephoned Leo Wanta, according to DC sources special to this service, to inform him that he would not be paid. As Wanta has stolen the editor’s $35,000 plus interest, and ranted without a cause at the Editor several times on the phone after we had successfully used our expertise to project his case before the whole world, only to be double-crossed by this operative, we are no longer in touch with this character.

• However our sources advise that Wanta was not particularly ‘fazed’ at being told that he won’t be paid the $4.5 trillion sent over on Howie Kwong Kok’s signature following the intervention by Dr Alan Greenspan and the former US Treasury Secretary John Snow, in May 2006.

And the likely reason for this ‘nonchalant’ response will have been that, although Mr Schumer will have made no reference to the fact – given that all phone calls in this firmament are recorded and transcribed – it may have been understood that lack of payment now ‘will not be an issue’ since, with the establishment of the internal Treasury hedge-cum-slush fund that can be multiplied for ever by means of exotic hidden trading operations with the corrupt foreign central banks handled through the unaudited Federal Reserve Interbank Settlement Fund controlled by Bernanke (who is shaping up, as he strokes his beard, to be almost more criminal than his discredited predecessor), all ‘players’ will be duly ‘taken care of’.

Which would certainly be ironic since Mr Wanta signed off on a large number of Pay Orders and payables, despite having no funds whatsoever with which to meet ANY of these obligations – a crime called ‘Fraud in the Inducement’ [see the legal summary at the foot of every report].

So now, all of a sudden, he isn’t going to be paid, which means that he remains vulnerable to legal remedies under the foregoing heading – the other side of the coin which would apply if he were to take economic receipt thereby becoming liable for the Wisconsin State tax on the $4.5 trillion [see immediately below]. As for the Richmond Attorney Steven Goodwin, who prepared the documents for the Editor’s $35,000 Wanta loan, it is to be imagined that he, too, can hardly be comfortable with this compromising state of affairs.

THE NEW WISCONSIN TAX LIABILITY FIASCO
The point of interest here, apart from the fact that the $4.5 trillion has in any case long since been stolen, is that Wanta could not have taken economic receipt of such funds without incriminating himself. And the reason for that fact is that, whereas his now moribund Commonwealth of Virginia Corporation, the weirdly-named AmeriTrust Groupe (misspelt) Inc., was meant to have been the recipient of the funds, the question of whether the funds were in fact to be paid to the (now dead) corporation or to him personally, remained moot throughout.

Either way spelt trouble, as Wanta had previously maintained for years that he was not resident in the State of Wisconsin and so could not be subject to Wisconsin State tax (which was accurate for a number of years, and which was associated with the fraudulent collection of $14,129 of Wisconsin State Tax THREE TIMES by the corrupt Wisconsin Department of Revenue: see our report dated 6th August 2007, for the most comprehensive coverage of the Wisconsin Tax Gestapo dimension).

So if Mr Wanta were to have taken economic receipt, he would be liable to indictment for having deceived the Wisconsin State tax authorities, who had in fact scammed him earlier, as we reported.

Even more bizarrely, several months ago, we gathered from several sources that Wanta had raised no objection when it had been intimated to him that the Wisconsin State Department of Revenue intended to sue the Bank of America for the State tax due upon the $4.5 trillion (an action that can now go nowhere), because Wanta had thought that such legal action would faciliate his claim to receipt of the $4.5 trillion!

EMBARRASSING ‘SOURCE OF FUNDS’ PROBLEM AVERTED
And yet more to the point, since $1.575 trillion of the $4.5 trillion would be payable in tax at 35% to the US Treasury (as arranged), the problem of ‘source of funds’, has now been averted – to the enormous relief of all the deeply compromised parties concerned.

For not only does the sudden appearance of the $1.575 trillion onto the Treasury’s books now require no explanation as it isn’t happening (the $4.5 trillion was stolen anyway but it had earlier been thought that the funds were to be ‘replaced’), but all manner of related issues associated with ‘source of funds’ – including issues bothering corrupt legislators who were supposed to be paid – are being sidestepped. (The issue of whether the corrupt legislators are to be paid or not, has not yet been clarified; but, as indicated above, the impression we had gained by the time of posting was that none of these corrupt US politicians were about the be paid).

As for the stolen sovereign LOAN money, when (if) this is released (and if it isn’t, many more very high-level arrests, starting at the White House, will, we are told, take place), it will attract no tax because the stolen/diverted funds are on loan – which, again, circumvents the problem of ‘source of funds’ which has caused the perpetrators such anxiety. The paperwork for the releases was reported to us to be in hand at Bank of America, with the value date unchanged of 14th August (although all such reports have to be treated with caution, whatever their provenance).

RELATED INFORMATION THAT APPEARS TO BE RELEVANT
Given the ongoing lies and deceit surrounding these matters, the fact that ‘information’ ‘leaked’ by CIA sources cannot either be verified or taken at face value since the CIA’s modus operandi is total deception, and given that banking transactions are ‘confidential’ – and also, clearly, that, without having access to NSA transcripts of all White House communications, outside observers cannot be sure of anything in this hideous ‘Black’ environment – the independent observer must buttress deductions based upon incomplete data, by analysing overt indications of what may be going on behind the scenes. Several circumstances noted recently may throw further light on the situation.

THE RECENT BEHAVIOUR AND ACTIVITIES OF THE CLINTONS
First, what was Mrs Hillary Rodomski Clinton, the US Secretary of State, actually doing during her tour of Africa, apart from preaching ‘Rule of Law’ out of the side of her corrupt mouth to bemused Kenyans? The likely answer is that this Jezebel was in fact setting up conduits and arrangements for the intended hidden inter-central bank trading arrangements to be perpetrated via the secret Treasury/White House hedge-cum-slush fund to be transacted via the unaudited Federal Reserve Interbank Settlement Fund.

In order to comprehend the foregoing, you will need to accept that this deeply criminalised and compromised CIA operative who, to save her own tawdry skin may have shopped the Bushites under cover of some form of immunity, is nevertheless still engaged in preparations for further criminal finance operations: and if you can accept that ANY human being can behave in such a cynical manner under such pressure, then you are living in the real world that we are describing.

That Queen Melusina was engaged in making such arrangements is likely, given that she visited African countries that this service knows for a fact to have corrupt central banks.

The Clintons, like the Bush Crime Family, operate on the standard mafiosi basis of demanding ‘a piece of the action’; and since Mrs Clinton is in charge of ‘development’, a reasonable assumption would be that arrangements to facilitate any intended hidden trading operations such as described above, would be accompanied by a requirement for the Clintons to be paid off with every trade.

(This assumes that both the Clintons can continue their corrupt operations personally, which will certainly become much more problematical for them under the ‘new régime’, necessitating the opening of bank accounts within one or more of the corrupt central banks).

By contrast, William Jefferson Rockefeller-Clinton looked decidedly sombre and out of sorts, as others have commented, on returning from the Far East, where he did secret deals with the corrupt North Koreans, but got slapped in the face, we understand, by the alert South Koreans.

In other words, he couldn’t ‘collect’ – just as his CIA spouse found that she couldn’t ‘collect’ in Baghdad, on that occasion last May when she was greeted by a Gold Badge who slapped a warm, clammy hand down on her shoulder exclaiming: ‘Gotcha’. No wonder that we are hearing that this woman appears to be becoming somewhat unhinged (like Geithner).

Specifically, her defensive comment to CNN’s Fareed Zakaria on 9th August that ‘it is fair to say that [the Chinese] are somewhat reassured’ after the G-2 meeting in late July, which flew in the face of the issuance of the Chinese ultimatum demanding completion of the payouts by close of business on 7th August, suggested friction within the highest reaches of the Obama Administration over how it can in fact extricate itself from the terrifying mess it has wilfully permitted to develop,

URGENT BUSINESS FOR MANDELSON IN CORFU
Secondly a curious sequence of events involving Lord (Jacob) Rothschild surfaced in the London press during the first and second weeks of August. The odd context here was that every summer, a bizarre, fleeting ‘power struggle’ materialises in the British capital when the Prime Minister du jour goes away on his summer holidays.

Specifically, various unsavoury characters holding high office jostle to take their turns ‘standing in’ for the Prime Minister at Number Ten Downing Street.

On this occasion, we had the pretty odious, self-important feminist ‘Deputy Leaderine’, Harriet Harman, who appeared in the top slot and advertised the innumerable bees in her bonnet for a number of days. She was supposed to have scarpered on Sunday 9th August, to make way for the next in line, the Rothschild agent, Lord Mandelson. Instead of which, the wayward Ms. Harman, having blown her own trumpet to the boredom of everyone, disappeared herself on vacation on Thursday 6th August, four days early (because no-one was listening).

This meant that the parcel was abruptly handed ‘prematurely’ to his Lordship – who, however, was discovered to be staying with Lord Rothschild on his estate on the Mediterranean island of Corfu (a fact subsequently confirmed after enterprising press photographers crept up on Rothschild and Mandelson in the dark, with the resulting picture appearing in the Times, London, on 10th August) (6). It turned out that Mandelson did not return to London until the end of the weekend – indicating rather clearly that it was more important for him to remain in Jacob Rothschild’s presence than it was for him to be seen entering Number Ten Downing Street.

Now why would this be? The ground, we suggest, had suddenly shifted violently beneath the feet of both their Lordships. For Lord Rothschild has provided banking services galore to the George H. W. Bush Financial Crime Family’s operations, which have effectively been severely battered by events [see above] and whose ‘day is decidedly over’.

Moreover there are indications that Lord Rothschild, seeing the writing on the wall, is hastening to close down hedge fund operations: for instance, Atticus LP, a Rothschild-linked hedge fund run by Tim Barakett and with which Nathaniel Rothschild is associated, is closing down. This and various other developments indicate that those on the inside track recognise that hedge funds are in the firing line, so that those hedge funds that The Financial Times complacently reports are prospering this year, may be living on borrowed time.

EUROPHILIAC MANDELSON SUDDENLY CHANGES HIS E.U. TUNE
In parallel with all this, President Sarkozy of France and the former Communist Youth Agitprop Secretary at East Berlin’s Karl Marx University, Chancellor Angela Merkel, told the G-20 summit held in London on 2nd April 2009 that all hedge funds should be ‘regulated and controlled’. As a consequence, the European Commission has issued a draft Directive that would compel hedge funds to maintain higher levels of capital, cap their debts, and disclose much more information.

This has had the remarkable ‘unintended consequence’ that the arch-Europhile ideologist, Lord Mandelson, a former European Commissioner, no doubt prompted by Lord Rothschild, is reported to be preparing a ‘hands-on’ lobbying operation AGAINST the draft EC Directive on hedge funds – representing a complete and embarrassing volte face from Mandelson’s usual tiresome ideological commitment to the oppressive European Union Collective.

ROTHSCHILD, MANDELSON, OSBORNE AND DERIPASKA – AGAIN
Another interesting feature here was that also present in Corfu were George Osborne, the Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, and none other than that notorious KGB criminalist oligarch, Oleg Deripaska – one of the 100 top criminalist KGB officers into whose hands the assets of the Soviet Party-State were ‘privatised’ for the time being, pending the inevitable time when the Party-State would claim back its assets with compound interest, in accordance with ‘the Party’s Gold’ syndrome (7) . Our list of the 100 KGB criminal oligarchs, which includes Rothschild’s friend Oleg Deripaska, is shown in Note 8 (8) below.

• Osborne is believed to be the intelligence handler for the current leader of the Conservative Party, David Cameron (which is why, when Osborne ‘messes up’, nothing happens), while Lord Mandelson is likewise a handler for Gordon Brown (ditto); and both are Rothschild agents.

In the summer of 2008, Deripaska, Osborne, Nathaniel Rothschild and, by association, Mandelson, were embroiled in an unseemly public spat after a similar stay on the Rothschilds’ Corfu estate had hit the headlines. As that sequence unravelled, glimpses of Deripaska’s unsavoury past surfaced briefly in the media, tarnishing all concerned, especially Osborne.

But this year, no repetition of these dimensions surfaced in the British media at all – despite the reality that Deripaska is as unsavoury as KGB officers come. He is thought to have replaced the jailed Mikhail Khodorkovsky in Rothschild’s circle. Khodorkovsky operated at one time a dubious Caribbean bank named European Union Bank, used by one or more corrupt CIA operatives.

TENSIONS BETWEEN RAHM EMMANUEL AND BINYAMIN NETANYAHU
Thirdly, it has been observed by several analysts that tension is evident between the Mossad (Irgun) operative who is, scandalously, currently Obama’s White House Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, and the current Israeli Prime Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, who is ‘not Irgun’.

Given Rahm Emanuel’s Chicago connections, and the important rôle played there by the Russian mafiya through which the covert Soviet GRU’s long-range revenge ‘Blowback’ operation against the United States is being manipulated with the full cooperation of the Obama White House and the US Treasury if the contemplated heist is implemented, indications of profound strategic differences between Emanuel and Netanyahu suggest the likelihood of fatal divisions within Israeli intelligence which may turn out to be a crucial restraining factor in this devil’s kitchen. We shall see.

AND FINALLY: THE AFGHANISTAN ISSUE BOILS OVER
Our unanswered question last summer to the British Ministry of Defence ‘what are we doing in Afghanistan’, is now the primary UK press headline issue, with our 200th solider having died last week. As previously reported, we told the MOD that if they refrained from answering our question, we would be forced to conclude that our interim assessment that we are in Afghanistan to help the corrupt Americans to grab and retain permanent control over the heroin trade, is correct.

• The Ministry of Defence didn’t correct us, because if they were to do so, they would be lying.

On 13th August, The Times, London, carried a large colour photograph of the greatly loved veteran British Forces’ sweetheart and songstress, Vera Lynn, above the headline: ‘Dame Vera: “I don’t know what we are doing in Afghanistan”’.

Nor, apparently, does anyone else – except the Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, who suddenly surfaced from his holidays to express his ‘sadness’ that the 200th British soldier had died of his wounds – adding that it was necessary for Britain to remain in Afghanistan in order to ‘make the country safer’ in the future: the kind of thing George W. Bush used to say.

But that is NOT A PROPER EXPLANATION. Safer from what? And why haven’t the British people been told, just as WE haven’t been told, what on earth we are doing in that god-forsaken place?

• If the diabolical devaluation sabotage swindle goes ahead, as is being planned, British troops will be pulled out of Afghanistan soon enough.

Cooperation with the United States will have to cease. We won’t be able to afford it.

• LATE NEWS:
However the British Foreign Office appears to have plenty of money to squander on campaigns to ‘support progress’ by financing ‘gay pride marches’ and legal challenges to any complaints about homosexual acts in countries such as Jamaica, Ghana and Nigeria, where such disgusting, aberrant behaviour is prohibited. The Foreign Office is targeting both Commonwealth and East European countries to teach males there how to fornicate with each other.

Thus the British Government is wilfully engaged in promoting a repulsive, filthy practice which, if described graphically, would make the reader sick – indicating that the Brown Government, headed by a closet homosexual, is aggressively promoting perverse, reprobate behaviour and calling evil good, and good evil [see above]. The Foreign Office Minister concerned, the previously unheard-of Chris Bryant, is a former Anglican curate. He was ridiculed for sending a picture of himself in his underpants to a friend via a homosexual dating website six years ago.

In addition to turning its priorities upside down (in conformity with the revolutionary norm), it is clear that the British Foreign Office, as we have suggested before, is overdue to be completely shut down, as it manifestly has nothing better to do: so it is filling its time in with shoving a filthy, decadent, sterile and unhealthy practice down the throats of foreign and Commonwealth countries (9) . Not unsurprisingly, such countries are repelled by this craven British official behaviour.

THE DOCUMENTATION THAT WE FLAGGED EARLIER
We now append documented information which, as mentioned earlier, cannot be elaborated upon for the benefit of the lay reader, but which pertains specifically to the matters described above, and which will be understood by the equivalent of those whom Lenin called ‘the interested’.

(A) Extract from Affidavit signed by Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., President, Pennsylvania Investments, Inc., on 5th September 2008, and notarised by Raemarie T. Kovaly, Notary Public, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, City of Erie, Erie County, commission expires August 03, 2012:

‘I asked if the “Settlement” would involve the “Wanta Plan” deposit into Pennsylvania Investments, Inc.’s securities account at Morgan Stanley, NYC, that was set up specifically for this transaction. He responded that “they are not going to allow the deposit into the account and the use of Pennsylvania Investments for the “Wanta Plan”. However, “we” would be making use of the account. “We” was not defined as to who or what.

On September 4, 2008, between approximately 4:16pm EDT and 4:45pm EDT, I placed a telephone call to Mr Thomas J. Melville, Jr. [Ref: Wanta v. Paulson, et al., Exhibit A: #20, #30, #32, #33, #36, and #41] to discuss the aforementioned items regarding the “Wanta Plan” deposit and Due Diligence Documentation, et al. During the conversation, Mr Melville stated the following:

(a) Basel-II was met and funded on August 29, 2008;
(b) Tax Shelter Accounts for the funds relating to the Wanta Tax Payment are being set up now;
(c) A large proportion of the Settlement Funds would remain in the United States Treasury, and thereby, fund several funded programs “In Trust” from the US Treasury;
(d) He was told to find and “bring in” qualified people to run the Capital Markets Funds,
under his direction;
(e) He knew nothing of the Five Hundred Billion USD Capital Markets Payable, the Joint Venture Programme Letter issued by Ambassador Wanta on January 2, 2008, or the signed Corporate Payment Instructions conveying the Joint venture Funding dated July 9, 2007.
(f) He was told that “all payment documents signed by Lee (Ambassador Wanta), would be paid with an accompanied non-disclosure document signed by the payee”, because no-one wants word of unfulfilled commitments in the public arena.

I advised Mr Melville to ask his contact at US Treasury Compliance, a.k.a. “J.B.” (who also reports to the International Court of Justice and the World Court), who the World Court, HMQ, and the G-7 nations had directed to operate the US Dollar Refunding Program via the “Wanta Plan” Capital Markets commitment, per the January 2, 2008 Joint Venture Program confirmation letter issued by Ambassador Wanta to Madame Wu and Ambassador Zhou Wenzhang of the People’s Republic of China, and to the respective G-7 nations.

I also advised Mr Melville to tell “J.B.” that if the $500 billion funding commitment were not met by the Settlement, I would have no option but to seek enforcement from the World Court and HMQ, since the Six Point Two Trillion USD funding source is a “loan” via the Bank of England – executed and transferred, with Levy, to the Bank of New York Mellon on 19-20 June 2007.

Mr Melville said that he would inform “J.B.” at US Treasury Compliance of this information.

A facsimile copy of this affirmation shall have the same effect and force as an original.

I, Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., President of Pennsylvania Investments, Inc., located at 1157 West 7th Street, Erie, PA 16502, United States Passport No. 205125335, do heareby swear and affirm that the above information is true and factual.

[Signed]
Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S.
President, Pennsylvania Investments, Inc.
[Notarised as stated above]
5th September 2008.

(B)
Delmarva Timber Trust (R.E.I.T.)
Home & Commercial Investors (R.E.I.T.) Ltd.
Office of the Secretary
1157 West 7th Street
Erie, PA 16502
Phone: 814-455 9218
Fax: 814-453 4453

Date: 25 May 2001
To: The Honorable Paul H. O’Neill
Secretary of the Treasury
US Department of the Treasury
Treasury Annex
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington DC 20220, USA

Ref: FAC No. IQ-191461 and:
Mr Charles “Owen” Meddles/Delmarva Timber Trust (R.E.I.T.)

Re:
Encl:
(1) Letter from OFAC (Acting) Chief of Licensing to Delmarva Timber Trust dated 15 May 2001;
(2) Letter from Delmarva Timber Trust to OFAC: Mr Paul Broderick; dated 4 May 2001;
(3) Letter from Mr Yousef M. Abdul-Rauhmaiv to Mr “Owen” Meddles dated 13 February 1990;
(4) Agreement dated 28 May 2000 between Mr Donald A, Meddles and Uniglobe Limited/
Mr Garas/Mr Blackwell.

Sir:

This letter seeks clarification of the following issues:
(i) The status of the FAC No. IQ-191461 License Application;
(ii) A determination as to why the 13 February 1990 letter from Mr Yousef M. Abdul-Rauhmaiv (Enclosure 3) is not sufficient evidence for the existence of the named London accounts within Rafidian Bank sub-accounts;
(iii) Whether the US Government desires to deny the Beneficiaries of Mr “Owen” Meddles the right to secure and receive the Trust Res of Delmarva Timber Trust (R.E.I.T,)/Home and Commercial Investors (R.E.I.T.) Ltd./Mr Charles “Owen” Meddles, et al; and:
(iv) Whether the US Government desires an amicable resolution or that these issues be decided in open court.

The last communiqué from OFAC (Enclosure 1) has left us totally unclear as to who issued this letter, and whether the application has been “denied” or “ignored” due to the amount of United States dollars claimed (USD 173 billion plus interest). Although this amount is in Off-Balance Sheet accounts, the Trust has been informed by the banks that such amounts do exist in these accounts (Enclosure 4).

The source of these funds has been detailed (see Enclosure 2) as those funds resulting from Mr Meddles’s close association with the late Mr William J. Casey, the “Enterprise” corporations, and former President George H. W. Bush. This association, as well as the authorities under the National Security Directive 26, authorized “Owen” Meddles to direct a commodities and arms manufacturing operation that included: Rafidain Bank, ABN-AMRO Bank, Matrix-Churchill, and SMS Hasencleaver GmbH. As stated in Enclosure 2, the material sold to Iraq dealt with “dual-use” exports and the purchase and resale of Rafidain Bank Letters of Credit by Mr Meddles, et al.

The funds were placed in the sub-accounts of Mr Yousef M. Abdul-Rauhmaiv – at the direction of Mr “Owen” Meddles in February 1990. Enclosure 3 identifies the account numbers and the sub-account bank names in a letter to Mr “Owen” (Meddles), dated 13 February 1990.

Since we have documents supporting that a sum of USD 173 billion was deposited, within Rafidian Bank sub-accounts within the London Branches of Chase Manhattan Bank, The Bank of New York, The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi, Manufacturers Hanover Trust Company, and The Bank of America, Enclosures 3 and 4, it is the Trust’s position that such funds (or a portion thereof) should be released as a result of the 25 April 2001 License Application.

These funds are not “Iraqi Funds” as Enclosure 1 implies, but are those belonging to Mr “Owen” Meddles and his Beneficiaries, i.e. Delmarva Timber Trust (R.E.I.T.), et al..

The question – whether the US Government desires to deny the Beneficiaries of Mr “Owen” Meddles the right to secure and receive the Trust Res of Delmarva Timber Trust/Home and Commercial Investors (R.E.I.T.) Ltd/ Mr Charles “Owen” meddles, et al. – is the result of the following events:

(1) That Mr Charles “Owen” Meddles was a member of a Special Operations unit formed with the purpose of financing covert operations during the Eisenhower Administration and continued until his death on 17 October 1992;
(2) That Mr “Owen” Meddles was instrumental in the creation and funding of the following entities, but NOT limited to: Transcon Investment Trust, et al.; Home and Commercial Investors, et al; Home and Commercial Investors (R.E.I.T.) Ltd., et al.; Alpha Funding, et al.; Alpha, et al.; Alpha Holding, et al.; Lasmo and/or Lasmo Holdings, et al.; AGC, et al.; CIT Financial, et al.; Meridian Investment, et al.; Wilmington Trust, et al.; Genesis Group, et al.; and others numbering more than 37 (37);
(3) That Mr Donald A. Meddles was given assurances, by various US Government agencies, between December 1999 and December 2000, that resolution of these issues had been agreed upon, i.e. Enclosure 4;
(4) That the failure of the aforementioned Agreement caused the Regorganization of the Trust(s),
9 January 2001; and:
(5) That these events prompted the submission of the 25 April 2001 OFAC Application for License, FAC No. IQ-191461.

Therefore, the last issue of clarification is: whether the US Government desires an amicable resolution of these issues or that they be decided in open court. The Trust has resolved to find an amicable solution to these issues, since Mr “Owen” Meddles served his post with distinction. However, if this appeal does not result in an accommodation, the Trust has now unanimously resolved to proceed and seek resolution either via US Courts or the [appropriate] Court in London. The latter court has been advocated by the bank officers of the named London accounts.

The obligation of resolution has been placed upon and accepted by the Trustees of the Trust(s) on behalf of the Beneficiaries of Mr “Owen” Meddles. It is our belief that the United States Government shares this obligation – due [to] Mr Meddles’ Beneficiaries – as befitting that of an honoured warrior of the Service.

Respectfully,

[Signed]
Michael C. Cottrell
Secretary/Trustee

Notes and References:

(1). On another website, an ANONYMOUS writer who cannot be held accountable for what he writes because he is anonymous posted [16th August] words to the effect: ‘Christopher Story has finally understood that Obama is a problem’.

FACTS: On 29th January 2009, the $14.0+ trillion was finally removed from US access as WE ALONE reported, because, as we pointed out, President Barack Obama, having been given the benefit of the doubt and ample opportunity to fulfil his pre-election undertakings, had failed to honour his commitments. We reported all this at the time, thereby indicating in plain English that we were well aware that Obama ‘is a problem’.

The Editor gave Obama ‘space’ out of respect due from a ‘foreigner’ to an incoming ‘President’ of the United States. If we are going to be prominently criticised without a cause for what we publish by cowardly anonymous sources, it would be greatly appreciated if they would kindly get their facts straight before traducing the ability of the Editor of this service to understand what is going on.

(2). Claire Sterling, ‘Thieves’ World’, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1994, page 113.

(3). Claire Sterling, a CIA agent, is believed to have been ‘taken out’ by criminal elements on FBI instructions after she had exposed dimensions of the criminal-intelligence nexus in her book ‘Thieves’ World’.

(4). Some US websites, evidently ignorant about both spelling and monetary affairs, have been spelling Basel (the Swiss city of Basle (French) and Basel (German)) as Basil, Basal, Basel, you name it, revealing their ‘Redneck’ origins while preaching to readers in a dogmatic manner as though they are authorities of some kind or another. It is suggested that these people should brush up their spelling and geography before making fools of themselves any further.

(5). Earlier reports to the effect that the countries had been paid have since been unmasked as Bush Crime Syndicate disinformation. As previously noted, given the intensive disinformation and diversion barrage designed to cover up this criminality, it has not always been possible to identify lies until some time after the event.

(6). The photograph of Lord Rothschild and Lord Mandelson in Corfu appeared in The Times, Monday 10th August, on page 3.

(7). In 1986, a book appeared in Kiev entitled ‘The Party’s Gold’, by Igor Bunich. It related how Stalin had instructed the head of his secret police to report the details of the secret Swiss bank accounts of all the Comrades. The secret police chief du jour, Gengrigh Yagoda, duly complied, furnishing his fellow Jew Josef Djiugashvili-Kochba (Stalin) with the secret Swiss bank account coordinates of all the Comrades, with the exception of his own.

But Stalin had also issued the same orders to his separate super-secret intelligence operation, which produced the same list, but including the numbered bank account details of the police chief. Yagoda therefore received the customary bullet through the temples along with the rest of the Comrades. The point of the book’s appearance in 1986, of course, was to signal to all those whom Lenin would have called ‘the interested’ that a similar operation was contemplated for the future. In the light of recent and ongoing criminal finance developments in the United States, it might argued that Stalin’s brutal behaviour in this context was perhaps not so reprehensible after all.

(8). The 100 top covert Soviet KGB oligarchs, in alphabetical order, are as follows:
Abramov, Alexander
Abramovich, Roman
Agalarov, Aras
Akhmedov, Farkhad
Alekperov. Vagit
Anisimov, Vasily
Aven, Piotr
Balaeskul, Vladimir
Baltiisky, Polimetall
Baturina, Yelena
Bekker, Arngolt
Berezkin, Grigory
Berezovsky, Boris
Bogdanov, Vladimir
Boiko, Oleg
Bronshtein, Alexander
Brudno, Mikhail
Chernoi, Lev
Chigirinsky, Chalva
Davidovich, David
Deripaska, Oleg
Dubov, Vladimir
Fridman, Mikhail
Golubev, Yury
Golubovich, Alexei
Goncharuk, Alexander
Gorbatovsky, Alexander
Gorodilov, Andrei
Gudaitis, Alexei
Gushchin, Yury
Gusinsky, Vladimir
Gutseriyev, Mikhail
Iorikh, Vladimir
Ivanenko, Viktor
Ivanishvili, Boris
Kamenshchik, Dmitry
Kantor, Vyacheslav
Kazakov, Viktor
Kerimov, Suleiman
Khairullin, Airat
Khan, Gherman
Khodorkovsky, Mikhail
Klyuka, Fyodor
Kogan, Vladimir
Kosogov, Andrei
Kremer, Vladimir
Kuzmichev, Alexei
Lebedev, Alexander
Lebedev, Platon
Leiviman, Alexander
Lisin, Vladimir
Makarov, Igor
Makhlai, Vladimir
Makhmudov, Iskander
Melnichenko, Andrei
Mikhelson, Leonid
Mordashov, Alexei
Moshkovich, Vadim
Muravlenko, Sergei
Naivalt, Igor
Nevzlin, Leonid
Novitsky, Yevgeny
Oif, Valery
Olkhovik, Yevgeny
Popov, Sergei
Potanin, Vladimir
Prokhorov, Mikhail
Pugachev, Sergei
Pumpyansky, Dmitry
Pushkin, Alexander
Rashnikov, Viktor
Rybolovlev, Dmitry
Safin, Ralif
Shakhnovsky, Vasily
Shefler, Yury
Sheremet, Vyacheslav
Shtyrov, Vyacheslav
Smolensky, Alexander
Smushkin, Zakhar
Sovmen, Khazret
Suslov [Jr.], Mikhail
Tariko, Rustam
Tetyukhin, Vladislav
Tsvetkov, Nikolai
Tynkovan, Alexander
Usmanov, Alisher
Vavilov, Andrei
Vekselberg, Viktor
Veremeyenko, Sergei
Vyakhirev, Rem
Yakobashvili, David
Yakovlev, Igor
Yevtushenkov, Vladimir
Zimin, Dmitry
Zingarevich, Boris
Zingarevich, Mikhail
Zivenko, Sergei
Zubitsky, Boris
Zyuzin, Igor

(9) Minister takes ‘pink diplomacy’ to anti-gay nations’, The Sunday Times, 16th August 2009.

• COPYRIGHT NOTICE: The Editor and his companies have taken measures to obtain protection and recompense for the gross breaches of copyright material, books and works owned by this service, our companies, the Editor and Author, and the Authors whose interests we must protect. In the first place, a pirate platform service in the United States has received a demand for a very large sum of money to compensate us for the wanton stealing of three of our books, the consequence of which barbaric acts has been effectively to destroy our book publishing business. Secondly, the agents for the Google Settlement have been specifically informed by registered mail that we have written, also by registered mail, to the four universities and one public library who have entered into an agreement with Google under the so-called ‘Google Settlement’.

The universities in question are: Oxford, Stanford, Harvard and Michigan; and the public library is the New York Public Library. Our three companies have opted out of the Google Settlement, which is anyway now in some disarray.

These and related parties have been advised that if ANY of our works, published by all three of our companies, not just the intelligence books company which has already been severely ransacked, are assaulted by copyright pirates, we will take all legal measures open to us to enforce our rights and those of our authors. The rationale underlying this scourge is the false and spurious one that the intellectual property of the whole of humanity is the property of the ‘global commons’: a dirty, revolutionary piece of hypocrisy and subversion, the underlying purpose of which is to destroy small publishers so that there will be no dissenting voices to The New Underworld Order.

When time permits, we will be providing ‘further and better particulars’ concerning this outrageous revolutionary development. In the meantime, those amoral persons and parties who have so far downloaded our works are hereby warned that every single download will be traced, and that they risk being pursued for very large damages for gross and insolent breaches of our copyright.

Anyone wishing to reproduce the important anti-World Revolution article posted here must contact the Editor for written permission, on the understanding that a precise form of words that we will specify must accompany any reposting and that the entire article, with credits, must be displayed. Any deviation will be treated as a breach of copyright and dealt with accordingly [see above].

• ROGUE’S GALLERY OF DECEIVERS: Given the deceit and abuse that has been meted out to the Editor of this service since we began these investigations in 2002, the Editor plans to expose, by name, each of the primary perpetrators of deception against us, including a UK-based deceiver recently unmasked who sought to extort money for delivering sensitive packages that he never delivered. This character has been reported to the Police, and a Major Crime Book Number will be sought with a request for an investigation. The relevant documents have been sent by registered and signed-for mail, to the Special Branch officer concerned. Those who have deceived us will be made to endure the grave consequences of their serial duplicity, starting with Leo Wanta, to whom the Editor lent $35,000 to pay for his release from irregular probation, which should have been paid back on 11th June 2007 but concerning which nothing has been heard. All other collaborators and operatives who tried to deceive us at various stages will also be exposed for their deception.

LIST OF U.S. STATUTES, SECURITIES REGULATIONS AND LEGAL PRINCIPLES OF WHICH THE CRIMINALISTS, ASSOCIATES AND ALL THE MAIN FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS REMAIN IN BREACH:

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:

THEFT BY DECEPTION:

• “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:

• “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’.

U.S. SECURITIES REGULATIONS OF WHICH INSTITUTIONS
HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO BE IN BREACH [SEE REPORTS]:

• 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.

U.S. LAWS ROUTINELY BREACHED BY THE CRIMINAL OPERATIVES AND INSTITUTIONS:

• Annunzio-Wylie Anti-Money Laundering Act
• Anti-Drug Abuse Act
• Applicable international money laundering restrictions
• Bank Secrecy Act
• 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.

ADVERTISEMENT: INTERNET SECURITY SOLUTION

NON-U.S. INTERNET SECURITY SOLUTION CD AVAILABLE: FAR BETTER THAN NORTON ETC
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. The program has an invaluable ‘Preview before downloading’ feature.

*VISTA: Virtual Instant Surveillance Tactical Application.

U.S. FRAUD SCHEME LAUNCHED MONDAY IN BIG TROUBLE

QUESTION: WHAT IS THE ‘PRICE’ OF FRAUDULENT ‘ASSETS’ THAT HAVE NO VALUE?

Thursday 26 March 2009 00:01

MISPLACED WALL STREET GLEE AT FRAUD AGAINST U.S. TAXPAYERS

MID-SEPTEMBER ‘LOCKDOWN’ RECONFIRMED AS MOMENT OF TRUTH

INTERNATIONAL CURRENCY REVIEW DECONSTRUCTION OF FRAUDULENT FINANCE

MERKEL ORDERED REVENGE MURDER OF BRITISH TROOPS IN NORTHERN IRELAND

REVIVING THE CARCASS OF THE EXPIRED DERIVATIVES SECTOR

OBAMA SIGNS LOMBARD ODIER DARIER HENTSCH UP FOR ROLLING TRADING PROGRAM

PERVERSE U.S. OFFICIAL STRATEGY DOOMED TO FAILURE

BEST INDEPENDENT FINANCIAL BRAINS AREN’T BUYING IT

GOVERNMENT ARRANGED FOR THE BANKS TO STIFF THE CHINESE

BANKS USE BASEL-II AND TARP AS THEIR PRETEXT FOR ILLEGAL SEIZURE

CORRUPT GOVERNMENT AND CORRUPT BANKS WORKING TOGETHER

SO, WHAT ARE THE CHINESE GOING TO DO ABOUT THIS CRISIS?

BRITISH AND CHINESE HAVE BEEN TOO POLITE FOR TOO LONG

CONGRESS CANNOT CHANGE BASEL-II RULES! THAT’S THE POINT

BANKS ‘BLACKMAILING’ GOVERNMENT: BY PRIOR AGREEMENT

TOP OFFICERS OF THE BIG BANKS SHOULD HAVE BEEN ARRESTED

HOW THE CHINESE REACT TO THIS U.S. SCAM IS WHAT MATTERS NOW

G-20 MEETING IN LONDON WILL BE A FLOP

CRIMINALISTS DON’T CARE ABOUT PONZI VICTIM SUICIDES

THE MAD INTENTION: TO MAKE THE ENTIRE FAKE DERIVATIVES SECTOR WHOLE AGAIN

IS THIS BEING DONE ON PURPOSE?

IT’S NOT ‘THE ECONOMY, STUPID’: ITS ‘THE DERIVATIVES, STUPID’

• 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.

NEW REPORT STARTS HERE:

MISPLACED WALL STREET GLEE AT FRAUD AGAINST U.S. TAXPAYERS
On Monday 23rd March, as everyone knows, the Dow Jones Industrial Average soared by 6.8%, or 497.48 points, after details were released of how the Geithner Treasury proposes to relieve the criminal banks of the proceeds of their Fraudulent Finance operations, also known as ‘troubled assets’. TV screens were plastered with the unsavoury spectacle of brokers hugging each other, clasping hands and slapping each other on the back with joy.

Wall Street was ecstatic over the latest instalment of the gigantic fraud which the Obama-Biden-Geithner cabal have concocted to achieve the real objective of reigniting the derivatives trading carousel to inject value into worthless assets, lurking behind the public consumption objective of ‘freeing up the banks to start lending again’.

And, as usual, investors were jumping to knee-jerk conclusions, as was made clear by the crass reporting of this episode by The New York Times, which included comments such as the following attributed to T. Timothy Ryan Jr., President of the Securities and Financial Markets Association, who said the opposite of the truth of the matter:

‘For the first time in seven months, I can say they’ve done it right’.

MID-SEPTEMBER ‘LOCKDOWN’ RECONFIRMED AS MOMENT OF TRUTH
Before we continue, note the ‘seven months’ period mentioned here. Seven months takes us back to 10th-12th September 2008, when the $14.0 trillion of sovereign and HM The Queen’s LOAN funds were placed into ‘lockdown’ following the advice that we felt compelled to provide concerning the outrageous ongoing exploitation of The Queen’s LOAN money, which had been languishing within the Treasury Custodial Account network since it was sent over by the Bank of England on 19th-20th June 2007 to Bank of New York Mellon, whereupon the funds were hijacked for carousel financing purposes contrary to the instructions of the owner(s) of the funds.

The entire $14.0 trillion was finally removed from access by US parties altogether on 29th January 2009, after it had become clear that President B. Obama was in breach of the undertakings that he signed during his European trip last year, to effect the releases and proceed with the transparent Group of Seven-Approved Dollar private sector System Refunding Programme agreed upon by the G-7 financial powers in 2007 and 2008.

The Editor’s ‘exchange’ between Her Majesty The Queen and President Obama, published with the report dated 24th March 2009, summarises the present ‘state of play’ with respect to the proposal to proceed with the Refunding Programme independently of US Government intermeddling, from London. It is appended to this report as an Appendix for your convenience.

Mr Timothy Ryan Jr.’s reference to ‘seven months’ indicates what we know to be the case, namely that the ‘lockdown’ of the $14.0 trillion was the crucial factor that triggered the showdown.

It is also clear that because that happened, the White House, both under Bush II and Obama, are wilfully determined to ‘do it their way’ in accordance with the wishes of the money center banks – ‘their way’ involving the revalidation and revaluation of derivatives assets that are worth nothing because they are all NON-RECOURSE. This is clearly demonstrated, with the aid of charts, in the latest issue of International Currency Review [Volume 34, #2], which was mailed worldwide on 18th March 2009, just as the worst criminal event recorded to date in this crisis, apart from the stealing of The Queen’s gold, was about to ‘pop’ (see below).

INTERNATIONAL CURRENCY REVIEW DECONSTRUCTION OF FRAUDULENT FINANCE
To the extent that we have been able to clarify matters here, it is therefore a fact that every major government, institution and central bank in the world that matters has our deconstruction, in words and pictures, of the Fraudulent Finance Ponzi carousel – so that any attempt to smother reality is a complete impossibility. The issue’s theme is Systemic Fraudulent Finance and The Legalisation of Financial Corruption – which is exactly what the Geithner Treasury and the Obama White House are attempting to achieve. There is no change whatsoever from the previous Administration.

Now, the pack of hedge fund ‘big noises’ who have said they will ‘support’ the Geithner Fraudulent Finance Upgrade is headed by Bill Gross, of Pimco, which ‘works for’ George Bush Sr.’s criminal network, and therefore meets the requirements of the Nazi bank which stands behind this crisis – namely Deutsche Bank. It will be recalled that the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, is bribed by Bush Sr. to protect his network’s assets within the German banking system.

MERKEL ORDERED REVENGE MURDER OF BRITISH TROOPS IN NORTHERN IRELAND
So it was no surprise to us when, all of a sudden a few weeks ago, a number of British troops in Northern Ireland were shot dead in cold blood at point-blank range. Why did this suddenly happen? Because, we are advised by UK intelligence sources, the German Chancellor, in deference to DVD, Dachau, gave the instructions for the Irish terrorist network, an instrument of long-range German Abwehr pressure against the United Kingdom, to be re-activated.

And why did Frau Merkel give these instructions?

Because the DVD and their associates inside Deutsche Bank had worked out that the events of 10th-12th September last year represented the gravest threat to the DVD’s operations and to its primary institution, Deutsche Bank, since the Second World War,

In parenthesis, it will be readily recalled that immediately after the 7/7 bombing of the London Underground and a bus in Central London, the order for which was given by the former French President Chirac on behalf of the Franco-German alliance, i.e. DVD, the Germans were told by a furious British Government (even though Tony Blair was totally compromised by both the Bush Crime Family and the European Union: see our report dated 12th October 2005: Archive) that if these terrorist acts, including the atrocities that were still ongoing in Northern Ireland, which unpenetrated components of UK intelligence knew were controlled ultimately by DVD, did not cease forthwith, Britain would initiate measures to exit from the European Union Collective.

Rather than risk facing the collapse of their long-range strategic deception entrapment operation calling itself the European Union, the Germans complied, and called off their controlled ‘assets’ in the Irish theatre. These were deliberately and provocatively reactivated by Chancellor Merkel the other day, in revenge for the deadly blow inflicted on the German hegemony project, by the events of 10th-12th September 2008 reported by this service.

REVIVING THE CARCASS OF THE EXPIRED DERIVATIVES SECTOR
Meanwhile the Obama-Geithner team are trying to rebuild the carcass of the exposed derivatives giga-pyramid-selling scam, despite the now deeply embedded and widely held knowledge that derivative so-called ‘Structured Products’ are worthless, and represent dead trash.

They are doing this by printing money and by creating debt out of thin air, while simultaneously operating a carousel platform which was triggered after the US Treasury found a foreign bank corrupt enough to agree to provide the foreign ‘wrap’ needed to reignite Fraudulent Finance trading under the radar, using monies that were ‘sequestered’ after the withdrawal of the $14.0 trillion on 29th January 2009, to form the basis for the secret trading operations which have been running for several weeks now at full tilt behind the scenes.

OBAMA SIGNS LOMBARD ODIER DARIER HENTSCH UP FOR ROLLING TRADING PROGRAM
The foreign bank was selected and signed up when President B. Obama arrived in Ottawa, Canada, on 19th February 2009, accompanied by the Chairman of his National Economic Council, Lawrence Summers, and the National Security Adviser, General Jim Jones. The visit, lasting seven hours, was Obama’s first trip abroad. A former US Ambassador to Canada, Gordon Griffin, made the following revealing statement about the visit:

‘There is an important “beyond Canada” component to this. Ottawa is providing a global platform’, he said. But he did not elaborate. Let us, therefore, elaborate in his stead.

The ‘important “beyond Canada”’ dimension’ referred obliquely to the signing of Lombard Odier Darier Hentsch, a very old Swiss bank, as the master counterparty for the hidden carousel trades that have been activated since shortly after that visit.

In other words, it took the Obama Administration just three weeks to find a corrupt foreign bank to do its dirty work – a display of wilful intent to engage in Fraudulent Finance on a gigantic scale (see below) in gross defiance of the Group of Seven, which had long since agreed the cost-free formula for reliquefying the US banks on-the-books – a formula which would cost the US Treasury and the taxpayer NOTHING because it would yield private sector TAXABLE REVENUE.

PERVERSE U.S. OFFICIAL STRATEGY DOOMED TO FAILURE
Instead of adopting this strategy, President Obama has knowingly adopted the perverse route to perdition, in deference to the blackmailing behaviour of the US banks: accordingly, since Obama is prepared to have the Federal Reserve lend untold volumes of fiat money creating Treasury debt in the background, he is deliberately and knowingly mortgaging the future of several generations of Americans, when he could have adopted the correct course and salvaged not only the American banking system, and economy, but the country’s battered reputation as a pariah state.

But he decided otherwise.

The Editor is perfectly well aware of allegations being made against the President of the United States, in all dimensions; but as a frequent visitor and friend of America, he considers that it would be unseemly for a ‘foreigner’ to engage in the polemical debate that is raging under that heading.

Furthermore, as a visitor, it is incumbent upon him to try to be polite about the Head of State, which is why he gave Mr Obama the ‘benefit of the doubt’ in the report dated 24th March 2009. It is not our job to enter into acrimonious internal debates that do not directly impinge upon the key vexatious INTERNATIONAL ISSUES that we have every right and a duty to our subscribers, to address. Some Americans who complained about the Editor’s ‘benefit of the doubt’ comment may have failed to take proper account of the Editor’s position here.

However given the grave INTERNATIONAL consequences of the doomed policies that President Obama is pursuing, we now have no hesitation, especially in the light of what transpired on Monday 23rd March – to be elaborated below – in stating that President Obama is engaged in Financial and Economic Fraud, not only against the American people, but against the Rest of the World, as well. We hope that this statement clarifies our position once and for all.

BEST INDEPENDENT FINANCIAL BRAINS AREN’T BUYING IT
Cutting a swathe through The New York Times’ coverage on Tuesday 24th March of the obscene outbreak of selfish euphoria on Wall Street on Monday, the following sober observations by Daniel Alpert, a Managing Director of the hedge fund Westwood Capital, stood out (in a secondary article):

‘We see another $1.5 to $2 trillion of as yet unrecognized losses from US assets still to hit global financial sector balance sheets and challenge its institutions. The near daily announcements over the past two weeks, by money center banks and finance companies, that they are making money this year on an operating income basis, have become borderline irresponsible, relative to the known continued deteriorations in value of the assets on their balance sheets and the continuing impact of a worsening recession’.

In other words, everyone’s under water: so what are they talking about?

Bearing in mind that the object of the White House exercise is FIRST OF ALL to reignite and re-start the derivatives carousel right across the board – an intention of extreme perversity, as we’ve explained – here is a deconstruction of events from 18th March 09 onwards, showing how ruthless these criminals are and why they can now be considered as dangerous as their evil predecessors.

Restarting the moribund (since 10th-12th September 2008) derivatives fraudulent money machine necessitates velocity of transactions once the pump has been primed: otherwise, in this carousel trading system, everything stalls. What the criminalist financiers NEED to reignite the system is LOADS OF NEW MONEY. This is why Geithner has come up with this scheme for new public-private partnerships, financed by fiat money generated by the Federal Reserve out of thin air but creating permanent real official debt on the other side of the balance sheet, so that the ‘private sector’ can provide the ‘new money’ that the criminalist financiers need to restart their giga-trading platform.

GOVERNMENT ARRANGED FOR THE BANKS TO STIFF THE CHINESE
We now understand that, as explained in the report dated 24th March, the Chinese parties were paid $13 trillion, between Wednesday 18th and Friday 20th March 2009, although given that the phrase ‘source of funds’ is strictly taboo now, neither we nor our sources are able to identify the complete provenance of this enormous volume of money – representing the ‘first instalment’ of the colossal sum that the Chinese are owed as explained in the preceding report.

But the Chinese parties then made the fatal mistake of agreeing to place some of these funds into a sort of ‘public-private partnership’ arrangement in the context of the latest Geithner wheeze which sent Wall Street investors into paroxysms of misplaced delight on 23rd March.

Guess what happened?

• The banks held onto the money. The banks would not release the funds repositioned with them by the Chinese parties, for the purpose for which the funds are intended. The US money center banks basically said: ‘We’re not paying anyone’.

BANKS USE BASEL-II AND TARP AS THEIR PRETEXT FOR ILLEGAL SEIZURE
Now the current Basel-II full disclosure regulations and the TARP legislation preclude the creating of non-securities such as derivatives ‘products’ for buy-sell trading operations by the new public-private partnership in which the Chinese parties were enticed to participate – thereby ‘enabling’ the banks to refuse to cooperate and to use this state of affairs as their excuse for holding onto the reinvested Chinese funds.

So, even as the Chinese parties were left understandably fuming and livid with anger at having AGAIN been defrauded by the crooks in the White House and the US Treasury, Timothy Geithner and Dr Ben Bernanke appeared before the House Banking Committee on Tuesday 24th March to ‘plead’ for changes in the banking regulations to permit ‘looser’ requirements – in other words, to ‘ask’ Congress to junk Basel-II (unspoken) so that the newly invested Chinese money could be legally deployed for the purpose intended by the Chinese after their arms had been twisted when they had demanded payment, or else they would exercise their lien over the Federal Reserve.

CORRUPT GOVERNMENT AND CORRUPT BANKS WORKING TOGETHER
Before we go any further, it needs to be understood that the criminal enterprise banks and the US Government ARE WORKING TOGETHER. This week, the big banks are the culprits. Last week, the authorities were the culprits. But now that it is the big BANKS who are illegally holding onto the Chinese money: after all, if it cannot legally (under Basel-II/TARP) be deployed for the derivatives trading purposes intended (which was a disastrous mistake on the part of the Chinese), the proper course of action for the banks would be to send the money back. But, being criminal enterprises, they have of course held onto it instead. Which was the whole purpose of the exercise.

Because the Government and the banks work together, the US authorities twisted the arms of the Chinese and persuaded them to participate in transactions KNOWING THEM TO BE ILLEGAL. To go through the motions of appearing to be ‘kosher’, Geithner and Bernanke appeared the next day before the House Banking Committee to ask the US Congress to ‘loosen the regs’ so that inter alia (unspoken, as indicated above) the Chinese derivatives trades can go ahead in the context of the latest instalment of the Geithner shambles. All very clever, very cynical, ruthless, and criminal.

SO, WHAT ARE THE CHINESE GOING TO DO ABOUT THIS CRISIS?
The central issue arising from this deplorable state of affairs can therefore be summarised in the form of the following questions:

• What are the Chinese parties intending to do, given that they have yet again been double-crossed by the US authorities but cannot blame the US authorities directly because the problem has ‘arisen within the banks’?

• And how long will the Chinese parties give the Americans before they take drastic action, as is their right, to obtain satisfaction following this latest display of outrageous criminal US official and commercial banking behaviour?

BRITISH AND CHINESE HAVE BEEN TOO POLITE FOR TOO LONG
If this Editor may now be permitted to indulge here in unsolicited advice, both the Chinese and the British parties have, in our view, been far too accommodating all along, as this crisis has expanded. The British are too accommodating because at the highest levels, business is still conducted on the basis of gentlemanly exchanges, and everyone is TOO POLITE.

• When dealing with gangsters, politeness is taken for weakness, which is why the British, too, have been repeatedly taken to the cleaners by these crooks.

The Chinese, too, are extremely polite: we know this from the impeccable manners and behaviour towards us of the Chinese Government subscribers to our printed publications. It is not for us to advise (but we hereby do so!) that when dealing with the organized criminal gangsters who have long since usurped power in the United States, politeness is a waste of time. It has its place at the beginning of a conversation: but the deceived and double-crossed Chinese parties need not now adhere to traditional, civilised cultural values when the magnitude of the crimes committed against them is known by both sides. On the contrary, a much harder line, and a willingness to adopt harsh countermeasures, is indispensable. These crooks have their weak spots, and the Chinese parties have more than enough intellectual resources to analyse their mentality correctly.

CONGRESS CANNOT CHANGE BASEL-II RULES! THAT’S THE POINT
Now it stands to reason that if the House Banking Committee were to have agreed to implement regulatory changes that fly in the face of Basel-II rules, any such changes, if agreed upon, would take weeks or months to travel through Congress. But the Committee could hardly consider any such departure. So what is the net result?

The banks get to keep a sizeable proportion of the Chinese trillions, which, you won’t be surprised to hear, they will be trading inside the Lombard Odier Darier Hentsch-wrapped derivatives carousel that was started up with the direct approval and very probably under the SIGNATURE of President Barack Hussein Obama – who, along with his Vice President Joseph Biden, has been talking up the Geithner Fraudulent Finance proposals that caused such an outbreak of unfettered joy on Wall Street. Which is another way of saying that President Barack Obama, Mr Timothy Geithner, Dr Ben Bernanke and Vice President Joe Biden, are co-conspirators in massive frauds.

Because in respect of the refusal of the banks to release the Chinese money that they have now effectively stolen, these operatives aided and abetted this latest outrageous theft, and it is clear from Obama’s visit to Canada, where he signed up Lombard Odier Darier Hentsch, that they knew precisely what they were doing all along.

BANKS ‘BLACKMAILING’ GOVERNMENT: BY PRIOR AGREEMENT
There is another way of looking at this – namely, that the banks are effectively BLACKMAILING the US Administration in accordance with the following equation:

• Get the regulations (Basel-II) loosened, and then we’ll think about releasing the Chinese monies. Unspoken: We may or may not also think about releasing other monies, especially $3.0 trillion to a US paymaster, that we were supposed to have released on 23rd March but conveniently managed to avoid doing. Also unspoken: We’ll do what we think is best for us and no-one else.

Because of course on Monday 23rd March, when payouts were widely expected, NOBODY WAS PAID because the banks kept all the money. The banks are holding a gun to the White House.

But on the other hand, the White House is quite content with this state of affairs because although that’s the way it looks, in reality the White House and the US Treasury are in cahoots with the banks because the primary object of everything Obama is doing is to reignite the derivatives carousel, which is the very opposite policy he should be pursuing.

TOP OFFICERS OF THE BIG BANKS SHOULD HAVE BEEN ARRESTED
The official response to the US money center banks’ seizure of the Chinese and other funds should have been to arrest all the senior officers of all the banks in question, and to do so in front of the TV cameras. Instead of which, co-conspirator Mr Timothy Geithner and co-conspirator Dr. Bernanke, against whom papers were served some time ago, appeared before the House Banking Committee to ask Congress’s assistance in making it possible for the banks to ‘enable the Chinese funds to be put to the use for which they were intended’. (Not really).

Except that, having got their fingers burned yet again, the Chinese parties should surely have decided by now that there is no way they will participate in ANY further US dollar transactions whatsoever – which may be why JPMorganChase has announced that it is disposing of certain shares in ICB, a Chinese institution (code for: the Chinese told them to get out of their laundry).

If we boil all this down further, we can see not only that:

• This operation against the Chinese was a deliberate dialectical operation coordinated between the Obama-Geithner team and the money center banks;

but also that:

• The banks have annexed a great deal of Chinese (and other) money that they will now be trading illegally, while at the same time they are anticipating a ‘get out of jail free card’ for their ‘virtuous’ behaviour in being ‘unable’ to release the Chinese funds for buy-sell fraudulent derivatives trade operations because to engage in such derivatives transactions (which they do all the time anyway) under Basel-II rules, would be fraud, commanding substantial jail sentences.

Geithner is a co-conspirator and a fraudster in appearing before Congress to try to get it to agree to changing the law, knowing full well that the Congress will have great difficulty conceding that it should water down Basel-II – not least because if that were to happen, all foreign banks would be precluded from dealing with the US banks under the Bank for International Settlements-brokered arrangements. Therefore, the appearance before the House Banking Committee of Geithner and Bernanke to argue for changes which Congress cannot in all ‘conscience’ (sic) possibly deliver, represented in itself a fraudulent charade.

HOW THE CHINESE REACT TO THIS U.S. SCAM IS WHAT MATTERS NOW
As we understood the situation on 25th March, the Chinese parties appear not yet to have decided how to react to this latest American official provocation. However there seems every prospect that if this hideous logjam is not broken, the Chinese will recall all debts from the dollar system. They are also talking in public about the dollar being replaced by a new international currency based on the International Monetary Fund’s Special Drawing Right (SDR) composite unit – something that cannot possibly be agreed overnight, and will take a long time to come to fruition, if it ever does. But open Chinese official talk along these lines is intended to raise the temperature of the ‘debate’,

Once again, diplomatic behaviour seems quite out of place here. It would be preferable for the Chinese to publicise what has been going on. The Editor cannot see why the power of genuine publicity cannot be put to good use in intergovernmental relations.

Instead of fighting these swine behind diplomatic cover stories such as the tensions in the South China Sea, why not go public with the necessary criminal information?

In the unlikely event of this further unsolicited advice being taken, the proper course of action must be to publicise precise details of the relevant aborted transactions (dates, precise times, references and so on) so that nothing can be challenged.

Given the extreme gravity of these abominations, publicising them might do more to bring these American official crooks and criminal banking enterprises to their senses (if they have any) than any other course the Chinese could take.

G-20 MEETING IN LONDON WILL BE A FLOP
By extension, we can now safely predict that the next conference on the calendar, the Group of 20 meeting in the London area, will be a bitter flop. The wronged Chinese parties have no incentive left to assist these US criminals out of the mess they have willfully expanded under President B. Obama. And here’s another point to bear in mind.

These crooks are only too delighted when observers such as the Editor of this service focus, for instance, on the Madoff scandal, the Stanford dimension, or the Friehling indictment.

Why? Because these developments represent, for these criminal operatives, something called COLLATERAL DAMAGE. They couldn’t care less about Madoff or his victims, or about Stanford ditto (although they took good care to murder Stanford’s sole accountant on 1st January 2009, the day after his contract with Stanford expired). So, while we are publishing reports about these PAST Fraudulent Finance operations, the criminalists in power and in the criminal banks are well away with their new Fraudulent Finance operations.

CRIMINALISTS DON’T CARE ABOUT PONZI VICTIM SUICIDES
The other day the Editor received yet another email from one of the 320,000 Ponzi victims, asking whether, in the Editor’s opinion, the money ‘due’ on the ‘humanitarian’ or ‘prosperity’ programs would ever be paid. In the first place, this is an unfair question: it is not the Editor’s responsibility to offer ‘opinions’ on other people’s problems (although the Editor does know the true answer to that question). But more to the point, the correspondent reminded the Editor of what he already knows – that many Ponzi victims have committed suicide, died in despair, suffered family breakdowns or other traumas as a direct consequence of the despicable behaviour of these criminals, who appear to have stolen ALL their money – consistently with the classic Ponzi scamming model. We started explaining this in the first quarter of 2007, long before the word Ponzi became almost as common as deleted expletives following the Madoff explosion: but the affected victims didn’t want to know.

But the point here is this: do these unspeakable criminals care a fig about the fact that an unknown number of these unfortunate people have committed suicide or died in despair?

Need we stress that the criminal operatives, having their consciences seared through with a hot iron, are completely indifferent to the suffering they have caused? True Christians know that these people will perish in hell for eternity – a fact that many of the perpetrators themselves also know full well, which is one reason why, psychologically, the fools think they have nothing left to lose by carrying on with their corrupt ‘business as usual’.

THE MAD INTENTION: TO MAKE THE ENTIRE DERIVATIVES SECTOR WHOLE AGAIN
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.

IS THIS BEING DONE ON PURPOSE?
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.

BANKS SUPERFLUOUS TO REQUIREMENTS
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.

IT’S NOT ‘THE ECONOMY, STUPID’: ITS ‘THE DERIVATIVES, STUPID’
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.

AND NOTHING ELSE.

• CMKM UPDATE:
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.

• LORD MYNERS UPDATE:
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.

APPENDIX ONE:
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’].

INTENTION HAD BEEN TO GET STARTED WITH CHINESE MONEY
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]:
FACE-TO-FACE EXCHANGE BETWEEN PRESIDENT OBAMA AND THE QUEEN

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?

LIST OF U.S. STATUTES, SECURITIES REGULATIONS AND LEGAL PRINCIPLES OF WHICH THE CRIMINALISTS, ASSOCIATES AND ALL THE MAIN FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS REMAIN IN BREACH:

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:

THEFT BY DECEPTION:

• “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:

• “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’.

U.S. SECURITIES REGULATIONS OF WHICH INSTITUTIONS
HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO BE IN BREACH [SEE REPORTS]:

• 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.

U.S. LAWS ROUTINELY BREACHED BY THE CRIMINAL OPERATIVES AND INSTITUTIONS:

• 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.

ADVERTISEMENT: INTERNET SECURITY SOLUTION

NON-U.S. INTERNET SECURITY SOLUTION CD AVAILABLE: FAR BETTER THAN NORTON ETC
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.

MICHAEL C. COTTRELL’S U.S. FINANCIAL REFORM PROPOSALS

MORE RELEVANT THAN EVER GIVEN BASEL-II COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS

Thursday 18 September 2008 02:00

U.S. FINANCIAL MARKET REVAMP LAST MARCH IS A FALSE PROSPECTUS BY TREASURY

ALTERNATIVE PLAN PRESENTED HEREWITH IS SIMPLER, TIMELY, CHEAPER AND EFFECTIVE

PRESIDENT’S WORKING GROUP ‘REFORM PLAN’ EXPOSED AS A SELF-SERVING RUSE

BETTER PLAN BY MICHAEL C. COTTRELL, B.A., M.S. CAN BE UP AND RUNNING IN MONTHS

CONVOLUTED ‘PAULSON’ FABRICATION WOULD COST IMMENSE $ SUMS TO IMPLEMENT

TREASURY’S PROPOSALS REQUIRE SEVEN NEW AGENCIES, MR COTTRELL’S JUST ONE

THREE-STAGE ‘PAULSON’ PROPOSALS CALCULATED TO UNDERMINE MARKET PSYCHOLOGY

ALTERNATIVE PLAN SUPPLEMENTED BY A COMPREHENSIVE SECURITIES MARKET GLOSSARY

Economic Intelligence Review contains Michael C. Cottrell’s Rules-Based Reform Plan and the extensive Glossary of Financial Market Definitions. Publication date: Friday 15th August 2008.

• See our report dated 12th August 2008 inter alia for historical intelligence on GEORGIA. See reports dated 14th, 16th, 18th and 19th August for Georgia and Settlements Crisis Updates.

• INTERNATIONAL CURRENCY REVIEW, Volume 33, #s 3 & 4, all 972 pages of it, is making waves all over the world. It contains a blow-by-blow deconstruction of this crisis via the Wantagate plus our further analyses: and everything published therein is now well and truly ON THE GLOBAL PUBLIC RECORD. Accordingly the whole world owns a detailed, damning account of the serial criminality of the Bush-Cheney-Clinton ‘Box Gang’ et al., which CANNOT BE EXPUNGED FROM THE RECORD.

• BOOKS: Edward Harle Limited has so far published FIVE intelligence titles: The Perestroika Deception, by Anatoliy Golitsyn; Red Cocaine, by Dr Joseph D. Douglass, Jr.; The European Union Collective, by Christopher Story; The New Underworld Order, by Christopher Story; and The Red Terror in Russia, by Sergei Melgounov. All titles are permanently in stock. We sell books DIRECT.

• Please Make a Donation, if you feel able to do so, to help finance Christopher Story‘s ongoing global financial corruption investigations. Your assistance will be very sincerely appreciated and will make a real difference, hastening the OVERDUE resolution of the worst financial corruption and linked financial fallout in world history. The Editor’s $35,000 Wanta bail-out money has been stolen.

• See the second white panel for details of our latest distributed intelligence publications.

By Christopher Story FRSA, Editor and Publisher, International Currency Review, World Reports Limited, London and New York. For earlier reports, press the ARCHIVE. Order your intelligence subscriptions and our ‘politically incorrect’ intelligence books online from this website.

SIMPLE RULES-BASED MARKET STABILISATION PLAN BY MICHAEL C. COTTRELL, B.A., M.S.
In the first quarter of 2008, Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., President of Pennsylvania Investments , Inc., contacted the Editor of this service to brief him in detail on the dubious stratagems behind the disparate proposals that were finally unveiled at the end of last March by the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets, a.k.a. the ‘Paulson proposals’.

As a result of several conversations, Mr Cottrell, one of the foremost securities markets experts in the United States, prepared a critique of the US Treasury’s extraordinary ‘Plan’, which he was easily able to demonstrate is highly destablising, not least since its plainly confused recommendations undermine financial market confidence while demonstrably serving the interests of the criminalist kleptocracy at the expense of the genuine investment community. This analysis is presented here.

In short, the Working Group’s ‘blueprint’ is shown herewith to be a false prospectus.

Having discredited the Working Group’s proposals, which would call for the creation of no less than SEVEN expensive and mischievously overlapping new US regulatory bureaucracies and for the abolition of the essential rules-based securities market environment, which would be phased out over an imprecise but prolonged timeframe, Michael Cottrell presents his own effective and simple solution to the chaos brought about by years of officially condoned fraudulent finance.

This will require just ONE new US regulator, will call for the revalidation by Congress of the Glass-Steagall Act and for the decisive re-establishment of the essential rules-based system which the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has neglected to enforce in recent years, and can be implemented in full within the space of just a few months, at most. Additionally, Mr Cottrell’s simple Plan will be infinitely cheaper to implement than the top-heavy Working Group proposals.

The Editor has incorporated Mr Cottrell’s proposal into this analysis; and the extensive Glossary, built around Michael C. Cottrell’s original framework, has been expanded so that all concerned can readily understand what has to be done. Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., can be contacted direct on: 814-455 9218 (voicemail), and at: pii-mcc@msn.com.

Mr Cottrell’s reform framework has been elaborated by the Editor to incorporate ideas for which he alone is responsible but which Mr Cottrell has graciously approved.

• Important Note: We can only report US law as it stands. We cannot make exceptions and neither can we speculate as to the prospective actions of authorities given, for instance, the admission by UBS that it broke the law, and the consequences of that admission for some US investors who may consider that they are eligible for Settlement payouts. Nor can we enter into ANY correspondence concerning that matter. The only issues that we will discuss arising from this post are Mr Cottrell’s practical and straightforward recommendations: and these issues should be raised with him direct.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This paper describes, exposes and then systematically demolishes the credibility and relevance of the so-called ‘Paulson’ proposals, a.k.a. the mish-mash of convoluted notions brought forth by the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets at the end of March 2008.

In passing, it questions the basis upon which expectations of repayment by some US participants in ‘humanitarian’, Omega and other often unregistered, and therefore usually (in the United States) illegal, Ponzi schemes are predicated, shows why these schemes are illegal by comparing them to what the US securities and other relevant US legislation requires, and presents inexpensive and constructive proposals to replace ‘Paulson’s’ dog’s dinner – which, incidentally, would call for the establishment of no less than SEVEN expensive new US bureaucratic agencies, whereas the Plan, devised by the securities expert Michael C. Cottrell, M.S., which is advanced here, would require just ONE new agency instead. Further, Mr Cottrell’s scheme could be up and running within a few months, whereas the ‘Paulson’ dog’s dinner is phased over an indeterminate timeframe.

OFFICIAL PROPOSALS ARE MISCHIEVOUS
On investigating this matter, we were quite surprised at the ease with which the Working Group’s spurious obfuscation operation could be shown to be a glaringly false prospectus that has been jumbled together in order to disguise what can only be described as its underlying mischievous intent. For these proposals dishonestly seek to convey an impression of regulatory reform (in response to the chaos in the financial markets which has been brought about exclusively by the serial criminality of holders of high office) – whereas their actual purpose is to mask the objective of precluding meaningful reform in favour of cosmetic adjustments consistent with an even more permissive and crime-friendly environment than exists today.

Indeed a pattern of nefarious US official behaviour has become clear since the deregulation of the Savings and Loan Associations in 1982. It can be summarised as follows. Far from entertaining any clear intention of curbing excesses and seeking to contain financial sector crises and instability brought about by organised financial fraud condoned at the highest levels of American power, the participating US authorities typically allow the prevailing crisis of confidence and its real economic consequences to escalate until, as happened at the end of the 1980s with the messy ‘responses’ developed by Congress to the ‘hollowing out’ (enronisation) of the thrifts, the problems become so huge that radical departures are agreed upon ‘under duress’ which, in turn, provide the intended basis for a proliferation of fraudulent financial operations ‘by other means’.

FOLDING THE CRIMINALISTS’ CRISIS INTO A ‘UNIVERSAL SOLUTION’
This is exactly what these cynical ‘Paulson’ proposals are predicated to achieve. The underlying motive here is to ‘fold’ the contemporary financial and economic crisis into a ‘ universal solution’ which will, if this Treasury has its way, give the arch-planners of fraudulent finance practices, carte blanche to proliferate their scams and aberrations for many years to come.

Accordingly, the fraudulent prospectus disgorged by the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets needs to be consigned forthwith to the trash can. This report will help to achieve that.

As indicated, we present a simple, straightforward, constructive, inexpensive and quickly and easily implemented alternative Plan to replace it. Its author, Michael C. Cottrell, M.S., one of the United States’ foremost securities markets experts, argues that no further attention should be paid to the dishonest and discredited ‘Paulson’ proposals, which have in any case more or less run into the sand; and that the straightforward measures advocated below should be adopted, instead.

They would immediately inject the necessary discipline into the marketplace, precluding scope for securities scamming models to which the notorious American kleptocracy has become accustomed.

This paper is supplemented by an extensive Glossary of securities environment terms, for the benefit of the lay reader. The Editor has incorporated several appropriate new terms in the list.

SELF-SERVING PLAN TO ‘CLEAN UP’ MESS THE CRIMINALISTS THEMSELVES CREATED
Among the most distasteful characteristics of the world-class financial criminals exposed through our reports is their habit of advising the Rest of Us how the distasteful consequences of their own glaring criminality are to be overcome. The flip-side of the accomplished US financial criminalist is typically an unimpressive ‘angel of light’, who preaches the virtues of sound finance, in order to mask the fact of his endless reprobate financial misbehaviour.

Thus, having presided over and orchestrated the stealing of colossal sums of other people’s money, the US intelligence operative calling himself Henry M. Paulson Jr. [but see Memorandum below], as advertised, promulgated, in March 2008, a set of goofy and confused proposals for the ostensible ‘reorganisation’ of the way the US financial markets are regulated, which amounts to a pre-planned ‘new regulatory order’ – but the purpose of which, on investigation, turns out NOT to be improved financial sector discipline, but rather the cynical and surreptitious institutionalisation of market conditions that will facilitate replication of the abuses and fraudulent finance that have so far been exposed, but on a far broader scale, in the years to come.

A prerequisite for understanding what follows, and the prevailing financial days of reckoning and their origination generally, is to recognise the subversive reality of the ‘angels of light’ deception model. The financial sector traditionally clothes itself in a mantle of assumed righteousness, which is reinforced by generational layers of perception yielding a belief that financial institutions are, generally speaking, models of rectitude which cannot deviate from the strict codes of conduct that are presumed to surround them, and therefore from the Rule of Law.

BELATED, GRUDGING REALISATION THAT WHAT HAS BEEN REPORTED IS ACCURATE
Because this general lazy presumption is rarely, even today, called into question, it took, to our certain knowledge, certain British and American circles over two years to reach the staggered conclusion that what we have been reporting was accurate, both in general terms and more often than not, in terms of specifics as well.

By the same token, the underlying assumption that the exotic Treasury proposals developed by the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets, which will be demolished here, are of beneficial and enlightened intent, has no basis in reality, as will now be examined. On the contrary, as might have been expected, they represent ANOTHER pathetic scam, a deception, a diversion, a PLOY.

We will begin with a ‘straight’ summary of the ‘Paulson’ proposals, which will then be exposed as representing a false and deceitful prospectus.

THE FALSE PROSPECTUS AS ANNOUNCED
Following our exposures of financial fraud between June 2006 and the same month a year later, tensions rose to such a pitch behind the financial sector scenes that the US authorities felt the sudden need to be seen to be ‘doing something’ – an urge that resulted in the establishment of the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets.

But by ‘doing something’, the criminalists actually meant leveraging the financial crisis which has developed as a direct consequence of their criminality through the advocating of false ‘reforms’ under cover of which they intended to institutionalise a permissive US environment which would guarantee that their addiction to manufacturing liquidity out of thin air through untaxed high yield investment programs (out of bounds to ordinary mortals because outside the officially protected corruption zone, they are lethally risk Ponzi scams: see below), would be OK’d without recourse.

The phrase ‘Working Group’ is a designation used by Israeli intelligence to describe an operation inside the Israeli Government structures (viz., intelligence), with a focus on developing a modus operandi to achieve an instructed objective, according to Robert Littell [‘Vicious Circle’, Overlook Press, Peter Mayer Publishers, New York, 2006].

After ‘labouring’ for eight months, the Working Group brought forth a convoluted, fragmented and opaque ‘THREE-STAGE plan’ to ‘reform’ US regulation of the very financial institutions with which the now disgraced ruling kleptocracy has been collaborating to scam ordinary American citizens, mortgage ‘holders’, the US Government itself, and foreigners who fail to do their ‘due diligence’.

The overall effect of the regulatory fragmentation plan put forward in bad faith (as we demonstrate below) by the Working Group would be to place the control of all financial markets wholly under the power of the President of the United States – which, given the criminality of the present and recent incumbents, would be a recipe for the institutionalisation of fraudulent finance, the elimination of all remaining checks and balances, and consequently for a corrosive financial market environment leading to a financial meltdown in a few years’ time which would make the present crisis look like a pleasant afternoon by the seaside.

Before we go any further, we must summarise the Working Group’s proposals without commenting in any detail immediately on their implications:

STAGE ONE, AS PROMULGATED BY THE PRESIDENT’S WORKING GROUP:

• The President’s Working Group on Financial Markets would be expanded to add banking sector regulators not hitherto participating in its deliberations, in order to broaden the Working Group‘s supposed focus to incorporate the whole of the US financial sector, rather than just the financial markets as such (begging the question: what was the problem? Why the delay?).

• Lending by the Federal Reserve: Because non-bank financial institutions have, since December 2007 (thanks to the chaos brought about by fraudulent finance operations over which this ‘Paulson’ himself presided) had access to the US Federal Reserve, the Fed would be able to conduct on-site examinations of such borrowers and impose conditions on their operations.

• Establish a Mortgage Origination Commission to consist of six Board Members, taken mainly from Federal structures. The new entity would proceed to establish minimum licensing standards and testing criteria, and would gauge and grade the adequacy of each State’s mortgage control system. This would be accompanied by clarification of which Federal body is to enforce mortgage lending legislation (which, for some unexplained reason, the Working Group could not manage to do).

STAGE TWO, AS PROMULGATED BY THE PRESIDENT’S WORKING GROUP:

• Federal Oversight of State-Chartered Banks: It was reported that the US Treasury recommended a study to determine whether the Federal Reserve or the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) should have oversight of State-chartered banks. (Great! So we need a ‘study’. Why didn’t the Group perform that study, then? Why the ‘need’ for further delay while the ‘study’ is carried out?).

• Thrift Charter to be eliminated: The following banking sector regulator was categorised as ‘past its sell-by date’: The Office of Thrift Supervision. This entity, which oversees US Savings and Loan Associations (so-called ‘Thrift Institutions’) should be closed down and folded into the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, which has oversight of National Banks. (No reason given).

• A new (optional) Federal Insurance Charter: The US Treasury proposed the creation of a Federal regulator to cover the insurance sector, which is extremely corrupt in the United States. The first step would be to ask Congress to create an Office of Insurance Oversight within the US Treasury, to focus on international issues and to advise the Treasury on insurance sector affairs. This would be the first step towards the creation of step two, namely the creation of a new Federal Insurance Charter. (Notice that everything is ‘spaced out’, laid-back, confused and overlapping).

• Revised payments and settlement arrangements: Under the eccentric proposals brought forward by ‘Paulson’, it was suggested that the Federal Reserve Board should be given oversight and rule-making authority over the payment and settlement systems for the processing of payments and the transfer of securities between financial institutions and their clients. (Hence, de facto regulation of the securities markets would devolve into the hands of the untrustworthy Federal Reserve).

• Futures and Securities markets: The US Treasury used this report to call for the merger of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the CFTC) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC), neither of which has been doing its job properly, given the sheer scale of the bribery and corruption behind the scenes, plus reports that the SEC has itself been engaged in trading on own account (see below).

In particular, the Treasury proposed that the Securities and Exchange Commission, which operates (or should operate) on the basis of precise rules and regulations backed by rigorous enforcement, should ‘preserve’ the modus operandi of the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which is that business should instead be conducted in accordance with stated ‘principles’.

In other words, the Treasury wanted to scrap the rules-based system (required under the 1933 and 1934 Securities Acts) and to replace it by a vague ‘principles- based’ system’, which would mean that enforcement would be almost impossible – because a régime of relativism would prevail and key terms would remain undefined.

Securities professionals are taught and intensively trained to operate exclusively on the basis of the SEC’s ‘rules-based’ system, which precludes any deviation whatsoever from the established rules (provided the regulations are enforced, which has not been the case for years because of corruption within the Securities and Exchange Commission itself).

STAGE THREE, AS PROMULGATED BY THE PRESIDENT’S WORKING GROUP:

A new US regulatory structure would be imposed over the longer term, under which US financial institutions would be asked to choose between one of three Federal Charters:

• Federally Insured Depository Institution:
This would be applicable to all lenders with Federal deposit insurance.

• Federal Insurance Institution:
Applicable to all insurers offering retail ‘products’ which entail some degree of Federal guarantee.

• Federal Financial Services Provider:
This charter would cover all other categories of financial services firms.

Under this regime, the following SEVEN NEW FEDERAL AGENCIES, each with its own hyper-expensive self-serving bureaucracy would ‘regulate’ US financial institutions:

• The Market Stability Regulator: Under this vague proposal, the Federal Reserve was to ‘look out’ for threats to the stability of the United States’ diverse financial system, whether they originated with banks, insurance corporations, mortgage lenders, investment banks, hedge funds, or with any other type of financial institution.

The Federal Reserve could require corrective measures to be taken to address current risks or to curb future risk-taking, but these powers could only be exercised if overall financial stability was threatened. In other words, this entity would essentially achieve nothing at all, leaving the financial markets alone (until it was too late), thereby passively facilitating a progressive repetition of the near-catastrophe experienced since the mid-1980s, but on a far larger scale.

• Prudential Financial Regulatory Agency: This new entity would regulate US financial institutions buttressed by explicit Government guarantees associated with their operations, such as Federal deposit insurance. The new US agency would assume the rôles of the current Federal prudential regulators, including the Office of the US Comptroller of the Currency and the Treasury’s Office of Thrift Supervision. Yet another (subsidiary) regulator would focus on the hitherto unrestrained and unregulated off-off-budget Government-Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) which, though established by the Federal Government, were placed (on creation) into the ‘private’ sector and have implicit Government backing, such as the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) and the Federal Home Loan Bank System. See our report dated 26th December 2007 for insights into how Fannie Mae, for instance, has been used to perpetrate fraudulent financial transactions in the US mortgage sector [Archive].

• Conduct of Business Regulatory Agency: This new regulator would be charged with ‘consumer protection’ with respect to all categories of financial entities. The agency would watch disclosures and business practices, and would supervise the licensing of certain types of financial firm.

It would absorb many of the functions of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), and would undertake some responsibilities that are currently handled by the Fed, state insurance regulators, and the Federal Trade Commission.

• Federal Insurance Guarantee Corporation: This new agency would replace the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, charging premia to guarantee bank deposits and insurance payouts.

• Corporate Finance Regulator: This new entity would take over other functions of the Securities and Exchange Commission, such as the oversight of corporate disclosures, governance issues, accounting, and other matters.

In other words, SEVEN NEW BUREAUCRACIES would regulate everything and achieve nothing.

THE PURPOSE OF THE FALSE PROSPECTUS: OBFUSCATION
Confused? That’s precisely what is intended. As can be seen, this curious pot-pourri of convoluted arrangements matches the intentions of those who framed it (and who will not see it implemented, we feel sure). Those intentions can be summed up in the single word: OBFUSCATION.

For these proposals were developed during the immediate aftermath of the emergence of overt financial sector strains arising from the ongoing exposures of the open-ended financial fraud; and their purpose, from the outset, was not to enhance regulation and to make it ‘more efficient’, but rather to bring forward a novel framework under cover of ‘overdue reforms necessitated by the credit crunch and the financial crisis generally’, which could be exploited and leveraged to cover up, rather than to further expose, the serial financial criminality that blew up in the faces of the US kleptocracy as a consequence of the exposures of its endless criminality.

In other words, the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets appears to have been briefed in bad faith, its task being to develop a platform and framework of proposals which would serve the purpose of obfuscating financial criminality, while appearing to do the opposite. This was, in short, nothing less than a typical deception, intended to convey the dubious impression that ‘reform’ was (belatedly) being recommended, while in practice substituting the existing regulatory system which has not been properly enforced, with a vague, woolly régime framed so as to facilitate the very free-wheeling fraudulent finance and risk-taking that the proposals are supposed to deter.

Since, however, the proposals were brought forward by deception operatives whose speciality has all along been dialectical ying-yang behaviour, duplication and duplicity, the discovery that these proposals are a sham, comes as no surprise. Whether those who listened to ‘Paulson’ making this pitch on 2nd July 2008 at the Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House) in London (the globalist UK think-tank which masquerades as a free-standing institution of the British nation state while constantly undermining it), understood this duplicity, seems improbable.

On that occasion, ‘Paulson’ presented a series of vague generalities for the consideration of the British ‘Great and the Good’ assembled to hear this pitch, such as that ‘the financial landscape has changed, and non-bank financial institutions play a significantly greater role’ than used to be the case. (When one of our special contacts attempted to make himself known to this ‘Paulson’ fellow, he vanished out of sight).

But the existing US regulatory régime has not ‘failed’ because it is no longer ‘fit for purpose’. It has ‘failed’ for three straightforward reasons:

(1) Some of the regulatory agencies, such as the Federal Reserve Board itself, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, are/have been corrupt.

(2) The corrupt regulators have accordingly failed to regulate, let alone to enforce their regulations.

(3) The focus of the corrupt regulators is to prolong the obfuscation operation, to verbalise their dereliction of duty through spinning for the benefit of the likes of The Wall Street Journal, and to seek to draw a veil over such issues as the SEC’s ‘legitimisation’ of naked shorts for a restricted group of participants, whereas a regulator should be completely impartial. The overall objective is self-preservation, protection of their own personal interests, and staying out of jail themselves.

• In respect of ‘naked shorts’, has the SEC conveniently forgotten the old securities market adage:
‘He who sells what isn’t his’n, Must put it back or go to prison’?

TERMS DELIBERATELY LEFT UNDEFINED UNDER THE INTENDED ‘PRINCIPLES-BASED’ REGIME
In place of the existing (albeit unenforced) regulatory régime, ‘Paulson’ proposed a system not of rules-based regulation, which could be enforced if the regulatory agencies themselves were not corrupt, but of ‘principles’-based regulation, which, by definition, would entail that there would be no rules to be enforced, terms are not defined, and that breaches of ‘principles’ are liable to be irrelevant because it would always be a nuanced matter of relatavist judgment whether principles were being flouted, or not. In otherwise, such a régime would not amount to a regulatory régime at all, but rather to a crooks’ charter and paradise. ALL OVER AGAIN.

If the existing US regulatory agencies were doing their jobs properly, they would be adequate for the purpose – and certainly far more adequate than the deliberately complexified, overlapping and obfuscatory framework suggested by the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets.

But while the Working Group may be redundant and has discredited itself, the financial market issues that it was supposed to have addressed, remain in existence and as intractable as before.

THE EXISTING U.S. REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
The existing US regulatory framework, for the record, consists of the following agencies:

• Federal Reserve System: Supposedly regulates the US monetary system and oversees bank holding companies. Historically lacked real assets apart from its contract to print the currency of the United States, which ought to be a function of the US Treasury,

• Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC): Established by the Congress in 1934 to regulate the securities markets in accordance with stated rules and under the 1933 and 1934 Securities Acts, to maintain ‘fair’ markets and to protect investors. The SEC also, as a primary element of its oversight powers, reviews corporate financial statements, is supposed to enforce the securities regulations, and provides guidance for the framing of accounting rules.

• Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC): This regulator insures deposits lodged by bank customers against the failure of banks. The FDIC was created in 1933 to build and maintain public confidence and to encourage stability in the financial system by fostering sound banking practices.

• Office of the Comptroller of the Currency: This traditional arm of the US Treasury Department was established in 1863 to supervise and regulate National Banks and the Federal branches of foreign banks. Its purpose is to promote the safety and soundness of the banking system and to conduct on-site examinations of banks across the nation.

• Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC): Established as a US agency in 1974, this entity is supposed to ensure the open and efficient operation of the US futures markets, which started out trading agricultural futures, and now trade sophisticated synthetics (derivatives).

• Office of Thrift Supervision: This agency issues and enforces regulations governing the United States’ Savings and Loan sector (Thrift Institutions). It is responsible for ensuring the safety and soundness of deposits with Thrift Institutions.

SHORT HISTORY OF U.S. FINANCIAL TRANSPARENCY

(A) 1890 to the 1920s:

Leading American financiers of the late 19th century, such as John J. Astor, Cornelius Vanderbilt, John D Rockefeller and J. P. Morgan (1), provided capital to finance the establishment of very large corporations and combines, also known as the trusts, which came to wield enormous power across entire industrial sectors. As a consequence, by the year 1890, the control of 5,000 corporations was held by about 300 such trusts operating all over the country. By 1900, the largest dozen of these combines were capitalised at over $1.0 billion (2) .

Accordingly, investment bankers became corporate directors – with Morgan, for instance, having board representation on 78 investment bank companies.

Therefore, when these large corporations needed injections of capital, the bankers who were sitting on their Boards claimed to represent the bondholders (3).

Disclosure of financial information was entirely voluntary, even though disclosure of predator practices could only be revealed via the balance sheet (4). The Sherman AntiTrust Act of 1890 was enacted in order to define and make the monopolistic activities of such trust companies illegal (5).

In 1914, the Clayton Anti-Trust Act sought to increase competition across the business sector by restricting predatory corporate activity such as acquiring other competing corporations and the practice of allowing interlocking corporate directorships (6).

And the Federal Trade Commission Act, passed in the same year, established a regulatory authority, acting as the ‘watchdog of competition’, to protect the American consumer from ‘unfair methods of competition’ (7). In other words, raw, unregulated capitalism was by now seen as being prone to abuse and in need, therefore, of official constraint.

(B) 1920s to 1941:

During this period, the number of investment companies that were formed in the United States steadily increased from six in the year 1921, to 46 in 1925 (8).

While most of these investment companies were subject in some measure to the ‘Blue-Sky’ [see Glossary] requirements, the State statutes and regulations appear not to have treated investment companies much differently from the general run of corporations and business trusts (9).

As previously, disclosure of financial information remained voluntary, even though the disclosure of predatory practices could only be conveniently disclosed through the balance sheet (10).

Between 1927 and 1929, these investment companies raised approximately $2,300,000,000 from the sale of new securities. Their assets increased from $550,000,000 in 1927 to almost $2,600,000,000 in 1929 (11). Distribution of the shares in these fixed trusts reached peak levels during 1930 and 1931, when $600,000,000 of their shares were sold, inducing the passage of various US statutes and the promulgation of regulations which brought the expansion of these fixed trusts to an end (12).

In 1933, North Carolina adopted a regulation (which in due course was adopted as Section 11 of the Investment Company Act of 1940) which prohibited the charging of any sales load on the switching of trust shares (13). As a consequence of the lessons learned the 1920s and early 1930s, including bitter experiences suffered by investors with ‘bucket shops’, the original and copycat Ponzi and Pyramid-selling schemes, and other forms of fraudulent finance that flourished in this free-for-all environment, the Congress passed the stringent Securities Acts of 1933 and 1934, followed by the Maloney Act of 1935; and in the banking sector, the Banking Act of 1933 and the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 which restricted US banks to banking operations and precluded their participation in the securities markets. The Securities Acts were updated by the Securities Acts Amendments of 1970.

THE EXPENSIVE FALSE PROSPECTUS ANALYSED:

U.S. TREASURY’S 2008 REGULATORY ‘REFORM’ PROPOSALS (14), (15)

Astonishingly, in view of the obvious fact that these proposals would be bound to have an impact on fragile financial market confidence, the Working Group’s suggestions were phased, with short- medium- and long-term proposals set within an imprecise timeframe, interspersed with periods of reflection for ‘study’, and personnel being liable to be poached from old regulatory agencies that would remain alive in one phase, but not the next, and with every opportunity taken to ensure that the responsibilities of no less than SEVEN newly proposed, expensive agencies would overlap as much as possible, while existing agencies would languish in a state of limbo or uncertainty pending prospective abolition, or not, as might be decided in a later phase.

Self-evidently, this confused prospectus is a recipe for undermining confidence in the integrity of financial market regulation, and therefore in the integrity of the financial markets themselves, as well as maximising the potential for obfuscation, as will be seen:

(A) THE SHORT-TERM PROPOSALS:

The President’s Working Group on Financial Markets is/was intended, we read, to be composed of a Coordinator of Financial Regulatory Policy and to cover the entire American financial sector, as indicated above, not merely the financial markets.

It was thus to incorporate banking regulators not currently participating in the study group, and would need to broaden its financial focus to capture the whole of the financial sector.

Hence the Working Group was to facilitate inter-agency coordination and communication, with a view (ostensibly) to developing proposals to mitigate all systemic risks to the financial system, to enhance the integrity of the financial markets, to promote protection of consumers and investors, and to support the efficiency and competitiveness of the financial markets.

Since overall ‘competitiveness’ covers the stance of any given financial market environment by comparison with foreign counterparts, the Working Group would or will have had to consider the impact of any proposals it puts forward on the competitiveness of the market in question, with its equivalents abroad; and the moment that such considerations had to be considered, the knee-jerk response of the Working Group’s membership is liable to have been to opt for the most lenient and liberal ‘solution’ on the drawing board.

As for the proposed creation of a Federal Mortgage Origination Commission (MOC), this huge new bureaucracy would be headed by a Director appointed by the President of the United States for a four- or six-year term – which means that, in accordance with the standard corrupt US practice, the job would be likely to go to a presidential crony.

The six Board members would be supplied from the Federal Reserve, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), even though the last of these three agencies were to be abolished under the proposals, and the Federal Reserve itself remains vulnerable, under unpublished H.R. 2778 of the 110th Congress, to be abolished and merged within the US Treasury.

The other two Board Members would be supplied from the National Credit Union Association and the Conference of State Bank Supervisors.

The new Mortgage Origination Commission would develop minimum licensing standards, testing criteria and a system for grading the adequacy of each State’s financial regulatory arrangements. The drafting of regulations covering national mortgage lending legislation would, the Working Group apparently proposes, remain exclusively with the Federal Reserve, as provided for under the Truth in Lending Act.

Finally, the States should be given clear authority to enforce Federal mortgage legislation upon independent mortgage originators, that is to say, those mortgage originators considered to have been responsible for originating most of the so-called ‘sub-prime’ loans.

There was no reference to the practice of collectivising such mortgage loans, let alone with false documentation purporting to represent other mortgages but which lack any underlying asset at all, for the purpose of ‘securitisation’ and marketing to gullible investors at home and abroad who may not perform adequate (or any) due diligence.

For the short term, too, the Treasury’s blueprint put forward two considerations relating to the overall stability of the financial markets. Specifically:

(1) The prevailing temporary liquidity provisioning process, designed to alleviate threats to market stability (launched in December 2007 in the face of the crisis of confidence which overwhelmed the American authorities given the accumulated consequences of their incompetence, criminality and mismanagement of the US financial system), must ensure:

• That the process is calibrated and transparent (with no definition of terms here);

• That appropriate conditions are attached to the lending, (with no explanation of ‘appropriate’);

• That information flows to the Federal Reserve System via on-site examinations, and/or that other conditions or means can be imposed as determined by the Federal Reserve, with no recourse and without any indication here of what the Federal Reserve might have in mind.

(2) The President’s Working Group should consider broader regulatory issues related to discount window access for non-depository (i.e., investment banking) institutions. So, this Working Group has not yet undertaken such considerations? What, then, was it doing between August 2007 and March 2008, exactly?

(B) THE MEDIUM-TERM PROPOSALS:

Under this heading, the Treasury recommended, as summarised above:

• Elimination of ‘redundant’ banking regulators, without providing any rationale for such a drastic and reckless measure, and without having practical alternative proposals formulated or in place;

• Closing down the Office of Thrift Supervision, ditto;

• Folding the responsibilities of the Office of Thrift Supervision into the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, again with no rationale for such action being provided.

Having shredded key existing regulatory institutions without replacing them (at this stage), the Treasury proposed that the next step should be that a leisurely ‘study’ should be undertaken, to establish whether the Federal Reserve or the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the FDIC) should have oversight of the State-chartered banks.

This seems to us to be quite ridiculous, and asking for trouble. First, some existing regulators are abolished, without the Treasury at this stage having a clue what should take their place. Secondly, having abolished the regulators, the Treasury would then embark upon a ‘study’ to decide what to do next, as it says it is undecided (cannot make up its mind) whether the Fed or the FDIC should oversee the State-chartered banks – a confused recommendation akin to throwing all the furniture out of the window before deciding what, if anything, should replace it.

A moment’s reflection will convince even the most enthusiastic supporters of the corrupt US ‘Paulson’ Treasury that these proposals are, of put it mildly, mischievous.

Nobody who cares about US financial market stability can possibly take them seriously: indeed, the proposals , even as far as has so far been described here, are so mixed up and destabilising, that it is no exaggeration to ask whether they represent some kind of spoof.

Has some malevolent gremlin substituted this mischievous verbiage for what the Working Group actually submitted? Given the track record of ‘Paulson’s criminalist Treasury, that may not be as far-out a proposition as it may appear to be.

The third element of the intermediate recommendations brought forward by this muddled report departed from common sense by recommending that the Federal Reserve – which has achieved notoriety thanks to its two-tier policy of purporting to represent the Rule of Law while at the same time surreptitiously condoning and facilitating corrupt financial practices through exploitation of the unaudited and secretive Federal Inter Bank Settlement Fund – should acquire oversight and rule-making authority over payment and settlement systems that process payments and transfer securities between financial institutions and their clients.

This would be worse than placing the fox in charge of the chicken coop: it would ultimately lead to the liquidation of the chickens by guaranteeing the perpetuation of the fraudulent finance model that has been exposed by notorious recent developments. And again, no coherent rationale for this supposed ‘reform’ was presented with the recommendations.

Put another way, the report then recommended that the Federal Reserve should acquire oversight and, inconsistently, rule-making authority, over the payment and settlement systems that process payments and transfer securities between financial institutions and customers.

Since this all-embracing ‘reform’ would include ALL institutions, this would mean inter alia that the Federal Reserve would in practice acquire rule-making authority over securities broker-dealers. Hence, the rule-making authority to be abolished with the folding of the Securities and Exchange Commission (see below) would reappear under the aegis of the Federal Reserve, although we are not told what category of rules the Fed would promulgate. It can be taken as read that the rules to be promulgated by the Federal Reserve would bear no discernible relationship to the rules long since established (but lately, not enforced) by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

On top of this nonsense, the proposals recommended a further unresolved ‘solution’, calculated to maximise uncertainty – this time in the insurance sector. First, the Working Group floated the idea of creating a Federal regulator to oversee the insurance industry.

Then, after floating this suggestion, the Treasury wants to ‘ask Congress’ to create a new Office of Insurance Oversight (OIO) which would function from within the Treasury, meaning of course that the Treasury would control the insurance sector directly. Since the Treasury, like the US Federal Reserve, has demonstrated that it is thoroughly corrupt, this recommendation would simply enable the corrupt Treasury to capture and channel the well-known corruption that bedevils the insurance sector in the United States. The OIO would supposedly focus upon international insurance sector issues, while also providing the Treasury with ‘advice’ – a completely meaningless concept since the entity, resident within and therefore a part of the Treasury, would accordingly be advising itself.

[The probable hidden intention here would be to replicate the Federal Financing Bank (FFB), which is likewise an office (plus some filing cabinets) situated within the US Treasury but which for many years enjoyed off-budget status, thereby providing the Treasury with increased ‘wriggle-room’ for its usual ‘smoke-and-mirrors’ financial shenanigans. As matters stand today, the Federal Financing Bank is one of the basic mechanisms that enables the Secretary of the Treasury to manipulate the Government’s finances by exploiting the fact that is allowed by statute to have $15.0 billion of debt outstanding at any one time, so that by means of creative bookkeeping, up to $15.0 billion extra can be borrowed on those occasions when the Congress has deployed its residual ‘control’ over the spending of the Executive Branch by refusing to raise the Statutory Debt Limit, in exchange for some Federal Budget concession or other that it seeks to extract from the Executive Branch].

In short, and Office of Insurance Oversight inside the Treasury would simply be leveraged by the corrupt Treasury for its own purposes, and in furtherance of the dubious interests of the official perpetrators of fraudulent finance operations who have been cornered and are running for cover.

Even worse are the quite appalling proposals affecting the securities sector. The Working Group suggested, as mentioned above, that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) should be merged – again, providing no rationale for such a radical shake-up. The actual purpose here would be to end the settlement reached by the Securities Acts of 1933 and 1934, which provided for the securities sector to be governed by the strict application of precisely defined rules – the settlement that ended the chaos arising out of the undisciplined free-for-all allowed in the 1920s, when bucket-shops ripped American investors off and investors enjoyed no protection from sharks other than that provided by the ‘Blue Sky’ above – in favour of standardising the so-called ‘principles-based’ approach employed by the ineffective Commodities Futures Trading Commission. Neither the SEC nor the CFTC have, in recent years, fulfilled their regulatory responsibilities, due to internal corruption; but scrapping the rules-based approach in favour of the CFTC’s permissive ‘principles-based’ approach would guarantee and perpetuate financial corruption perhaps for generations to come.

An indication of the deceptive nature of this recommendation can be gauged by the mealy-mouthed language employed to present this sorcery for public consumption. Specifically, the Working Group postulated that the Securities and Exchange Commission should seek to ‘preserve’ the CFTC’s principles-based approach, presupposing of course that the SEC should DROP its rules-based approach: but in order to mask this deception, THIS CENTRAL RUSE WAS LEFT UNSTATED.

‘Preserving’ the principles-based approach used by the ineffective CFTC would, self-evidently, be inconsistent with ‘preserving’ any rules-based approach – which is the point of this proposition.

What the Treasury is seeking to achieve here is to pass off a fraudulent reform as a key element of an improved regulatory system, when what would be perpetrated would be the de facto elimination of the existing framework which, if properly applied, would protect investors from fraud and make it impossible for fraudulent finance operations such as those that have been exposed, to exist, let alone to flourish. In other words, this recommendation represents a typically diversionary fraud by the ‘Paulson’ Treasury, consistent with the reputation it has earned for itself as an institution of the Federal Government in which no trust can currently be placed, not least because, on the basis of its recent behaviour, it cannot be relied upon to honour its obligations.

(C) THE LONG-TERM PROPOSALS:

Not content with the chaos that would be created as a consequence of this wrecking operation to date, the Working Group, true to its false prospectus, capped this truly shambolic mish-mash with a series of half-baked long-term proposals, the net effect of which would be to leave everything up in the air, thereby maximising scope for a 1920s-type free-for-all – and ensuring that the investment environment of future years would be consistent with the underlying intention of this dog’s dinner of spurious proposals – namely to facilitate the perpetuation of fraudulent finance, following the shocks administered to the criminalist kleptocacy by recent developments.

By staging its fitful proposals over a prolonged and imprecise timeframe, the US Treasury has of course already compromised the prospects for global financial stability, since no-one now knows what is coming next. The fact that proposals have been put forward in such a vague, disjointed and dissonant manner has itself added to the febrile atmosphere of uncertainty, although the Treasury doubtless hopes that the deceptions encased within these proposals will have passed its targeted audiences by – an example being the attendees at the Chatham House event in London addressed by ‘Paulson’ at the beginning of July. These people will have been easily impressed by anything that the Secretary of the Treasury might have told them – the purpose of such presentations being to build an unthinking ‘consensus’ (in London, especially) for the treacherous ‘reforms’ that the corrupt ‘Paulson’ Treasury is putting forward.

The so-called long-term proposals (with no timeframe mentioned) would involve, to begin with, a revolution in the status of all US financial institutions. All lenders equipped with Federal deposit insurance would be granted a brand new charter certifying them as a Federally insured depository institution. All insurers offering retail products involving some degree of Federal guarantee, would be chartered as a Federal insurance institution, under the direct regulatory control (see above) of the Treasury. Finally, all other types of financial institution would receive a charter signifying their status as a Federal services provider. Note the crucial use of the adjective ‘Federal’ here: what is intended is the usurpation or duplication by the Federal Government (it is not yet clear which) of ALL the regulatory functions currently exercised by the State Governments. Whether usurpation or duplication is intended, this proposition must have gone down like a lead balloon in State capitals.

Under the first of this final batch of dubious proposals, a so-called Market Stability Regulator, namely the Federal Reserve itself, or else an entity that is subservient to it (unclear), would be established, which, however, would hardly undertake any regulating of the financial markets at all. Instead, it would ‘look out for’ threats to the stability of the US financial system, whether they might originate with mortgage lenders, banks, insurance companies, investment banks, hedge funds or any other category of institution. The only environment in which the so-called new Market Stability Regulator would intervene would be when it had formed the subjective judgment that corrective action needed to be taken to address current risks, or that it is necessary to constrain further risk-taking. This proposal appears to have nothing to recommend it at all.

Establishing further expensive bureaucracies without any teeth is a pernicious practice equivalent to a fudge, and the impression given here is that the Working Group needed somehow to convey the impression that the permissive environment that it was subversively recommending would be watched closely for aberrations, whereas the underlying and thoroughly dishonest intention and consequences of these proposals will be to maximise potential for market abuses across the board.

The next piece of gross mischief would entail the establishment of a so-called Prudential Financial Regulatory Agency, with a brief to regulate financial institutions which have explicit Government guarantees associated with their business operations. Hence this new agency would regulate all institutions equipped with Federal deposit insurance. This agency would also take over the roles of the current Federal prudential regulators (for no discernible reason), such as the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Office of Thrift Supervision.

The agency should, the report argued, focus on the protection of consumers and ‘help’ to maintain confidence in the financial system (by unspecified means). The agency would operate on the basis currently applied to the regulation of the insured depository institutions – in which case, since this new agency would replicate existing practice, why do the existing regulatory arrangements need to be changed? – using the standard capital adequacy requirement techniques, imposing investment limits, circumscribing the scope of an institution’s activities, and directing on-site risk management supervision. The agency would be focused on institutions, rather than operating generically.

On top of all this, a separate new regulator was proposed, to focus on the powerful and wayward Government-Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) which have been surreptitiously exploited to facilitate fraudulent finance operations, such as the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) and the Federal Home Loan Bank System. As we discussed in our report dated 26th December 2007, corrupt mortgage lenders have been transferring the full risk and ownership of mortgages to these off-off-budget entities which were established by the Government but positioned immediately upon their foundation, into the private sector, so that they could be excluded from the scrutiny of the Federal Budget process.

The crisis surrounding Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that blew up during the week ending 11th July 2008 – over seven months after we posted our report on the abuse of the foreclosure process on 26th December 2007 – illustrated the mischievous and destabilising nature of the Working Group’s proposals, because this dimension of the crisis ‘suddenly‘ ran out of control in July 2008, despite the fact that the President’s Working Group had intended to ‘deal with’ the Government-Sponsored Enterprises problem under its ‘long-term’ category, rather than as an immediate, burning issue of the greatest significance, as flagged by our report dated 26th December last year.

This miscalculation alone showed the Working Group to be extremely incompetent, in dereliction of its self-appointed duties, and quite incapable of handling the huge mess for which its own largely corrupt membership has been specifically responsible. Fancy treating the US GSEs as a long-term problem when several of the key GSEs have all along been at the very centre of the machinery of fraudulent finance that is in the process of being widely exposed, and which the Working Group was meant to be addressing! This was surely taking OBFUSCATION too far.

No rationalisation was presented for the proposal that a separate regulator should be established to ‘regulate’ these off-budget entities, other than the spurious one that implicit Federal backing is qualitatively differentiated from explicit Government backing. Presumably the woolly thinking here is that the legal status conferred by Federal Statute on the GSEs would be violated if the proposed Prudential Financial Regulatory Agency were to assume regulatory responsibility for the GSEs – which have hitherto, by the way, escaped all regulation and have thus provided fruitful ongoing scope for organised criminal and financial fraud operations.

The other agencies proposed by the Working Group simply would compound the confusion and the seemingly deliberate dispersion of responsibilities which this dog’s dinner of recommendations perpetrates. Specifically:

• A so-called Conduct of Business Regulatory Agency would cut across the ‘responsibilities’ of the mish-mash of other agencies, establishing the basis for endlessly unresolvable turf wars that lead nowhere. This bureaucracy would ‘observe’ disclosure information and business practices (with no indication of what it would do with these observations), and would also engage in the licensing of certain categories of business firms (so that its personnel would be tin gods).

It would supposedly absorb ‘many of’ the functions of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Commodities Futures Trading Commission, the Federal Reserve System, of the State insurance regulators and even the Federal Trade Commission. The rationale of all this is left unclear.

However it would do so, according to the Working Group’s blueprint, after an undefined period of uncertainty and therefore turmoil – during which hiatus the usual pork-barrel lobbying operations would have been deployed at full throttle, with no-one knowing which way any of the cats would be liable to jump, and a state of officially contrived chaos having long since been generated.

By this stage, the divisions of regulatory responsibilities will have multiplied to such an extent that every agency would have burgeoning responsibilities overlapping with some or all of the others, so that nothing at all could ever be resolved – a remarkably classical Leninist formula for ensuring the definitive perpetuation of the collective will of a small clique at the centre. Lenin established two orders for his Party-State, under which all the institutions of the State were replicated by Party entities. This meant that a complainant making representations to the State structures would find that his case would be frustrated by the parallel Party structures, and vice versa. This is exactly the state of affairs, albeit a much more fragmented and complicated one, that the President’s Working Group has put forward. This blueprint would have the following overall consequences:

• It would complete the process of discrediting capitalism which the free-wheeling fraudulent finance operations perpetrated by the exposed criminalist operatives and institutions have successfully initiated to date; and:

• By ensuring the perpetual overlapping of responsibilities with their concomitant bureaucratic turf warfare, it would institutionalise and confirm absolute power and freedom of corrupt action for the central controlling élite, namely for a successor group of organised financial criminals who would build upon this new foundation of institutionalised US regulatory confusion, to create the conditions for the next global financial showdown, which would certainly be terminal.

Since, whether ideologues like it or not, the ultimate objective is the destruction of free enterprise and the abolition of all private property except for the privileged criminalised élite, that showdown would be terminal. It is not going to happen, but that is the long-range objective.

Two other expensive US agencies would, under the convoluted blueprint, be tacked on to the contrived ramshackle mess so far recommended. The proposed Federal Insurance Guarantee Corporation, which is to replace (for no apparent reason) the existing Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), would charge premiums to ‘guarantee’ bank deposits and insurance payouts.

No terms are defined here (as is the case throughout this false prospectus), so it is not clear why the FDIC cannot, if really necessary, have its existing statute amended so as to expand or modify its responsibilities in accordance with this proposal. What is wrong with the existing structure?
This unanswered question is applicable throughout.

Finally, the Working Group floated the batty idea of a Corporate Finance Regulator which would supersede the functions of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and would focus on corporate disclosures, corporate governance, accounting matters, and other issues. Presumably the idea here is that there should be a special agency which sticks its nose into the affairs of US corporations generally – a suggestion that may mask a cynical political objective to subject all US corporations to an officially sponsored espionage system which would be abused, if information gathered by this agency fell into the ‘wrong’ hands. If we assume, as we must, given recent past experience, that the underlying intentions here are malevolent and mischievous, the creation of such an agency would signal to anyone who is not sitting on his or her brains that an ever more socialist United States had essentially finished with capitalism altogether.

There is also an obvious sense that these convoluted ‘regulatory’ proposals have been brought forward in bad faith for yet another reason: their purpose includes the need to deflect criticism that ‘nothing is being done to stop this happening again’. Meanwhile, the socialist European Union has predictably responded with various trial balloons suggesting that the unprecedented display of financial scandal that has been partially exposed, can at long last be exploited as a rationale for the imposition of European-style socialist (Communist) regulation which, by its nature and intent, would smother risk-taking and close off innovation.

For example, Tony Robinson, chief spokesman for the Socialist Group in the Soviet-style European Parliament, said on 3rd July 2008, quite correctly, that the capitalist system had disgraced itself and must now face much stricter regulation. Since we must agree that the capitalist system has indeed disgraced itself as a consequence of the hijacking of the American official structures by organised criminal cadres, it is hard to argue against what Mr Robinson had to say:

‘There is a groundswell of opinion building up for action at a European level. Our group wants a ban on all investment funds speculating on food. We support a proper functioning market, but what we have seen in this crisis is a most distasteful morality where decisions are driven by greed. Hedge funds have used debt to take over companies and strip out their assets. This must stop’.

Leaving aside the ideological hang-ups and ignorance of the market system embedded in these comments, it is a fact that although proposals for a pan-European regulator have not yet been crystallised into a draft EU Directive, the European Parliament has been ‘debating’ three separate proposals to crack down on private equity, hedge funds, and banking sector bonuses.

(Actually, no debate ever takes place inside the European Parliament: rather, the Members (MEPs) address the podium just as they do in the covert Soviet system. Indeed, the European Parliament chamber precisely replicates the Soviet model. In order to complete the transformation, all that would be necessary would be to replace the esoteric European flag above the podium with the familiar bust of Lenin and a nice red star plus a hammer and sickle, and we would all be back to square one. The Editor witnessed this reality in Brussels with his own eyes several weeks ago).

Should such an outcome materialise over time, as intended, the process would have been given decisive added momentum by the pillaging and fraudulent finance that have been exposed since June 2006. This would be a supposedly ‘unintended consequence’ of the organised criminality.

RESULT: EXTREME LACK OF REGULATION ENFORCEMENT
That the proposals put forward by the President’s Working Group are damaging and would have grim consequences has been well attested by people who know what they are talking about.

For instance no less than THREE former Chairmen of the Securities and Exchange Commission, David Ruder, Arthur Levitt and William Donaldson, have condemned these proposals outright, although the language they have used to date has been inappropriately circumspect.

Their general view is that a Treasury initiative to adopt the ‘principles-based’ regulatory approach applied by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission would be ‘a mistake’ (16) . David Ruder, an SEC Chairman under President Reagan, has commented that:

‘It’s not at all useful for the Securities and Exchange Commission to function on the basis of ‘a prudential-based attitude’ in which regulators solve problems by discussing them informally with market participants and asking them to change… we have an enforcement approach’ (17).

For his part, the former SEC Chairman, Arthur Levitt, a Bloomberg Board Member, has commented:

‘That proposal does more violence to protecting America’s investors from the standpoint of transparency as anything in the Paulson proposal’ (18) – referring specifically to substitution of a ‘principles-based’ approach for the tried and tested (until wantonly unenforced) rules-based approach which the existing securities market legislation requires of the SEC.

As matters stand the SEC is, however, considering the easing of its rules to allow foreign stock exchanges and brokerages to sell securities direct to US investors, under supposed surveillance by overseas regulators (such as the British Financial Services Agency) ‘who have rules that are similar to those in the United States’ (19).

In other words, even as we speak, the Securities and Exchange Commission is thinking of watering down its currently poorly enforced rules-based system to allow various foreign stock exchanges and brokerages to deal directly with US investors, rather than going through US intermediaries – so that there would be no control over the volume of dodgy financial ‘products’ that could soon be sold back into the United States, given that non-institution US investors would not necessarily be subjected to any surveillance at all. This might very well be hazardous in the future.

As for the immense problems surrounding derivatives – leveraged, securitised, hypothecated products yielding accruals that are not denominated in real US dollars, but rather exclusively as digitised entries generated electronically in just nanoseconds on bank statements – the Working Group’s proposals sidestepped them altogether: a sure indication that the real purpose of these proposals has never been to ‘solve’ any of the intractable problems created by the invasion of the capitalised system by organised crime, but rather that their purpose is precisely to obfuscate what has been happening so as to draw a veil over the criminal activities that have led to this crisis.

The irresponsible securitisation of ‘sub-prime’ loans and the hoodlum practice of mixing them up with fraudulent paper backed by no assets at all, were not even addressed.

THE ‘PROGRAMS’, OMEGA PONZI SCAMS, ETC.
Exotic investment schemes marketed by scamsters promising sky-high returns into which many Americans entered and ploughed their savings a number of years ago, and which have not paid out, may have purported to be exempt from registration under the Securities Acts of 1933 et seq. [see Glossary below] and in terms of State securities registration requirements.

Such unregistered schemes, unless narrowly they are exempt from registration in conformity with relevant stringent statutory restrictions (such as being confined, for instance, to no more than 35 subscribers nationwide), are all illegal and violate the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) and SEC regulations, and were/are also further illegal as they may not have been registered with the relevant State Securities Commission.

When considering such participations, such US investors, in conformity with the Prudent Man Rule under the 1933 Act [see Glossary] should, in performing their Due Diligence, have been in receipt, and should have reviewed, the necessary registration and prospectus documents meeting the requirements of the NASD, the SEC and State Regulators.

In cases where the issuer was a bank, the participants have undoubtedly been victimised. In all other instances, they will have acted on the basis of fraudulent documents which made them co-conspirators. The issuers were and remain engaged in Ponzi schemes, as we have several times reported [see Glossary and Appendix] and are all co-conspirators and open to prosecution under R.I.C.O. and other relevant US legislation, including multiple anti-money-laundering legislation.

Furthermore, it is likely that some American participants will have signed Non-Disclosure forms or agreements, a fatal error which will have meant that they can have no recourse to US authorities for relief from being scammed, not least because in having participated in any of these schemes and signing such forms, they became co-conspirators themselves, as indicated.

They cannot therefore seek protection from the relevant regulators, and neither can they disclose their participations, especially where money-laundering will likely have been intended, since this presupposes tax evasion: and under the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act (TEFRA) of 1982, US taxpayers are required to report all sources of income, wherever it was earned anywhere in the world. It follows that all receipts by US taxpayers since the passage of this Act which have not been reported to the Internal Revenue Service are taxable, which means that all US taxpayer holdings in offshore accounts that are not declared for tax are vulnerable to payment of the tax and penalties. Imprisonment is also dished out to tax evaders in the United States with abandon.

But the participants in these programs have received nothing and have so far forfeited 100% of their investments. Having signed Non-Disclosure documents purporting to protect the program organisers or distributors from the consequences in the United States of their criminality, and the participants from the consequences inter alia of prospective tax evasion and of co-conspiring in a felonious transaction, some participants have been left dangling and are at the mercy of ruthless MK-ULTRA-style perception manipulators who have been managing their expectations for years.

Under the regular securities laws of the United States, investors and participants have to show source of funds. How can they take receipt of the proceeds of these ‘program’ and Omega-type Ponzi schemes without exposing themselves to US authorities, in many cases with prospectively grievous consequences?

These participants need to ask themselves: are the websites that may have been managing their expectations for years disclosing both sides of the equation, or have they simply been expressing justified anger and frustration at the brazen evil of the high-level, well-connected perpetrators of these scamming programs, thus deceiving their intended readerships by failing to look at the other side of the issue, namely the possibility that the scamsters may have compromised the investors?

They also need to consider whether it is likely that the hitherto ‘protected’ perpetrators of these scams have, all along, also been relying upon their knowledge that their victims may be impotent because they may be engaged in prospective tax evasion, as a rationale for the integrity of the Greenspan-Bush Sr. ‘Never-Pay’ model. In this connection, it is axiomatic that crooks always seek to compromise their victims, thereby ensuring, for instance, that they cannot testify against them.

In the case of the Swiss banks that marketed such participations, their first priority is understood to have been to obtain the targeted investor’s signature on the coveted Non-Disclosure document. Then the participant was typically asked to prove his or her funds. Thirdly, the participant may have been requested to travel to Europe, or to courier funds to the bank’s European address, where their account would have been be opened. In cases where very large amounts were put up, the bank’s aircraft was actually dispatched to collect the participant and his funds..

Participants in these schemes may be caught, if any of these unfortunate conditions apply to their circumstances. Co-conspiracy is a function of motive. If the motive was to receive inordinately high yields and/or to evade taxes in breach of the Prudent Man Rule, TEFRA and/or Internal Revenue Service regulations, it is not at all clear on what basis expectations of repayment of principal with interest may be predicated. The fact that the perpetrators (‘principals’) of these scams are indeed despicable, ruthless snakes is no comfort for the participants because the perpetrators may have taken care to ensure that those whom they have scammed are co-conspirators as well as victims.

Even more disconcertingly, the professional perpetrators of these fraudulent finance operations were fully aware of what they were doing from the outset, and may have deliberately ensured, in these cases, that their participants became co-conspirators and would therefore become impotent to recover their funds, which the perpetrators always intended to steal.

Their evil intentions will have been based upon extensive experience of the psychological reality that victims of financial Ponzi and Pyramid scams often collapse into a state of permanent denial, unable to move beyond the mental barrier that they have lost everything. This attitude is typically associated with embarrassment at the fact that the victim has been scammed, a state of mind akin to the humiliation of being mugged or the victim of common theft.

What has been achieved to date as a direct consequence of these exposures, though, is that life has been made extremely uncomfortable for the professional and official sector perpetrators of all categories of fraudulent finance, and will most certainly become more uncomfortable day by day – as official enforcement procedures, which grind slowly but surely, bring more and more decisive pressure to bear on these snakes. Despite everything that has had to be said above, this may still provide some minimal degree of comfort, no doubt, for the victimised participants; but it may not alleviate their problems or their suffering.

What we can say with confidence is that the prevailing sense of pessimism in the United States is misplaced. Perceptions are often slow to catch up with reality. We are being bombarded with data which has almost no bearing on the current environment, which can be summed up as follows: the crooks are on the run, are being hounded day and night, have nowhere to turn, did not anticipate what was about to hit them, and have been caught completely unprepared for the onslaught.

S.E.C. ‘CORRUPTLY ENGAGED IN OWN ACCOUNT TRADING’
And here is another exposure: the Securities and Exchange Commission – still the chief securities market regulator, no less – is itself apparently corrupt. For instance, it has failed to enforce its own regulations, and has only (it appears) been galvanised into action very recently, in response to the cacophony generated inter alia by our reports. No-one has been impressed by Mr Cox’s statements recently, because the failure of the SEC to do its job properly has become widely known.

The SEC irresponsibly dismantled their own enforcement division, and to make matters very much worse, have been engaged in trading, or allowing insiders to trade, for their own account.

For what purpose? The likelihood must be that SEC personnel have been trading for their own personal enrichment, taking their cue from the Black House: the nefarious principle being that if the President of the United States and his most senior colleagues are content to exploit public office for self-enrichment purposes, then what is to stop lesser officials doing the same?

The fact that the Securities and Exchange Commission, which exists for the purpose of regulation only, has reportedly branched out into participating in exotic money-making programmes instead of concentrating on its job of regulating the securities sector, provides us with a further indication of the extreme decadence of the US financial system which can hardly hope to recover unless such grotesque abuses are eliminated.

COUNTER-PROPOSALS FOR CLEANING UP THE MESS
It is perfectly clear to anyone who is not sitting on their brains that the so-called ‘Paulson’ Treasury proposals, a.k.a. the mish-mash of half-baked notions served up by the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets, is not fit for purpose and should be relegated to the dustbin of history with immediate effect. It is further clear that these messy proposals have actually exacerbated the crisis by introducing new dimensions of uncertainty surrounding future US Government policies, thereby further undermining confidence in an environment so febrile that the entire edifice of fiat money cards has been teetering on the verge of collapse anyway.

Given the perverse effects of these proposals on financial market confidence, we can legitimately go further, and accuse the Working Group of irresponsible behaviour which is tantamount to the financial criminality which the proposals are intended to obfuscate.

To place consideration of the problems surrounding the Government-Sponsored Enterprises in the ‘long-term reform category’ when, within months of our report on the subject last December, this central dimension of the overall crisis blew up in the Working Group’s faces, surely provides all who ‘need to know’ with sufficient evidence of the Working Group’s incompetence, let alone its clearly mischievous intent, to warrant the Working Group being closed down forthwith – before it does any more damage, like the proverbial elephant in the china shop.

Michael C. Cottrell, M.S., the securities markets expert, has therefore prepared the following basic recommendations, which should be substituted for the cack-handed and extremely damaging false prospectus promulgated last March by the disreputable President’s Working Group on Financial Markets, fronted by this ‘Paulson’ fellow.

MR COTTRELL’S COUNTER-PROPOSALS ARE AS FOLLOWS:

(A) Comprehensive funding of the necessary enforcement structures, which must remain intact. The organisations most suited for this function remain the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Trade Commission. Before summarising Mr Cottrell’s proposals, here are some examples of what has happened when these regulators fail to do their jobs properly, or at all:

(1) The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC): This entity must enforce its regulations with vigour, in the context of the further reforms that Mr Cottrell recommends, below:

The Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, Christopher Dodd, and Senator Jack Reed, have asked the Government Accountability Office (formerly the Government Accounting Office, GAO) to investigate why sanctions imposed by the SEC plunged by 51%, to $1.6 billion, in the regulator’s most recent fiscal year. According to the SEC’s Annual Reports, it opened 15% fewer probes during the same period, than in the preceding fiscal year (20).

For instance, the Securities and Exchange Commission failed to enforce its regulations in the case of American Business Financial Services, Inc. (ABFS), located in Philadelphia, PA, which operated from 1988 until it declared bankruptcy in January 2005.

This case is revealing in the context being considered here.

ABFS financed its operations by selling its notes to the general public, by means of newspaper advertisements and mass mailings, which promised high interest yields. The notes it sold carried no collateral and were not insured, so that they were worthless when ABFS declared bankruptcy (21). More than 22,000 individual investors lost a total of approximately $750 million. The bankruptcy trustee has filed suit against Bear Stearns & Co., J. P. MorganChase & Co., Morgan Stanley and Crédit Suisse, to recover monies lost when these investment banks allegedly allowed or enabled ABFS to overstate the value of assets on its books (22).

ABFS extended loans to borrowers burdened with poor credit, worth more than $6.0 billion in the aggregate, which were then packaged for marketing purposes, but which essentially represented securitised pools of sub-prime loans. ABFS also secured cash from individual investors by selling the investors uncollateralised notes via public offerings (23).

The investment banks converted the sub-prime loans and uncollateralised notes into ‘interest only strips’, or ‘residuals’ which represented ‘the right to receive future cash flows from securitised loans’ (24). ABFS assigned to these securities a value much higher than their actual worth because the falsification of these values made ABFS look more financially sound than was in fact the case.

Specifically, ABFS booked more than $500 million in ‘fictitious assets’ when the investment banks allowed ABFS to underestimate early repayments of the ‘sub-prime’ loans. ABFS assumed its had a 23% prepayment rate when, in reality, Crédit Suisse had questioned the percentage as being too low. In fact, repayment rates were running at between 30% and 35% of total such ‘assets’ (25) .

Wall Street investment banks finally stopped securitising AFBS sub-prime loans when one investment bank received a letter dated 15th May 2003, addressed to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the SEC asking: ‘Who is protecting these (AFBS) investors?’

Notwithstanding this state of affairs, the Securities and Exchange Commission did not launch an investigation into the behaviour of ABFS until 2004, when ABFS asked for SEC approval to enable it to make another public offering (26). In this, as in so many other instances, the US Securities and Exchange Commission simply failed to enforce its own regulations.

We have summarised these regulations in our reports since 2006, in case this fact had escaped the SEC’s notice. It hasn’t escaped the notice of the financial community generally, so we are entitled to ask why the Securities and Exchange Commission appears to have been an exception.

The SEC regulations of specific relevance to these issues that NEED TO BE ENFORCED include the following [see also the usual Annex at the end of this report].

These details have been published here for at least 18++ months, so as to emphasis the chronic necessity of substituting the Rule of Law for the Law of the Jungle:

• 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

(2) Federal Trade Commission: This Government structure has authority to investigate fraudulent transactions in all markets.

According to a plea bargain agreement announced on 8th April 2008, a former Board Member at the New York Mercantile Exchange pleaded guilty to two felony counts relating to illegal natural gas trading. Mr Steven Karvellas, aged 48, made trades and then waited to watch how they turned out before assigning the trades either to his own account or to his client’s account – an abuse referred to as ‘trading ahead of the customer’, which is a violation of the SEC’s Fair Dealing With Customer rules. Karvellas was a floor Exchange Board Member of the publicly traded Nymex Holdings, Inc., and indeed headed up its compliance review committee when the illegal trades took place (27).

Under the supervision of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), floor brokers such as Mr Karvellas can operate both as broker for customers and trade for own account operations. This practice is referred to as the ‘dual trader’ mode, with the floor broker under an obligation to act at all times in the customer’s best interest, a responsibility that entails an obligation upon the broker to seek the best possible prices for the customer 28 .

Ironically (perhaps not, since we are of course dealing with the familiar double-mindedness here), in a letter addressed in 2002 to Nymex Holdings members as part of his campaign for re-election to the Board, Mr Karvellas opined that ‘the shocking collapse of Enron indicates that our Exchange does wear a white hat in the financial world. We illustrate how markets should operate, honestly and with openness and transparency that gains the public’s trust’ (29).

In January 2008, a Grand Jury subpoenaed a five-year-old trading ticket related to this investigation and to Mr Steven Karvellas, who pleaded guilty to tampering with physical evidence by ordering a subordinate to destroy the subpoenaed trading ticket (30).

Nymex, which has been or is currently being acquired by the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME, Inc.), and other floor exchanges, have been financially hurt by the emergence of electronic trading, and have attempted to reduce costs and to speed up the ‘open-outcry’ process [see Glossary] (31).

But floor trading remains vulnerable to manipulation: for instance, in 2005, 15 traders at the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) were indicted on charges of cheating investors. Although many of these traders actually won their criminal cases, the Exchange realised that it had to ‘do something’, and upgraded its surveillance systems at a cost of about $20 million (32).

These examples, which could be replicated here ad nauseam, illustrate the absolute necessity for a regulatory régime that is underpinned by enforcement, which must be implemented without fear or favour at all times – so that everyone participating in the financial markets is aware of the severe consequences of any breach of the rules and regulations.

Talk of operating on the basis of relatavist ‘principles’ is not only irresponsible and unprofessional: it encourages the misplaced belief among the easily swayed and the corrupt, that the ‘way forward’ need not include enforcement as conceived in the 1930s, so that everyone can feel comfortable and at ease – a recipe for the proliferation of fraudulent finance on an open-ended basis.

Moreover it is crystal clear that the dishonesty, hesitation and the sheer confusion surrounding the ‘Paulson’ proposals have severely exacerbated a fragile situation and the crisis of confidence which the criminal incompetents in charge of US financial affairs have never intended, on the basis of the massive evidence of their ongoing corruption, should be addressed in an orderly fashion, since their agenda has all along diverged from the public interest.

Almost as though it had suddenly woken up from a long slumber, the SEC was reported to have launched a probe on 13th July 2008 into the manipulation of stock prices through the spreading of false rumours, focusing on compliance controls which are supposed to be applied by traders and investment houses. This initiative appeared to mimic a similar attempt by the UK Financial Services Authority FSA) in London, to crack down on rumour-mongering and short-selling in the UK market following the plunge in the shares of HBOS (Halifax Bank of Scotland) last March.

The FSA was unsuccessful in its search, suggesting that the SEC’s response represents a belated cosmetic attempt to be seen to be ‘doing something’, since the SEC must certainly be aware of the FSA’s failed investigation. However nothing that the US regulator does now, with the benefit of any hindsight and with the fraudulent prospects implied by the Treasury’s proposals hanging over its head, can make up for its past failure to enforce its own regulations – as a consequence of which fraudulent securities operations/scams have assumed colossal and, as we have been observing, catastrophic proportions, in recent years.

The SEC’s failure and dereliction of duty is no reason for abandoning the enforcement approach in favour of a contrived, weak ‘principles-based’ approach. On the contrary, what remains essential is proper and rigorous enforcement of appropriate regulations.

(B) Mr Cottrell insists that the following structure and disciplines should be created and imposed:

Office of Inspector General for Financial Markets Compliance (OFMC):
A new regulatory entity with the function described by its title should be established by Statute, who would be required to report directly to the Chairman and ranking Member(s) of the following US Congressional Committees, who would be considered to be their superiors (Bosses):

• The US Senate Financial Services Committee.

• The US House of Representatives’ Financial Services Committee.

All management and field personnel employed by the Office of the Inspector General for Financial Markets would need to be fully trained and qualified compliance officers. Specifically:

• They must be field-tested and recognised as licensed compliance officers, and they must all be licensed under the following régimes:

(1) Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (created in July 2007 through consolidation of the NASD (National Association of Securities Dealers) and the NYSE (the New York Stock Exchange) member regulation régimes [see also: Glossary]) with respect to the following examinations:

• Series 24 [General Securities Principal];
• Series 27 [Financial and Operations Principal];
• Series 4 [Registered Options Principal];
• Series 51 [Municipal Fund Securities Principal]; and:
• Series 53 [Municipal Securities Principal].

(2) They must be licensed members of NYSE Member firms.

(3) They must be licensed as US Treasury compliance officers.

Nothing short of the deployment of management and field personnel qualified to these demanding industry standards will suffice. Because this is so, it is self-evident that the half-baked, confused and deliberately fragmentary proposals put forward by the President’s Working Group, which are intended to OBFUSCATE the situation and to lodge total power in the hands of the Presidency by default, with no checks and balances at all, represent a fraudulent prospectus, which should be consigned to oblivion forthwith. NO FURTHER CONSIDERATION SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THEM.

(C ) Michael Cottrell further demands (recommends is much too weak a word here) that The Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 must be re-enacted in order to re-establish once and for all the very stringent regulatory requirements enshrined in the 1933 and 1934 Securities Acts.

In the same context, and in parallel, the divisive Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act – written by lobbyists for the banking sector – must be repealed.

(D) Regulation of Credit and Debt Derivatives:
An essential further reform will be the development of overdue new securities regulations specifically focused on the creation, use and risk limitation of structured instrument vehicles (credit and debt derivatives). These new regulations would be enforced by the Securities and Exchange Commission (and the Federal Trade Commission, as appropriate), and of course subject to compliance oversight by the trained personnel of the newly established Office of the Inspector General for Financial Markets Compliance [see above].

(E) Finally, the revitalised regulatory regime for all US financial markets will be seen to be entirely rules-based, with all ‘legacy’ ‘principles-based’ thinking and language expunged from the system, which must be backed up by rigorous enforcement applied impartially and across the board.

SEC, FTA AND OFMC management and field personnel would be well remunerated, but at the same time subject to specified and appropriately severe sanctions in cases of official corruption within these structures. One reason why the regulations have not been properly enforced, or applied at all, in recent years is that the existing agencies, and/or certain personnel within them, have been corrupted. Fish rot from the head.

CONCLUSION
This far simpler regulatory régime requires a minimum of new legislation, building upon existing regulatory structures and experience, with the introduction of precisely ONE new US agency (the OFMC), compared with SEVEN new burdensome, confusing, bureaucratic, intentionally overlapping, obfuscatory agencies as proposed by the Working Group on Financial Markets (33).

Therefore, these straightforward reforms, instead of being spurious and deliberately opaque and spread out over an indeterminate timeframe, exacerbated by the carrying out of vague ‘studies’ as specified in the ‘Paulson’ proposals, could be implemented within a very limited timeframe at an early stage of the next Presidency. Establishing ONE new agency instead of SEVEN should, of itself, provide a powerful incentive for adopting Mr Cottrell’s straightforward proposals and for rejecting the hugely expensive and mischievous dog’s dinner put forward by the Working Group.

Such an initiative would do more to restore confidence in the battered US financial markets than innumerable further confused announcements by the ‘Paulson’ Treasury and other intermeddlers, and would place the incoming Administration on a sound financial market footing, without which everything it touches will disintegrate as has happened under the criminalised Bush II Presidency.

In short, these are straightforward, practical reforms which can be legislated for and implemented quickly. They can also be publicised with advantage ahead of their implementation, so that the US and world financial markets are made appropriately aware of the smack of firm, sound and decisive governance, with all that this approach will imply for the restoration of confidence in the battered financial markets in the United States and worldwide. (34).

Notes and References:

1. Howard Abadinsky, ‘Organized Crime’, 6th Edition, Belmont,
Wadsworth Thompson learning, 2000, pages 49-58

2. Gary Giroux, Ph. D., ‘A Short History of Accounting and Business’, available at: http://acct.tamu.edu/giroux/financial.html (Internet), page 1.

3. Giroux, op. cit., page 1.

4. Giroux, op. cit., page 2.

5. Michael C. Cottrell, M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’ thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for Master of Science, Mercyhurst College, 2001, page 33.

6. Cottrell, op. cit., page 33.

7. Cottrell, op. cit., page 33.

8. John H Hollands, Acting Director, Investment Company Division, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), ‘Government Regulation of The Distribution of Investment Company Shares’, dated 8th October 1941, page 2.

9. Hollands, op. cit., page 2.

10. Hollands, op. cit., page 2.

11. Hollands, op. cit., page 2.

12. Hollands, op. cit., page 2.

13. Hollands, op. cit., page 2.

14. ‘Treasury’s Summary of Regulatory Proposal’, The New York Times Company, 29th March 2008, available at: http://www.nytimes.com (Internet).

15. Kara Scannell and Michael R Crittenden, ‘Treasury’s Blueprint: the View from Washington’,
The Wall Street Journal, 31st March 2008, Section A, page 15.

16. Jesse Westbrook, ‘SEC Overhaul Bid by Bush Condemned by SEC Chairman (Update 1)’, New York, Bloomberg, L.P., 8th April 2008, available at: http://www.bloomberg.com (Internet), page 1.

17. Westbrook, op. cit.,, page 1.

18. Westbrook, op. cit., page 2.

19. Westbrook, op. cit., page 2.

20. Westbrook, op. cit., page 1.

21. Steve Strecklow, ‘Subprime Lender’s Failure Sparks Lawsuit Against Wall Street Banks’,
The Wall Street Journal, 9th April 2008, Section A, page 1.

22. Strecklow, op. cit., page A1.

23. Strecklow, op. cit., page A14.

24. Strecklow, op. cit., page A14.

25. Strecklow, op. cit., page A14.

26. Strecklow, op. cit., page A14.

27. Aaron Lucchetti and Gregory Meyer, ‘Dual Traders Under Fire’, The Wall Street Journal,
9th April 2008, Section C, page 1.

28. Lucchetti and Meyer, op. cit., page C18.

29. Lucchetti and Meyer, op. cit., page C1.

30. Lucchetti and Meyer, op. cit., page C18.

31. Lucchetti and Meyer, op. cit., page C18.

32. Lucchetti and Meyer, op. cit., page C18.

33. The seven new agencies recommended by the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets, which of course obfuscate the regulatory environment out to infinity, with intent, are: Mortgage Origination Commission; Market Stability Regulator; Prudential Financial Regulatory Agency; Government-Sponsored Enterprises Regulator; Conduct of Business Regulatory Agency; Federal Insurance Guarantee Corporation; and: Corporate Finance Regulator.

34. The one dimension of Mr Cottrell’s practical reforms that will require an appropriate lead-time concerns the recruitment of the necessary trained and licensed management and field compliance personnel for the new Office of the Inspector General for Financial Markets Compliance (OFMC).

In addition to the need to remunerate such expert personnel sufficiently well not least in order to minimise the temptation to succumb to bribery (which has bedeviled enforcement of late), financial compensation must reflect the expertise of recruited staff and the exceptional importance of their responsibilities. At the same time, it will not be necessary to recruit a large compliance staff. A tight ship is recommended, given that a modest staff can be motivated to higher levels of achievement, especially since the recommended ethos would be one of sober determination to stamp out market abuses and corruption generally. Despite the ravages inflicted by the permissive financial market environment in recent years, it is believed that the pool of such qualified experts who are keen to enforce the Rule of Law in the United States remains of sizeable proportions.

GLOSSARY OF U.S. FINANCIAL MARKET DEFINITIONS

References only entries specifically germane to the market issues purportedly addressed by the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets, and relevant to Mr Cottrell’s alternative proposal:

• Annunzio-Wylie Anti-Money Laundering Act of 1992:
This legislation enlarged the definition of ‘financial transaction’, and made money-transmitting, without reporting, a crime. Source: Howard Abadinsky, ‘Organized Crime’, 6th Edition, Belmont: Wadsworth/ Thompson Learning, Inc., 2000, page 411.

• Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988:
This law detailed undercover operations involving money-laundering. Source: John Madinger and Sydney A. Zalopany, ‘Money Laundering: A Guide for Criminal Investigators’, New York: CRC Press, LLC, 1999, page 43.

• Anti-Trust Laws:
US Federal legislation designed to prevent monopolies, cartelisation and restraint of trade. Landmark statutes include:
(1): Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890, which prohibited actions or contracts tending to create a monopoly and initiated an era of trust-busting;
(2): Clayton Anti-Trust Act of 1914, passed as an amendment to the Sherman Act, which dealt with local price discrimination, interlocking directorates, holding company activities and restraint of trade; and:
(3): Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914, which created the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), with the power to conduct investigations and the power to issue orders preventing unfair practices in interstate commerce. Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Ed., Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, 2006, s.v. ‘Antitrust Laws’.

•Bailout Bill:
See Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA).

• Bank Holding Company Act of 1956:
This act brought, for the first time, holding companies under the banking regulations, and provided that the holding company was subject to the same regulation and examinations as member banks. A Holding Company is a company that exercises control over another via voting shares. Organisation as a holding company allows a banking firm to engage in other non-deposit taking activities, such as discount brokerage operations, securities underwriting, and general public or industrial leasing.
Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA 13th February 2002; Munn, ‘Encyclopedia of Banking and Finance’, page 84; Fitch, Dictionary of Banking Terms, page 225. See: Financial Holding Company.

• Bank Holding Company Act Amendments of 1970:
This legislation expanded the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 by legislating for a new Holding Company that controls only one bank, and limiting the permissible activities of these entities to those ‘closely related to banking’. The effect of these amendments was to permit one-bank holding companies, such as Bank of New York Company, Inc., to become conglomerates with subsidiaries in non-banking fields without regulation. Sources: Mr Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, op. cit., thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, on 13th February 2002; Munn, ‘Encyclopedia of Banking and Finance’, page 87; Thomas A. Eder, Thompson Desktop Financial Directory, Volume 3, Skokie: Thompson Financial Publishing, Inc., 1993, page 252. See: Financial Holding Company.

• Banking Act of 1935:
This legislation implemented changes to the Federal Reserve Board, prohibiting any banker from serving on the Board of Directors, or being an officer or employee, of more than two institutions. Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, 13th February 2002; Munn, ‘Encyclopedia of Banking and Finance’, page 89. See: Financial Holding Company.

• Bank Secrecy Act of 1970:
This legislation, the formal title of which is the Currency and Foreign Transactions Reporting Act of 1970, extended to the Secretary of the US Treasury great flexibility in respect of official definitions of ‘monetary instruments’, which could now all of a sudden include ‘coins and currency of a foreign country, travelers’ checks, bearer negotiable instruments, bearer investment securities, stock on which title is passed on delivery’. The ostensible intention of this law was to deter criminal activity in order to assist criminal investigations by requiring all financial institutions to report large cash transactions and the transportation of such instruments initially exceeding $5,000, (now, amounts that in excess of $10,000). Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, 13th February 2002; See also Munn, ‘Encyclopedia of Banking and Finance’, p.109; John Madinger, Sydney A. Zalopany, ‘Money Laundering: A Guide for Criminal Investigators’, New York, CRC Press, LLC, 1999, page 43.

• Basel-II:
The Bank for International Settlements (BIS), located in Basel, Switzerland, has established and provides the Secretariat for the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, which consists of senior representatives of bank supervisory authorities and central banks from Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States. Basel-II is the comprehensive updated and agreed version of ‘International Convergence of Capital Management and Capital Standards’ revising the 1988, 1996 and 2005 texts to secure an international standard on revisions to supervisory regulations governing the capital adequacy of internationally active banks. Source. and for further information: Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, ‘International Convergence of Capital Measurement and Capital Standards’, Basel, Press & Communications, 2004, available at: http://www.bis.org (Internet).

• Bucket Shop:
An illegal brokerage firm which accepts orders from customers but does not execute them right away, as Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) regulations require. Bucket shop brokers confirm the price that the customer asked for, but in fact make the trade at a time considered to be advantageous to the broker, whose profit is the difference between the two prices. Sometimes bucket shops neglect to fill the customer’s order and just pocket the money. Main source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Bucket Shop’.

• Clayton Anti-Trust Act of 1914:
This law was passed in order to increase competition in business, by restricting the corporate activity of acquiring other competing corporations or the practice of interlocking directorships. Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, 13th February 2002; additionally: Jack C Plano and Milton Greenberg, ‘The American Political Dictionary’, 4th Edition, Hinsdale, The Dryden Press, 1976, page 328. See: Anti-Trust Laws.

• Clear:
(a): In banking: Collection of funds on which a cheque (check) is drawn, and payment of these funds to the holder of the check.
(b): In the securities sector: Comparison of the details of a transaction between brokers prior to settlement; final exchange of securities for cash on delivery. Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Clear’.

• Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CTFC):
An independent agency created by Congress in 1974 which is responsible for regulating the US commodity futures and options markets. The CFTC is responsible for ensuring the integrity of the commodity futures and options markets everywhere, and for protecting market participants against manipulation, abusive trade practices, and fraudulent operations. Primary source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘CFTC’.

• Commodity Futures Contract:
A Futures Contract that is tied to the price movements of a particular commodity. This arrangement enables contract buyers to purchase a specific amount of a listed commodity at a specified price on a particular date in the future. The price of the contract in question is determined using the ‘open outcry’ system on the floor of a US commodity exchange such as the Chicago Board of Trade or the Commodity Exchange in New York. Commodity Futures Contracts are typically based upon (a) meats (cattle and pork bellies); (b) grains (corn, oats, soybeans and wheat); (c) key metals (gold, silver and platinum); and energy products (heating oil, natural gas, and crude oil). Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Commodity Futures Contract’.

• Commercial Bank:
A State or National Bank owned by stockholders that accepts demand deposits, makes commercial and industrial loans, and performs other banking services for the public. The phrase Full Service Bank covers banks that, as is the case with many commercial banks, supply trust services, foreign exchange, trade financing and international banking services. Source: Thomas P. Fitch, ‘Dictionary of Banking Terms’, 3rd Ed., Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 1997, c.v. ‘Comm. Bank’.

• Compliance Department:
A department typically established by brokers and all US organised stock exchanges to oversee market activity and make sure that trading and other activities comply (in the United States) with Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and specific Exchange regulations. A company that does not adhere to the rules can be delisted. And a trader or brokerage firm that violates the rules can be barred from trading. Main source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Compliance Department’.

• Compliance Examination:
Periodic bank examination by a Federal regulatory agency to ensure compliance with consumer protection regulations, such as the Community Reinvestment Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and the Truth in Lending Act. Financial institutions are required by law to issue reports at regular intervals – for example, an annual statement of their mortgage lending in the lender’s market area. Compliance examinations are intended to uncover any hidden violations of consumer protection regulations so that remedial action can be taken. Source: Thomas P. Fitch, ‘Dictionary of Banking Terms’, 3rd Ed., Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 1997, c.v. ‘Compliance Examination’.

•Consumer Credit Protection Act of 1968: See: Truth in Lending Act.

• Criminalism: A new word invented by the Editor of this service, meaning the perpetration and exploitation of organised criminal operations in the interests of political strategy and/or one or more secret agendas; noun, ‘criminalist’, an operative or other cadre who engages in criminalist activities and assumes that he is protected and can therefore continue such activities beyond and above the reach of the Rule of Law. The Editor first used this word in the context of Soviet criminal operations, as exposed in Soviet Analyst, and has since extended it to cover the American variant.

• Currency and Foreign Transactions Reporting Act of 1970: See: Bank Secrecy Act.

• Debenture:
A certificate or bond acknowledging a debt on which fixed interest is being paid. Source: Oxford Senior Dictionary, Oxford University Press, 1984.

• Depository Institutional Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980:
This law gave the Federal Reserve Board tighter control over monetary policy. It also required the Fed to assign examiners to examine foreign operations of State member banks, and prohibited the Fed from rejecting any application from a one-bank holding company on the basis of a stock loan, unless that applicant’s financial arrangements were deemed to be unsatisfactory. The applications were to be judged on a case-by-case basis. The Act further proclaimed that collateral was no longer required to support Federal Reserve notes held in the vaults of the Federal Reserve banks, and that the kinds of eligible collateral for Federal Reserve notes were expanded to include those of foreign governments and/or agency or any other ‘asset’ purchasable by Federal Reserve Banks. Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, 13th February 2002; Munn, ‘Encyclopedia of Banking and Finance’, pages 252 and 253.

• Derivative Instrument (Derivative):
A contract the value of which is determined from publicly traded securities, interest rates, currency exchange rates, or market indices. Derivative Contracts are often ostensibly used for the purpose of ‘protecting’ assets against changes in value. Types of derivatives include the following:

(1): Over-the-counter derivative ‘products’, such as currency swaps and interest rate swaps, which are privately negotiated bilateral agreements, transacted OFF the organised US exchanges. In the currency markets, forward delivery contracts allow traders to lock in current prices when buying and selling baskets of currencies for future delivery.

(2): Derivative securities: Bond-like securities created when pools of loans and mortgages are packaged and sold to investors. In the hands of knowledgeable users, derivative contracts have many applications in the floating interest environment, such as managing currency and interest rate risk, or locking financing costs in by swapping floating rate debt for fixed-rate debt.

Derivatives gained public notoriety in the 1990s when a number of corporations and municipalities embarked upon the use of derivatives for speculative purposes (known as ‘taking a view on the market’), and suffered large losses when interest rates moved against them. Source: Thomas P. Fitch, ‘Dictionary of Banking Terms’, 3rd Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 1997, c.v. ‘Derivative’.

• Disclosure:
Release by listed companies of all information, both positive and negative, that might bear on an investment decision, as required by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the stock exchanges. Source: Thomas P. Fitch, ‘Dictionary of Banking Terms’, 3rd Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 1997, c.v. ‘Compliance Examination’.

• Edge Act:
Passed in December 1919, the Edge Act, under the heading ‘Banking Corporations Authorized to Do Foreign Banking Business’, permitted the establishment of foreign banking corporations that aided in the financing of foreign trade. This allowed US banks to establish branches in foreign countries to accommodate American corporations engaged in foreign trade transactions. Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, his thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science (M.S.), The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, 13th February 2002; Munn, ‘Encyclopedia of Banking and Finance’, page 289.

• Equal Credit Opportunity Act of 1974:
Monitored by the Federal Trade Commission (FTA), this legislation seeks to ensure that all US consumers are given an equal chance to obtain credit. The Act prohibits discrimination in the granting of credit on the basis of race, colour, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age, receipt of income from any public assistance scheme, and good faith exercise of any rights under consumer protection legislation. The US Department of Justice may file a lawsuit under the Act where a pattern or practice of discrimination appears to exist. For further information, see: http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/housing/housing_ecoa.htm (Internet).

• Emergency Banking Relief Act:
Passed on 9th March 1933, this Act was triggered following the national liquidity crisis that followed the stock market crash of 29th October 1929 and the extended ‘bank holiday’ of the 4th-12th March 1933. The bank holiday closed all banks nation-wide for one week by order of President Franklin D Roosevelt, to control the wave of banking failures and to restore confidence in the United States’ battered banking system. This legislation permitted banks to issue new stock, with the new stock exempt from subjecting the holder to be liable for the bank’s previously issued stock. The Act also authorised the issuance of US Federal Reserve Bank notes that were redeemable in lawful money in the United States, as 100% obligations of the Federal Government. Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, Administration of Justice Department, at Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, 13th February 2002; Moore, ‘The Federal Reserve System’, pages 81-82; Fitch, ‘Dictionary of Banking Terms’, pages 46 and 83.

• Enronisation: A new word coined by the Editor of this service, meaning ‘hollowing out’. Verb: ‘to enronise’; noun: ‘enronist’, a financial criminal who ‘hollows out’ a targeted entity. The essence of the destruction of Enron was that executives and directors formed private partnerships and stole or diverted financial assets or proceeds from the corporation into offshore bank accounts of the partnerships. These diverted monies were then systematically leveraged and hypothecated into high-yield investment and other programs which wound up being far more profitable than Enron itself. Such illegitimate financial arrangements proliferated, so that the original enterprise, Enron, was ‘hollowed out’, while the illicit partnerships prospered, with 100% of the proceeds being held undeclared and untaxed offshore. ‘Enronisation’ strategies are applied not only to companies, but also to whole countries (e.g., Ireland, Zimbabwe, Iceland, probably also Spain (forthcoming)).

• Federal Reserve Act of 1913:
The purpose of this legislation, according to the precise language of the Act, was ‘to provide for the establishment of US Federal Reserve Banks, to furnish an elastic currency, to afford means of rediscounting commercial paper, to establish a more effective supervision of banking in the United States and for other purposes’. The Act established two basic structures:
(1): A central body known as the Federal Reserve Board; and:
(2): Not more than 12 Reserve banks located throughout the country. The Federal Reserve Board is comprised of seven members appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the US Senate for 14-year terms. Sources: Mr Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, his thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, on 13th February 2002 Carl H. Moore, The Federal Reserve System, Jefferson: McFarland & Company, Inc., 1990, page 7; Fitch, Dictionary of Banking Terms, page 46.

• Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914:
This legislation established the Federal Trade Commission as the ‘watchdog of competition’, and as a comprehensive regulatory authority empowered to protect the consumer against ‘unfair methods of competition’. Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, the thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science (M.S.), for The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, 13th February 2002; See also: Munn, ‘Encyclopedia of Banking and Finance’, page 383. See: Anti-Trust Laws.

• Financial Future:
A Futures Contract based upon (relating to) a financial instrument. Such contracts usually move under the influence of interest rates: as interest rates rise, contracts fall in value; as rates decline, contracts gain in value. Examples include: Treasury Bills, Treasury Notes, GNMA Pass-Throughs, foreign currencies, and Certificates of Deposit (CDs). Main source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Ed., Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Financial Future’.

• Financial Guarantee:
A non-cancellable indemnity bond guaranteeing the timely payment of principal and interest due on securities by the maturity date. If the issuer defaults, the insurer will pay out a fixed sum of money to holders of the securities. Financial guarantees are further written by banks which are allowed to operate in the insurance business by the Garn-St Germain Act of 1982, which prohibited banks from entering the insurance business. Insurance companies selling bond insurance must be monoline underwriters, a status which precludes their direct ownership by property and casualty insurance corporations. Source: Thomas P. Fitch, ‘Dictionary of Banking Terms’, 3rd Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 1997, c.v. ‘Financial Guarantee’

• Financial Holding Company: The Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 prohibited any affiliations between banks and insurance companies (referred to as ‘firewall restrictions’). A Bank Holding Company qualifies as a Financial Holding Company if:
(1): Its banking subsidiaries are ‘well capitalised’ and ‘well managed’; and:
(2): It files with the Federal Reserve Board a certification to such effect and a declaration that it elects to become a Financial Holding Company.

Securities firms and insurance companies must undergo a two-stage process: first, they must qualify as Bank Holding companies under the 1956 Act; and secondly they must then qualify as Financial Holding Companies. Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Financial Holding Company’.

• Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA): FINRA was brought into existence in July 2007 through consolidation of the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) and NYSE Member Regulation. It is the largest US non-governmental regulator and covers all securities firms doing business in the United States. FINRA oversees nearly 5,000 brokerage firms, about 172,000 branch offices and more than 676,000 registered securities representatives. Source: Financial Regulatory Authority, corporate information ‘About FINRA’: copyright 2008 FINRA; this document is available from: http://www.finra.org (Internet).

• Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA):
Enacted on 9th August 1989, this legislation addressed the crisis affecting the Savings and Loan Associations (‘thrifts’) after the sector had been ‘enronised’ by the criminalist kleptocracy headed by George H. W. Bush Sr. Also known as the Bailout Bill, this legislation revamped the regulatory, insurance and financing structures, establishing the Office of Thrift Supervision. It created:

(1): The Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) which, operating under the management of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), was charged with closing or merging institutions which had become insolvent and would be becoming insolvent in the future;

(2): The Resolution Funding Corporation (a.k.a. REFCORP), which was charged with borrowing from private capital markets to fund the RTC’s operations to manage the remaining assets and liabilities that had been taken over/assumed by the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation (FSLIC), a Government-Sponsored Enterprise (GSE), prior to 1989;

(3): The Savings Association Insurance Fund (SAIF), which was to replace the FSLIC as the insurer of ‘thrift’ deposits and would henceforth be administered by the FDIC separately from its bank deposit insurance programme, which then became the Bank Insurance Fund (BIF); and:

(4): The Federal Housing Finance Board (FHFB), which was charged with overseeing the Federal Home Loan Banks.

• The Resolution Trust Corporation was authorised to accept additional insolvent institutions up to June 1995, after which date responsibilities for the handling of newly failed institutions was shifted to SAIF. This typically convoluted mishmash of arrangements successfully (up to a point) masked and obfuscated the reality, which was that the Savings and Loans Associations (S & Ls) had been systematically scammed and ‘enronised’ by the organised kleptocracy, this being the model for the kleptocracy’s subsequent systematic attacks on the US financial bedrock.

• The overall strategy here was to allow the scandal to escalate to the point where Congressional action became mandatory, whereupon Congress was pressurised to establish institutions that the insiders could then exploit – in this case, to buy up vast portfolios of land and assets for cents on the US dollar, which were then used as collateral for borrowings that were in turn leveraged and hypothecated into high-yield trading programmes for the benefit of the corrupt insider community.

Source for technical information (not the commentary):
John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIERRA)’.

• Financial Institutions Regulatory Act of 1978 prohibits management interlocks by banks operating in the same Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). However it exempts the smaller banks, and permits interlocks of up to 49% of a bank’s management officers. See also entry: Interlocking Directorates. Source: Thomas P. Fitch, ‘Dictionary of Banking Terms’, 3rd Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 1997, c.v. ‘Interlocking Directorates’.

• Financial Operations Officer, of a Securities firm: The financial Operations Officer of a securities firm is equally responsible with the Registered Principal [see Principal, of a Securities firm], for the firm’s financial reports to the SEC and the NASD, for the accurate record-keeping of the firm’s Net Capital Account, and for all trades and customer accounts and correspondence, advertising, and sale literature issued by the company. The Financial Operations Officer must also pass the Series 27 (Financial and Operations Principal) as well as the Series 7 (General Securities Representative) Examinations conducted by the NASD; and must further pass written procedures and oral interview prior to assuming this position with the firm. Source: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, the thesis he submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, on 13th February 2002; NASD, ‘National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.: Manual’, April 1998, page 3171; NASD, ‘NASD Compliance Check List’.

• Financial Services Modernization Act (FSMA) of 1999, also known as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act: This Act repealed parts of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 and the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956. It permits commercial banks, merchant banks, securities firms and insurers to affiliate through the structure called the Financial Holding Company. Under the Act, Nationally (Federally) Chartered Banks are permitted to engage in most financial activities through Direct Subsidiaries. The FSMA permitted Financial Holding Companies to:
1: Lend;
2: Exchange;
3: Transfer;
4: Invest for others;
5: Safeguard money or securities (custodial services);
6: Engage in insurance activities, including insuring and acting as principal, agent, or broker for all types of insurance (including health), and providing financial advice (including the provision of financial advice to investment companies);
7: Issue or sell instruments representing interests in pools of assets that are permissible for a bank to hold indirectly;
8: Underwrite, deal in, or make a market in securities with no limitation as to revenue;
9: Engage in activities outside the United States;
10: Be seized of the following (text is verbatim here): ‘The Federal Reserve Board has determined to be usual in connection with the transaction of banking or other financial operations abroad’.
Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. under: ‘Financial Services Modernization Act’.

• FinCEN [Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] is a bureau of the US Treasury which collects and analyses information about financial transactions in order to combat money laundering, the financing of terrorism, and other financial crimes and fraudulent finance. In line with the double-mindedness which characterises the kakocracy, almost all the senior criminalist figures identified in our reports have themselves been engaged in financing terrorism on a colossal scale.

Created in 1990, FinCEN seeks to realise the potential of critical information-sharing among law enforcement agencies and its other partners in the regulatory and financial communities. While the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network’s task is to safeguard the US financial system from abuses associated with financial crime, including the financing of terrorism, money laundering and other illicit activities, it does nothing the curb the excesses of the criminalists holding high office, who assume that the privileges and power of their offices, together with their prolific use of the ‘Black Arts’ of bribery and blackmail, protect them from the consequences of their actions.

While, therefore, FinCEN’s publicity presupposes that it thinks it is doing a good job, the record inter alia of our reports suggests the reverse. FinCEN was established by order of the Treasury Secretary (Treasury Order Numbered 105-08) on 25th April 1990. In May 1994, its responsibilities were broadened to include regulatory responsibilities, and the US Treasury’s Office of Financial Enforcement (OFE) was merged with FinCEN in October 1994. On 26th September 2002, after the passage of Title III of the USA Patriot Act, Treasury Order Numbered 180-01 [1] made FinCEN an official bureau within the Department of the Treasury.

Under Section 314(a) of the USA Patriot Act of 2001, Federal law enforcement agencies, through FinCEN, are empowered to reach out to more than 45,000 points of contact at over 27,000 financial institutions to locate bank accounts and transactions by persons that may be involved in terrorist financing and/or money laundering. This cooperative partnership between the financial community and law enforcement allows disparate items of information to be identified, centralised, and rapidly evaluated. FinCEN has its headquarters in Vienna, VA. See: www.fincen.gov [Internet].

• Full Disclosure: Public information requirements established by the Securities Act of 1933, the Securities Act of 1934, and the major US stock exchanges. Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, see their ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Full Disclosure’.

• Garn-St Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982: This Federal law was enacted in 1982, and authorised banks and savings institutions to offer a new type of account, known as the Money Market Deposit Account, which is a transaction account with no interest rate ceiling, to compete more effectively with money market mutual funds. The legislation also gave the Savings and Loan Associations the authority to extend commercial loans; and it gave Federal regulatory agencies the authority to approve, for the first time, interstate acquisitions of failed institutions and also savings institutions. Thus, the Act effectively created the environment for the subsequent enronisation of the Savings and Loan Associations, providing inter alia that:

(1): Savings and Loan Associations were authorised to extend commercial, corporate, business or agricultural loans up to 10% of assets after 1st January 1984;

(2): The deposit interest differential, allowing Savings and Loans and Savings Banks to offer rates on interest-bearing deposit accounts that were 0.25 of 1% higher than commercial banks, was lifted, as of January 1984;

(3): The Act authorised a new capital assistance program, the Net Worth Certificate Program, under which the US Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation would be able to purchase novel capital instruments called Net Worth Certificates from savings institutions with net worth-to-assets ratios of under 3%, and would subsequently redeem the certificates as they regained financial health;

(4): The Act permitted Savings and Loan Associations to offer checking accounts (demand deposit accounts) to individuals and business checking accounts to customers who had other accounts;

(5): Savings and Loans were authorised to increase their consumer lending from 20% to 30% of assets, and to expand their dealer lending and floor-plan loan financing;

(6): The Act raised the ceiling on direct investments by savings institutions in nonresidential real estate from 20% to 40% of assets, and also allowed investment of 10% of assets in education loans for any educational purpose, and up to 100% of assets in state and municipal bonds;

(7): The Act pre-empted State restrictions on enforcement by lenders of due-on-sale clauses in most mortgages for a three-year period ending on 15th October 1985, and further authorised State chartered lenders to offer the same kind of alternative mortgage deals that nationally chartered financial institutions were allowed to offer (opening the door to what became the ‘sub-prime’ crisis;

(8): The Act authorised the Comptroller of the Currency to charter Bankers’ Banks, or depository institutions owned by other banks;

(9): It made State chartered industrial banks eligible for Federal deposit insurance; and:

(10): It raised the legal lending limit for National Banks from 10% to 15% of their capital and surplus.

Source: Thomas P. Fitch, ‘Dictionary of Banking Terms’, 3rd Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 1997, c.v. ‘Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act’. See also: Financial Guarantee; Savings and Loan Deregulation.

• Glass-Steagall Act of 1933:
Legislation passed by Congress which:

(1): Authorised deposit insurance;

(2): Prohibited commercial banks from owning full-service brokerages (Securities Houses of Broker/Dealers);

(3): Prohibited banks from undertaking investment banking activities, for instance underwriting corporate securities or municipal revenue bonds;

(4): Was framed to insulate bank depositors from the risk involved when a bank deals in securities, in order to prevent banks from collapsing.

The Glass-Steagall Act was disabled by the Financial Services Modernization Act (a.k.a. the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, a.k.a. the Financial Services Modernisation Act). Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Glass-Steagall Act’.

• Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999:
See: Financial Services Modernization Act; Glass-Steagall Act of 1933.

• Guarantee: This entails the acceptance of responsibility for payment of a debt or for performance of some obligation if the person (entity) primarily liable fails to perform. The guarantor acquires a Contingent liability – namely, a potential liability that is not going to be recognised in accounts until the outcome becomes probable in the opinion of the company’s accountant. Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Guarantee’.

• Guaranteed Bond: A Bond that is characterised by the fact that the principal and interest are guaranteed by a firm other than the issuer. Both guaranteed stock and guaranteed bonds become, in effect, debenture (unsecured) bonds of the guarantor. Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, see: ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Guaranteed Bond’.

• High-Yield Investment Program:
A sophisticated scam perpetrated in many instances by corrupt elements of US intelligence and associates, masterminded inter alia by the arch-criminalist George H. W. Bush Sr. and his corrupt co-conspirator, Dr Alan Greenspan, the former Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board. Due to overuse of this term by the corrupt operators, it has become more or less synonymous with the generic term ‘fraudulent finance’, and with Ponzi and Pyramid Schemes (known as ‘pyramid-selling schemes’ in Britain). Experts are divided as to whether most High-Yield Investment Programs are Ponzi schemes, or not. Our own investigations suggest that colossal sums of stolen and duplicated funds (as explained in the Wantagate reports) were also used in these schemes, with stolen money being employed as purported back-up for promised and actual initial payouts. However these were never intended to occur beyond the first and perhaps the second layers, as the fraudulent finance techniques were used to entice retail investors into parting permanently with their funds, often after signing illegal Non-Disclosure Agreements.

High-yield investment programs were/are able to collect large amounts of money for the criminalist operators because initial payoffs to first and second round participants (financed from the stolen money in the case of the giga-scams presided over inter alia by the aforementioned master crooks) gave the scams momentum by spreading news of the sizeable initial payments by word of mouth – a situation that prevails as long as new participants can be found and/or old participants are foolish enough to leave their money in the schemes in the hope of gaining high rolled-up interest on their initial investments. Participants are usually attracted by some form of an appeal to emotion or faith that the program will help them to achieve rapid financial freedom. High-Yield Investment Programs may also mirror pyramid-selling schemes by offering current investors incentive commissions, for instance, 9% of investment by the participant on top of promised accruals, to recruit new investors.

Notorious documented High-Yield Investment Programs include:
(1): OSGold, founded as an e-gold ‘imitation’ in 2001 by David Reed, It folded in 2002. According to a lawsuit filed in US District Court in 2005, operators of OSGold may have made off with $230 million.

(2): The second largest documented High-Yield Investment Program was PIPS (People In Profit System), or Pure Investors. Started by Bryan Marsden in 2004, this scheme spanned more than 20 countries. PIPS was investigated by Bank Negara Malaysia in 2005, resulting in Marsden and his wife being charged in a Malaysian Court with some 97 counts of money laundering more than 77 Malaysian ringgit, equivalent to $20 million [New Straits Times, 11th October 2006]. Yet even after these charges were brought, many of Marsden’s followers continued to support him and to believe that they would be seeing their money in future. A similar rationalisation and denial syndrome can be observed in many other High-Yield Investment Program contexts.

(3): Indicted operators or schemes under investigation:
12DailyPro Autosurf (United States: Securities and Exchange Commission); Ginsystem, Inc. (Singapore: Commercial Affairs Department of Singapore); IT4US (United States); PlexPlay (Norway: HegnarOnline, in Norwegian); Solidinvestment (United States).

The foregoing provides merely a preliminary outline of the background to these scams, concerning which a considerable literature now exists. Promoting or perpetuating Ponzi schemes is a criminal offence punishable by jail terms or fines in most countries. The fact that the High-Yield Investment Program monitoring websites publicise disclaimers to the effect that the sites ‘do not promote the programs advertised’ on their websites, does not absolve the operators from criminal liability.

A disturbing feature of this environment is that a large number of High-Yield Investment Program participants persist in participating in further schemes long after they have already lost money in schemes that have either folded, or in respect of which the operator has disappeared. The fact that most of the publicised schemes are openly labelled scams on the relevant Internet monitor boards, even though their operators are themselves criminally liable, suggests that many participants are well aware of the risks they are running, know that the schemes are fraudulent, but choose to put money in them anyway, like addicted gamblers.

Former officials and members of the US armed forces may have been taken in by indications that the operators were officially connected or even that the scams in which they have participated were legitimate because of such alleged connections, including intelligence backgrounds.

The perpetrators play on the understandable anger felt by those who have been scammed, even though they were originally enticed by the US perpetrators into becoming prospectively felonious participants themselves, a condition which leads psychologically to the state of denial that in turn supposedly provides the perpetrators with the protection that they require.

However the operators, sitting on their stolen funds, may well fear the ultimate outcome, should manipulation of the expectations of the scammed investors cease to remain perversely ‘credible’, or those manipulative counterintelligence Psy-Ops initiatives are closed down.

• Hypothecation:
Originally a pledge of property as collateral for indebtedness without transfer of possession to the party extending the loan. This arrangement is common in the case of mortgages. The borrower retains legal ownership of the property but provides the lender with a lien over the property until the debt is paid off. Rehypothecation occurs when a broker pledges hypothecated client-owned securities in a margin account to secure a bank loan.

The fraudulent finance buried inside the ‘sub-prime’ mortgage nexus of scandals was explained in our report dated 26th December 2007 [www.worldreports.org: Archive]. As described in that report, the ‘homeowner’ has been scammed, either he or she has been coerced into signing several top copies of the same document, enabling the lending bank to claim ownership even though the bank has sold the mortgage on the basis of another top copy, for instance, to one of the co-conspiring Government-Sponsored Enterprises; or because the bank has alienated its ownership of the loan to the GSE in question, or has packaged the mortgage with other loans, as well as with worthless securities underpinned by no real asset, and has sold such packages on to parties (usually abroad) which have not performed due diligence.

In our report of 26th December 2007, we advised ALL US ‘homeowners’ facing foreclosure to let the Court know that the underlying contract has been requested from the bank. In most instances, the bank will be unable to supply it, because it has sold on the mortgage to the GSE, having therefore already passed on the risk. People facing foreclosure who ask for the contract can usually expect to be pleasantly surprised at the outcome of their cases.

• Internal Revenue Service (IRS):
The IRS is part of the US Treasury Department, and was officially created by Act of Congress on 1st July 1962. The IRS is responsible for administering and enforcing the Internal Revenue Code (IRC), as established under US Congressional authority, passed in 1913, to levy taxes on the income of individuals and corporations.

In 1939, the IRC was codified from the separate Internal Revenue laws. The IRS Code was further overhauled in 1954, with substantive new provisions being added concerning depreciation, the double taxation of dividends, research and experimental expenditures, carryback on operating losses, tax on ‘unreasonable’ accumulations of surplus, preferred stock bail-outs, and collapsible corporations and partnerships.

Of the enormous changes to the IRC implemented since 1954, the most important for the context we are dealing with here was the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act (TEFRA) of 1982 which, inter alia, required US taxpayers to report all sources of income, wherever it was earned anywhere in the world. It follows that all receipts received by American taxpayers since the passage of this Act which have not been reported to the Internal Revenue Service are taxable, which means that all US taxpayer holdings in offshore accounts that have not been declared for tax are liable for tax and penalties. Main source: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, for The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, 13th February 2002; see also: Munn, ‘Encyclopedia of Banking and Finance’, page 589.

• Interlocking Directorates:
These reference commercial banks or savings institutions which have individuals on their Boards of Directors who further serve on the Board or Boards of one or more unaffiliated competitor(s) operating in the same marketplace. The US Financial Institutions Regulatory Act of 1978 prohibits management interlocks by banks operating in the same Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). But it exempts smaller banks, and also permits interlocks of up to 49% of a bank’s management officers. Source: Thomas P. Fitch, ‘Dictionary of Banking Terms’, 3rd Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 1997, c.v. ‘Interlocking Directorates’.

• International Banking Act of 1978:
This legislation essentially places American branches and agencies of foreign banks under the supervision of US bank regulators. The provisions included: authorising the Comptroller of the Currency to license and supervise a foreign bank; authorising Federal bank agencies to examine US offices of any foreign bank; subjecting any foreign bank branch or holding company to the Bank Holding Company Act, just like any US bank holding company; and imposing reserve requirements and Federal deposit insurance coverage for foreign banks to the same extent as the US member banks. Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, for The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, 13th February 2002; see: Munn, ‘Encyclopedia of Banking and Finance’, page 563.

• International Banking Act of 1987:
Created a Federal regulatory structure similar to the Federal Reserve to examine the assets and liabilities of foreign banks on-site, and to ensure similar licensing and regulation of non-banking activities of foreign banks. It also required the Federal Reserve to maintain the same competitive equity requirements for foreign banks as for US member banks. Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, 13th February 2002; Munn, ‘Encyclopedia of Banking and Finance’, page 563.

• Investment Banking:
The sale and distribution of a new offering of securities, carried out by a financial intermediary (an investment banker), who purchases securities from the issuer as principal, and assumes the risk of distributing securities to investors. Source: Thomas P. Fitch, ‘Dictionary of Banking Terms’, the 3rd Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 1997, c.v. ‘Investment Banking’.

• Investment Company Act of 1940:
This Act requires that all companies which offer securities or investment advice to the public must register with the Securities and Exchange Commission. For instance, any advisory corporation that offers investment advice (not straight reporting, but advice) must register with the SEC. For those who may be interested, this explains why this service does not offer advice and will not respond to the frequent requests for financial investment advice that we routinely receive. Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, for The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, 13th February 2002; Munn, ‘Encyclopedia of Banking and Finance’, page 589.

• Kakocracy: Rule by the worst elements of society exclusively in their own interests and with cynical and permanent disregard for the interests of anyone else.

• Kleptocracy: The ascendancy of a rapacious, thieving class of co-conspiratorial bandits protected by public office that is bent on maximising the open-ended potential of their office and power for personal enrichment and for the furtherance of clandestine agendas divorced from the interests of the people and the constituencies they are supposed to serve. This term is used in these reports even though kleptomania is strictly defined in the Oxford Senior Dictionary as ‘an uncontrollable tendency to steal things, with no desire to use or profit by them’.

The definition is interesting, because it reveals an element of madness that is clearly inherent in the behaviour of the criminalist snakes identified in these reports. This madness can be observed in the rapacious behaviour, for instance, of the arch-criminalist DVD godfather, George Bush Sr., whose avarice for other people’s money notoriously knows no bounds, despite his age, indicating that he chooses to remain unaware of his own mortality: a characteristic of greed which can only be described as symptomatic of mental derangement.

• Leverage, Financial and Investment:

(1): Financial Leverage: Debt in relation to equity in a firm’s capital structure (such as long-term debt, preferred stock, and shareholders’ equity. Financial leverage is measured by the debt-to-equity ratio: the more long-term debt there is, the greater the financial leverage.

(2): Investment leverage: A means of enhancing return or value without increasing investment: for instance, by buying securities on margin with borrowed money. Extra leverage may be achievable if the leveraged security is convertible into common stock.

(3): Note: Option contracts provide leverage, with NO borrowings, offering the prospect of high return for little or no investment.

Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Leverage’.

• Maloney Act of 1938: An amendment to the Securities Act of 1933 which created the US National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD). The legislation promoted the organisation of member securities dealers as a Self-Regulating Organizations (SRO) under the supervision of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to institutionalise a code of ethics in the securities industry and its enforcement nationwide. NASD members are known as Broker/Dealers, since they represent both clients that buy and/or sell securities, and themselves, as a principal, when they are engaged in underwriting and/or selling a stock or bond issue directly to the public. The NASD is the only firm operating under the Maloney Act. See: NASD: National Association of Securities Dealers. Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, 13th February 2002; NASD, ‘National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.: Manual, April 1998, page 3171.

• Margin Accounts: See Mark to [The] Market and: Margin Requirements

• Margin Requirements:
The minimum amount that a client must deposit in the form of cash or eligible securities in a Margin Account, as is spelled out under Regulation T of the Federal Reserve Board. Regulation T requires a minimum of $2,000 or 50% of the purchase price of eligible securities bought on margin or 50% of the proceeds of short sales. Also referred to as the Initial Margin. Primary source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Margin Requirement’.

• Margin Security:
This is a security that may be bought or sold in a Margin Account. Regulation T of the Federal Reserve Board defines margin securities as:

(1): Any registered security (a listed security or a security having unlisted trading privileges);

(2): Any OTC margin stock or OTC margin bond, which are defined as any unlisted security that the Federal Reserve Board (FRB) periodically identifies as having the investor interest, marketability, disclosure and solid financial position of a listed security;

(3): Any OTC security designated as qualified for trading in the National Market System under a plan approved by the Securities and Exchange Commission;

(4): Any mutual fund or unit investment trust registered under the Investment company Act of 1940. Other securities that are not exempt securities must be transacted in cash. Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Margin Security’.

• Mark to [The] Market:
Adjustment of the valuation of a security or portfolio to reflect current (prevailing) market values. For instance, Margin Accounts are marked to market in order to ensure compliance with financial maintenance requirements. (In UK parlance, the definite article is dropped). Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Mark To The Market’.

• Money laundering:
Passing illegally acquired funds or taxable funds on which no tax has been paid inter alia with the intent to evade tax and to hide the funds from relevant national authorities. American legislation addressing money-laundering includes:

(1): The Bank Secrecy Act of 1970;
(2): The Money Laundering Control Act of 1986;
(3): The anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988;
(4): The Annunzio-Wylie Money Laundering Act of 1992;
(5): The Money Laundering Suppression Act of 1944; and:
(6): The Terrorism Prevention Act of 1996.

The Money Laundering Control Act of 1986 made money laundering a Federal crime corresponding to the previously passed Organized Crime Control Act of 1970. See separate entries in Glossary.
Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, 13th February 2002; Munn, Encyclopedia of Banking & Finance, page 109; also: John Madinger and Sydney A. Zalopany, ‘Money Laundering: A Guide for Criminal Investigators’, New York, CEC Press, LLC, 1999, page 43; Howard Abadinsky, ‘Organized Crime’, 6th Edition, Belmont: Wadsworth/Thompson Learning, Inc., 2000, page 411; FINCEN, ‘The Global Fight Against Money Laundering’, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FINCEN, 1999, available from: http:// www.occ.treas.gov/launder (Internet).

• Money Laundering Control Act of 1986:
This legislation made money laundering a Federal crime corresponding to the previously passed Organized Crime Control Act of 1970. See: Money laundering.

• Money Laundering Suppression Act of 1994: Legislation which required that ‘any person who owns or controls a money services business’ must register with the Secretary of the Treasury. Source: FINCEN, ‘The Global Fight Against Money Laundering’, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FINCEN, 1999, available from: http:// www.occ.treas.gov/launder (Internet).

• Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MRSB): See Self-Regulatory Organization (SRO), below.

• NASD: National Association of Securities Dealers:
A non-profit organisation that was formed under the joint sponsorship of the Investment Bankers’ Conference and the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in order to comply with the requirements of the Maloney Act. NASD Members include virtually all investment banking houses and firms dealing in the Over-the-Counter Market.

Operating under the supervision of the SEC, the basic purposes of the NASD are to:
(1): Standardise practices in the field;
(2): Establish high moral and ethical standards in the securities trading business;
(3): Provide a representative body to consult with the Government and investors on matters of common interest;
(4): Establish and enforce fair and equitable rules of securities trading;
(5): Establish a disciplinary body capable of enforcing the above provisions.

The NASD requires members to maintain ‘quick assets’ in excess of current liabilities at all times.

Within the NASD, a special Investment Companies Department concerns itself with the problems of investment companies and has the responsibility of reviewing companies’ sales literature in that segment of the securities industry.

Michael C. Cottrell, M.S., has described the NASD’s contemporary responsibilities as including the following (to be read in conjunction of the foregoing information):

(1): Nationwide inspections of member firms;
(2): Provision of centralised computerised surveillance of the trading of NASD Automated Quotations, of its sister company NASDAQ;
(3): Enforcement of Securities and Exchange Commission rules and regulations, as well as of its own rules for members;
(4): To review underwriting arrangements for securities offered to the public;
(5): To perform and monitor qualification examinations of personnel of members; and:
(6): To coordinate and cooperate with the SEC, the States and with other Federal agencies.

The responsibilities of the SEC do NOT include trading on own account [see text], a gross abuse of which it has been and continues to be accused. This abuse is inconsistent with its responsibilities as a regulator and is considered by experts to be a scandalous development. See also: Financial Industry Regulator Authority (FINRA). Sources: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘NASD’; Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, 13th February 2002; Munn, ‘Encyclopedia of Banking & Finance’, page 696.

• National Market System: See: Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

• Non-Disclosure agreement:
An illegal document which, if signed by a participant to a transaction, precludes any recourse to official regulators for protection after the participant has predictably been scammed, and likewise precludes any legal recourse.

• Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC):
This is the chief regulator of US National Banks. The Comptroller of the Currency is appointed by the President of the United States for a five-year term, with Senate confirmation. The OCC, the supervisory agency covering nationally chartered banks, is the oldest US Federal regulator of financial institutions. The Comptroller of the Currency also serves as one of the three Directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Source: Thomas P. Fitch, ‘Dictionary of Banking Terms’, 3rd Ed., Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, 1997, c.v. ‘Comptroller of the Currency’.

• Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS):
This US Federal agency was established under the Financial Institutions Reform, recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 to examine and supervise Savings and Loan Associations (‘thrifts’) and Federal Savings Banks. It replaced the Federal Home Loan Bank Board as the primary regulator of State chartered and Federally chartered savings institutions. It is a bureau within the US Treasury Department. The Director and Chief Operating Officer (CEO) of OTS is appointed by the President of the United States with Senate confirmation, and is also one of five directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). The fact that the OTS is structured within the US Department of the Treasury parallels the position with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. Source: Thomas P. Fitch, ‘Dictionary of Banking Terms’, 3rd Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 1997, c.v. ‘Office of Thrift Supervision’.

• ‘Open outcry’:
A non-electronic method of communication between professionals on a stock or futures exchange involving shouting and the use of hand signals to transfer information primarily about buy and sell orders. The component of the trading floor where this takes place is often called the pit. The best-known ‘open outcry’ markets in the United States remain the New York Mercantile Exchange, the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, the Chicago Board of Trade, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, and the Minneapolis Grain Exchange. In the United Kingdom, the London Metal Exchange (LME) still makes use of the ‘open outcry’ method. Many traders prefer the ‘open outcry’ system on the basis that physical contact in the pit allows traders to speculate as to the motives or intentions of buyer/seller, so that positions can be adjusted accordingly.

• Organized Crime Control Act of 1970:
See Money Laundering Control Act of 1986; and Money laundering.

• Over-the-Counter:
(1): Of a security: A security that is not listed and traded on an organised exchange;
(2): Of a market: A market in which securities transactions are conducted through a telephone and computer network connecting dealers in stocks and bonds, rather than, as classically, on the floor of an exchange. Over-the-counter stocks are traditionally those of smaller companies that do not meet the listing requirements of the New York Stock Exchange or the American Stock Exchange.

In recent years, however, many companies that qualify for listing have chosen to remain with Over-the-Counter trading, because they consider that the system of multiple trading by many dealers is preferable to the centralised trading approach of the New York Stock Exchange, where all trading in a stock has to go through the Exchange specialist in that stock. The rules for Over-the-Counter stock trading are written and enforced largely by the US National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD), which is self-regulating (see NASD).

Prices of Over-the-Counter stocks are published in daily newspapers, with the National Market System stocks listed separately from the rest of the Over-the-Counter market. Over-the-Counter markets incorporate markets in both Government and municipal bonds. Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Over-the-Counter (OTC)’.

• Pass-Throughs:
Pass-Through Securities: Pools of fixed-income securities that are backed by a package of assets. A servicing intermediary collects monthly payments from issuers and, after deducting a fee, remits or passes them through to the holders of the pass-through security. This device is also known as a ‘pass-through certificate’ or a ‘pay-through security’. The most common type of pass-through is a mortgage-backed certificate, whereby ‘homeowners’’ payments pass from the original lending bank through a Government agency or investment bank to the investors (per the supposed model).

• Ponzi Scheme:
A scam designed to entrap the unwary investor, as described in the following analyses published on this website [see Archive) and in International Currency Review:
(1): ‘Treasongate Update: Omega ‘Ponzi Game’ scams, 13th January 2007;
(2): ‘Treasongate Background: Intel Ponzi Scams’, 22nd January 2007.

So-called ‘lending programs’, a.k.a. High-Yield Investment Programs operating along Ponzi or Pyramid Scheme lines promoted clandestinely inter alia by corrupt elements of the criminalist US intelligence community (including the CIA’s OMEGA OPS scams) will comply with none of these stringent regulations and requirements, and are accordingly, by definition, ALL ILLEGAL IN THE UNITED STATES. This may well be the basis upon which non-payment of these accounts has been predicated. The question therefore arises: why have these illegal schemes been so widespread, having given rise to a colossal constituency of the American ‘broken hearted’, who have been scammed in one way or another but who have been clinging to the hope, like Rip van Winkel, that they, their family trusts or their restless associations of ‘the scammed’, will finally be paid out one sunny day far out into the future?

The generic answer to this question is that the cynical, criminalised fraudster élite, headed by the crooks controlling and inside the intelligence community, have taken precautions to instal their own corrupt operatives within and in control of certain enforcement institutions, including the SEC.

Enron and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) have been used to proliferate and perpetuate these illegal securities scams: indeed, it is from operations such as the CIA’s nefarious Enron scamming system, that the derivatives overhang and crisis have mainly arisen.

As a consequence, blind US official (Federal and State) eyes have been turned to what has been going on, the securities regulations have not been enforced with respect to such illegal Ponzi frauds, and the old system whereby anyone involved with trading securities was blackballed for life if caught engaged in irregular activities, has been moribund since the 1970s.

When an uncorrupt SEC Commissioner tried, quite recently, to enforce the regulations, he was removed from his post on some typically trumped-up pretext or other. In other words, the wolves are and have been in charge of the chicken coops.

So key enforcers are, as matters stand, co-conspirators in the despicable, hitherto (but since the Wantagate and the subsequent exposures, no longer) proliferating intelligence community-driven Ponzi Game operations that have devastated an unknown number of American families – with the proceeds channelled through corrupt participating banks into offshore accounts. See Appendix to this report for the narrative of the original Ponzi fraud.

• Principal:
(1): The person with highest authority in a business, or a person for whom another acts as an agent.
(2): A capital sum as distinguished from the interest on it.
(3): See also: Principal, of a Securities firm.
Source: Oxford Senior Dictionary, Oxford University Press, 1984.

• Principal, of a Securities firm:
An NASD member firm is directed by a Registered Principal, who can be the sole proprietor, an officer, a partner, a manager of an office of Supervisory Jurisdiction, and/or a Director of the firm.

The Registered Principal is answerable for all actions taken on behalf of the firm, and all trades submitted by the firm, and all actions of its registered representatives, subject to the rules and regulations of the NASD, SEC and the State of registration. The Registered Principal must pass the Series 24 (General Securities Principal) and also the Series 7 (General Securities Representative) Examinations conducted by the NASD, and must pass the written procedures and oral interview before assuming this position for the firm. Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, the thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, on 13th February 2002; NASD, ‘National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.: Manual’, April 1998, page 3171; NASD, NASD Compliance Check List, Gaithersburg: NASD MediaSource, 1992.

• Principle:
A basic truth or a general law or doctrine used as a basis of reasoning or a guide to action or behaviour; a fundamental truth or doctrine, as of law; a comprehensive rule or doctrine which furnishes a basis or origin for others; a settle of action, procedure or legal determination. Also defined as: a truth so clear that it cannot be proved or contradicted unless by a proposition which is still clearer. Sources: Oxford Senior Dictionary, Oxford University Press, 1984.; Henry Campbell Black, M.A., ‘Black’s Law Dictionary’, Revised 4th Edition, St Paul, West Publishing Company, 1968, s.v., ‘Principle’.

• Prudent Man Rule:
This is the fundamental American principle that is applicable in respect of professional money management, originally asserted by Judge Samuel Putnum in 1830 as follows:

‘Those with responsibility to invest money for others should act with prudence, discretion, intelligence, and regard for the safety of capital as well as income’ [1830 Massachusetts Court decision: Harvard College v. Armory]. The Prudent Man Rule directs trustees ‘to observe how men of prudence, discretion and intelligence manage their own affairs, not in regard to speculation, but in regard to the management and disposition of their funds, considering the probable income as well as the probable safety of the capital to be invested’. Investments in risky Ponzi and Pyramid Schemes and in ‘programs’ such as those referenced, typically breach the Prudent Man Rule.

• Public Offering Price: See: ‘Underwrite’ below.

• Pyramid Scheme or scam: See: Ponzi Scheme.

• Registered Principal: See: Principal, of a Securities firm.

• Registered Representative, of a Securities firm:
This officer is licensed and authorised to purchase and/or sell stocks, bonds, options, limited partnerships, tax shelters, mutual funds, and variable annuities on behalf of a customer or the firm.

The Registered Representative must have qualified by passing the Series 7 (General Securities Representative) Examination and must be registered with the firm as an authorised representative. Additionally, all licensed representatives must have passed the NASD Series 63 (Uniform State Law) AntiFraud Examination, and must register with each State the firm intends to operate in.

Source: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, 13th February 2002; NASD, ‘National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.: Manual’, April 1998, page 3201; NASD, ‘NASD Compliance Check List’.

• Risk:
Uncertainty as to whether an asset will earn an expected rate of return, or whether a loss may occur: Various categories of risk apply in the securities market environment:

(1): Delivery risk: The possibility that the buyer or seller of an instrument or foreign exchange may be unable to meet obligations at maturity.

(2): Liquidity risk: The possibility that a bank may have insufficient cash or short-term marketable assets to meet the needs of depositors and borrowers.

(3): Settlement risk: The possibility that the failure of a major bank, or its inability to honour payment commitments in a wire transfer network, could have a domino effect on other institutions, causing similar failures elsewhere. In the United Kingdom, this is usually referred to as ‘systemic risk’.

Source: Thomas P. Fitch, ‘Dictionary of Banking Terms’, 3rd Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 1997, s.v. ‘Risk’.

• Risk Free Asset:
A non-callable, default-free bond such as a short-term Government security. While such an asset is not risk-free in terms of inflation, it is (given that the Government can always print money) risk-free in a dollar sense. Source: Jerry M. Rosenberg, ‘The Essential Dictionary of Investing & Finance’, New York, Barnes & Noble, Inc., 2004, s.v. ‘Risk Free Asset’.

• Rule of Law, A (indefinite article):
The way this may be defined in the present context is to begin with the word ‘Rule’. A ‘Rule’ is an established standard, guide or regulation, especially a regulation set up by an official authority. It prescribes or directs action or forbearance. The term also covers a regulation made by a Court of Justice or a public office with reference to the conduct of business therein. Hence, ‘A Rule of Law’ encompasses a legal principle, or a body of legal principles, of general application, sanctioned by the recognition of authorities, and usually expressed in the form of a maxim or logical proposition. The word ‘Rule’ is used because in doubtful or unforeseen circumstances it is a guide or norm for the decision of those concerned (Toullier, tit. Prel. No. 17).

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

• Rule of Law, The (definite article): Note that the foregoing diverges from ‘The Rule of Law’. The common interpretation of The Rule of Law is that ‘the Law rules’ or is paramount: in other words that everyone in society, including the Government, operates within the ordered framework of the Law, precluding arbitrary behaviour. It is important to distinguish between the indefinite and the definite article here, because ‘Rule of Law’ has a different meaning, depending on which is used.

• Savings and Loan Deregulation:
The Garn-St Germain Act of 1982 cut Savings and Loan Associations loose from the tight girdle of ‘old-fashioned’, ‘restrictive’ Federal legislation, opening the door wide to the ransacking and enronisation of the ‘thrift’ banking sector, which in turn laid the groundwork for the subsequent giga-financial scandals that are now being exposed. President Reagan unveiled this legislation at a Rose Garden presentation and signing ceremony on 15th October 1982, before an audience of 200 people. Billed as a major piece of deregulation legislation, this law represented nothing less than the US criminal kleptocracy’s charter to ransack and pillage the middle and working classes. For 50 years, American families had relied on Savings and Loan Associations to finance their homes; but Reagan now pronounced that ‘outmoded regulations left over from the 1930s Great Depression’ had been preventing thrift institutions from competing in the complex, sophisticated financial marketplace of the free-wheeling 1980s.

When signing the bill with a flourish, Reagan pronounced: ‘All in all, I think we’ve hit the jackpot’.

But those who ‘hit the jackpot’ turned out, predictably, to be the organised criminal kleptocracy that had infiltrated official structures, could immediately mobilise criminal funds to buy their way into thrift institutions, and were embedded inside the corrupted US intelligence community. A new breed of swashbuckling Savings and Loan executive sprang up on cue, like weeds, out of the rich soil fertilised at the October 1982 Rose Garden ceremony.

Among their leaders was the notorious Neil Bush, then-Vice President George H. W. Bush’s son, who became a Director of Silverado Savings and Loan, of Denver, CO, and Andrew Cuomo, the son of New York Governor Mario Cuomo, who tried to buy Financial Security Savings of Delray Beach, Florida. The former Governor of Illinois, Dan Walker, bought First American Savings of Oak Brook, Illinois. Within 18 months of the Rose Garden signing, Edwin Gray, Chairman of the Federal Home Loan Bank Board (FHLBB) was provided with a grim, classified report and video, which revealed a swathe of abandoned, half-finished condominium units financed by Empire Savings and Loan of Mesquite, Texas: this was when the FHLBB was made aware of the fact that organised criminal cadres had immediately taken advantage of the deregulation of the Savings and Loans, and that an open-ended financial implosion was under way as a consequence. The enronisation of the US thrift industry was an ‘inside job’ from the outset. Source: ‘Inside Job: The Looting of America’s Savings and Loans’, Stephen Pizzo, Mary Fricker and Paul Muolo, McGraw-Hill Publishing Company, New York, 1989, ISBN 0-07-050230-7.

• Securities Act of 1933: This Act, which followed the 1929 crash and the Great Depression, was framed in accordance with the interstate commerce clause of the US Constitution, and requires that any offer for sale of securities using the means and instrumentalities of interstate commerce must be registered under the terms of the 1933 Act. Prior to the 1933 Act, the public regulation of securities in the United States had been governed mainly by State laws (commonly referred to as the ‘Blue Sky’ laws). With passage of the 1933 Act, the patchwork of existing State securities laws was left in place, to supplement the Federal legislation. A crucial dimension of the law is that the 1933 Act makes it illegal to commit fraud in conjunction with the offer or sale of securities.

Exemptions to the registration process under the Act are extremely tightly prescribed.

Hence, except for extremely narrowly defined offerings (for instance, to groups of no more than 35 investors), securities offered or sold to the general public in the United States must be registered by the filing of a registration statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The prospectus for the offering is generally filed in conjunction with the registration statement. The SEC itself prescribes the relevant forms on which an issuer’s securities must be registered, and these forms call, inter alia, for:

(1): A description of the issuer’s properties and business;
(2): A description of the securities to be offered for sale;
(3): Information about the management of the issuer;
(4): Information about the securities (if other than common stock); and:
(5): Financial statements certified by independent accountants.

It is illegal for an issuer to lie or to omit material facts from a registration statement or prospectus. Secondary market transactions may take place without registration. Under Rule 144A, resales of restricted securities between ‘Qualified Institutional Buyers’ (QIBs) are exempted, thus creating a secondary market in restricted securities among the largest Wall Street houses.

• Securities Acts Amendments of 1975: See: Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

• Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC): A Federal agency created under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, to administer the following legislation:
(1): The Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
(2): The Securities Act of 1933;
(3): The Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935;
(4): The Trust Indenture Act of 1939;
(5): The Investment Advisor Act of 1940; and:
(6): The Securities Acts Amendments of 1975, which ratified free market determination of brokers’ commissions and gave the SEC authority to oversee the development of a National Market System.

The SEC has five Commissioners, appointed by the President of the United States on a rotating basis for five-year terms. The statutes administered by the SEC are designed to:
(1): Promote full disclosure;
(2): Protect the investing public against malpractice in the securities markets;
(3): Require all issues of securities offered in interstate commerce or through the mails, to be registered with the SEC;
(4): Supervise all national securities exchanges and associations;
(5): Supervise investment companies, investment counselors and advisers, Over-the-Counter brokers and dealers, and virtually all other individuals and firms operating in the investment field.

Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘SEC‘.

• Securities Exchange Act of 1934: This legislation, which governs the US securities markets, was enacted on 6th June 1934. The Act:
(1): Outlawed misrepresentation and manipulation, and other abusive practices in respect of the issuance and marketing of securities.
(2): Created the Securities and Exchange Commission to enforce the Securities Acts 1933 and 1934.
The primary stipulations of the 1934 Securities Act are as follows:
(1): Registration of all securities listed on stock exchanges, and periodic disclosures by issuers of financial status and changes in condition.
(2): Regular disclosure of holdings and transactions of ‘INSIDERS’ (officers and directors of a corporation and those who control at least 10% of equity securities).
(3): Solicitation of proxies enabling shareholders to vote for or against policy proposals.
(4): Registration with the SEC of stock exchanges and brokers and dealers to ensure their adherence to SEC rules through self-regulation.
(5): Surveillance by the SEC of trading practices on stock exchanges and Over-the-Counter (OTC) markets, to minimise the possibility of insolvency among brokers and dealers.
(6): Regulation of Margin Requirements for securities purchased on credit. These requirements are set by the Federal Reserve Board.
(7): The provision of subpoena power for use by the SEC in investigations of possible violations and in enforcement actions.

Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Securities Exchange Act 1934’.

• Self-Regulatory Organization (SRO):
These are Federal organisations established to enforce fair, ethical and efficient practices in the securities and commodities futures industries. The practices are referred to as ‘industry rules’ to distinguish them from regulatory agencies such as the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) or the Federal Reserve Board. SROs include:
(1): All the national securities and commodities exchanges; and:
(2): The National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD), representing:
• All firms operating in the Over-the-Counter market; and:
• The Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB), established under the US Securities Acts Amendments of 1975 to regulate brokers, dealers and banks dealing in municipal securities. The NASD enforces the rules promulgated by the MSRB with bank regulatory agencies. Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘SRO’.

• Settlement:
(1): Of Securities: The conclusion of a securities transaction in which a broker/dealer pays for securities bought for a customer or delivers securities sold, being paid from the buyer’s broker.
(a): Regular Way Delivery and Settlement is completed on the third full business day following the date of the transaction for stocks (called the Settlement Date).
(b): Government Bonds, and Options, are settled on the next business day.
(2): Of Futures/Options: Represents the final price, established by Exchange Rule, for prices prevailing during the closing period and upon which Futures Contracts are Marked to The Market. Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Settlement’.

• Sherman AntiTrust Act:
Passed in July 1890, this legislation described in general terms, without the benefit of definitions, activities that were viewed as monopolistic and were therefore illegal. Many of the definitions had already been determined by case law involving court actions by employers combating the activities of trade unions. The Act forbade ‘every contract, combination… or conspiracy in the restraint of trade or commerce’. Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, for The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA 13th February 2002; Jack C. Plano and Milton Greenberg, ‘The American Political Dictionary’, 4th Edition, Hinsdale, the Dryden Press, 1976, page 328.

• Story’s First Law:
‘All organisations are run for the benefit of those running the organisation’.

• Story’s Second Law:
‘The interests of the supplier and the consumer diverge’.

• Story’s Third Law: ‘Sooner or later, all operations and covers are blown’.

• Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 (TEFRA):
Federal legislation which reversed some earlier tax reductions, established a 10% withholding tax applicable to dividends, repealed accelerated appreciation deductions and provided that American taxpayers must report all sources of income, wherever it was earned anywhere in the world.

It follows that all receipts received by US taxpayers since the passage of this Act which have not been reported to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) are taxable, which means that all US taxpayer holdings in offshore accounts that have not been declared for tax are liable for US tax and also for penalties. It also means that ‘program’ participants expecting their funds eventually to be paid into offshore accounts may not only be in denial about the fact that they have been scammed, but may have also allowed themselves to become co-conspirators in tax evasion with the perpetrators of the scams themselves. It is standard criminalist practice to procure that targeted victims are enticed into compromising themselves by the perpetrators.

• Terrorism Prevention Act of 1996:
This legislation added terrorism-related crimes as predicates for money-laundering. Madinger and Sydney A. Zalopany, ‘Money Laundering: A Guide for Criminal Investigators’, New York: CRC Press, LLC, 1999, page 43.

• Transparency:
(1): In Financial Reporting: Ease of understanding, made possible by FULL, CLEAR and TIMELY disclosure of relevant information.
(2): In Securities Transactions, price transparency means access to information concerning the depth of the market that would enable detection of fraud or manipulation. Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Transparency’.

• Trust Indenture Act of 1939:
This legislation supplemented the Securities Act of 1933, requiring the appointment of a suitably independent and qualified trustee to act for the benefit of the holders of securities. The legislation specified certain substantive provisions for such a trust indenture that must be entered into by the issuer and the trustee. The law is administered by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

• Truth in Lending Act:
Federal legislation which established disclosure rules that lenders must observe in dealings with borrowers. The Act stipulates that consumers must be told annual percentage rates, potential total cost, and any special loan terms. Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Consumer Protection Act of 1968’.

• Truth in Lending Act (TILA) of 1968:
This legislation is designed to protect consumers involved in all kinds of credit transactions, including (and especially) mortgages. It is contained in Title 1 of the Consumer Credit Protection Act as amended. The purpose of the legislation is to promote the informed use of consumer credit by requiring disclosures about its terms, and gives consumers the right to cancel certain credit transactions that may involve a lien on the consumer’s principal home. It regulates certain credit card practices, and provides a mechanism for the fair and timely resolution of credit disputes. The law requires the uniform and standardised disclosure of costs and charges so that consumers can shop around (thereby promoting competition). The legislation further prohibits certain practices associated with credit secured on a consumer’s principal dwelling. The lender must disclose to the borrower the annual percentage rate charged (APR), which must reflect the cost of the credit to the consumer. The legislation proved ineffective in curbing the abuses which were highlighted as a consequence of the corruption exposures, because many mortgage lenders failed to comply with the Act’s disclosure provisions, and were not prosecuted or penalised accordingly.

• Underwrite:
To assume the risk of buying a NEW ISSUE of securities from an issuing corporation or Government entity and reselling the securities to the public, either directly or through dealers. The underwriter makes a profit on the difference between the price paid to the issuer and the Public Offering Price, called the Underwriting Spread. Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Underwrite’.

• Underwriting Spread: See ‘Underwrite’ above.

• Vault Cash Act of 1959:
This legislation modified the reserve requirements of Federal Reserve member banks to allow the banks to count their vault cash, in excess of specified percentages of their deposits, as part of their required reserves. This was one of innumerable retrograde modifications since the Second World War which have facilitated covert financial operations, to the detriment of global financial stability and integrity. Source: Munn, ‘Encyclopedia of Banking & Finance’, page 589.

APPENDIX:

THE ORIGINAL PONZI SCHEME EXPLAINED:

Charles Ponzi, an immigrant from Italy to Boston, MA, made millions of dollars for a brief period, by exploiting his shrewd observation that while national currencies were fluctuating wildly in 1920, just after the end of the First World War, the Universal Postal Union (UPU) issued coupons which were always worth a given amount of postage stamps.

In those days, European refugees were flocking to the United States, Canada and Brazil; and often, their only contact with their families and friends back home was an occasional letter, enclosing a few dollars. The Universal Postal Union arranged to move the millions of postwar letters, business documents and messages across national borders by issuing Postal Reply Coupons.

You bought a Postal Reply Coupon in your country of residence, and enclosed it with your letter. Your mother, once she had received the letter, exchanged the Postal Reply Coupon for stamps at her local post office.

Charles Ponzi told friends in Boston: ‘Everybody’s heard of the Postal Union. They print coupons like these I’m holding here: Postal Reply Coupons. You can send a letter home, or anywhere in the world, with these coupons. And you can trade this coupon for a stamp in any country. I send my mother coupons with every letter that I write home’.

‘Now, in cooperation with certain large businesses in our city, I am making a fortune on the Postal Reply Coupon. Stocks are too risky. Forget it. And bonds, what are they paying these days? Maybe six percent? Savings accounts at Tremont Trust, they’ll give you four and a half cents on the dollar. Give them $100 and they’ll give you back $104.50. I can beat that into the ground’, Ponzi insisted, beating his cane against the floor. ‘My investors get 50 cents on the dollar. Place a hundred dollars with my Securities Exchange Company, and you take out $150. Put that $150 in, you’ll get back $225. That’s right, in six months, you can more than double your money’.

How could he pay 50%, when banks couldn’t even manage to pay 5%? ‘Exchange rates’, Mr Ponzi explained. ‘Every morning I go down and check to see how the lira is doing against the US dollar. Usually you get five lire for a dollar. This morning I checked, and with the war just ended, it takes 20 lire to the dollar’. While currency rates were bouncing around like popcorn, Mr Ponzi explained, the Postal Reply Coupon always bought one stamp. Here’s what I do’.

‘I send my cousin in Parma, Italy, $1.0. He exchanges the dollar for lire. With the 20 lire ( or 2,000 centesimi), he can buy 66 Postal Reply Coupons (worth 30 centesimi each, the cost of a letter-sized stamp in Italy). Back in the United States, each of the coupons buys one stamp, at face value five cents. I redeem all 66 coupons for $3.30 worth of stamps. The magic happens in the exchange rate. In America, my dollar buys 20 Postal Coupons. But if I exchange the dollar for Italian lire, and buy the coupons in Italy, then return and buy the stamps in America, I get $3.30 worth of stamps for that same $1.0. My profit margin is 230%’.

‘Yeah, but $3.30 worth of stamps is still stamps’, complained an attentive listener.

‘I know’, said Ponzi. ‘So I sell the stamps at a 10% discount through my contacts with the larger firms downtown in our city. Deducting the discount, I’ve got $3.0 cash now, from the $1.0 that I started out with. Now, let’s say, I got that dollar from you. I will pay you back your dollar, plus 50 cents of interest. Since I just sold $3.0 worth of stamps, I have a dollar and 50 cents for myself. I’m going to spend a third of that on my offices and processing overheads, and a third on commissions and bonuses to my sales people; and then, ladies and gentlemen, I’m going to pocket the other third and take my wife for a stroll’.

THE ORIGINAL FALSE PROSPECTUS IS SOON ABANDONED, AND REPLACED BY… ZILCH
This was the essence of the original Ponzi scheme. Note that in this description, Ponzi starts out by exploiting the fluctuations of exchange rates, and the lack of arbitrage; and note that, by the end of the explanation, he is simply NOW offering 50% interest, which he pays out to claimants out of the additional funds he has received from other investors who are likewise anticipating a 50% return on their investments, within a short space of time.

The germ of the idea was derived from the foreign exchange market; but once Ponzi has realised that people will pour their money his way if they are promised a 50% return, he can abandon his elaborate explanation (his ‘prospectus’) of the exploitation of exchange rate fluctuations and the tedious task of shipping, receiving, handling and exchanging Postal Reply Coupons, which gave him the ‘easy money’ idea in the first place.

In other words, his sales pitch is no more than a now redundant, expendable illustration – a false prospectus which disguises the fact that he is really promoting a pyramid selling operation. For he has realised that all his investors care about is receiving 50% on their money. How this is to be achieved does not normally concern them.

ALL THEY WANT IS A HUGE RETURN ON THEIR MONEY.

By December 1920, Charles Ponzi was matching old money with ever larger amounts of new money. In May 1921 alone, almost $500,000 of new money poured into the Securities Exchange Company – as 1,500 or more new customers, lured by the 50% yield offered through advertisements, sought their share of the huge profits they thought would be forthcoming at minimal risk. The office now bulged with fat stacks of dollar bills.

THE FLOOR STARTS TO GIVE WAY BENEATH HIM
But problems started to arise when Joseph Daniels filed a lawsuit alleging that he had helped to found the Securities Exchange Company (SEC) with a loan of $230 worth of furniture plus $200 in cash. Daniels had indeed provided the beaten-up desks that had been offloaded in the dusty office, and had let Mr Ponzi have $200 to spark interest in the Postal Coupons. It wasn’t just a loan, Daniels maintained, now that Ponzi was drowning in cash. ‘We were partners. I put up capital and property’. On 2nd July, Mr Ponzi was handed a demand for $1.0 million.

The Boston Post telephoned, and Mr Ponzi told the reporter that he had indeed bought furniture from Mr Daniels, but that he had never received any money for investment from him.

But when the newly installed banking commissioner for Massachusetts, Joseph Allen, read the newspaper, he wondered: ‘Where did Ponzi come from? Who are his associates? How is he managing to double people’s money?’

Allen asked Ponzi to pop round to his office, for an interview. The Securities Exchange Company did not describe itself as a bank, nor did it offer any banking services.

Therefore, in the absence of a complaint – and none had yet arrived – the Commissioner had no jurisdiction to examine Charles Ponzi’s business. At the interview, Ponzi explained the curiosities surrounding Postal Coupons, pointed out that money chased money, collected his black hat and coat, doffed his hat, and bid Mr Allen goodbye.

But Richard Grozier, city editor at The Boston Post, had always thought that Charles Ponzi’s scheme was fraudulent; and to initiate what he fancied would be the inevitable coming débacle, he elicited a comment from one of Boston’s leading citizens, Clarence Barron, the owner of Dow Jones & Co and The Wall Street Journal.

At the end of July 1920, The Boston Post carried a front page story entitled: ‘Clarence Barron questions the motive behind Ponzi’s scheme’.

Theoretically, Barron admitted, you could indeed turn a profit on the UPU coupons. But that was the only truth buried within the operation. You could never earn more than a few thousand dollars, not just because of the trouble involved in offloading the stamps and tracking the various conversions driving the process, but because there simply were not enough coupons available.

France, Romania and Spain had just abandoned the scheme, a few months earlier. A cursory check with the UPU showed that they only had a few hundred thousand dollars’ worth of coupons left in circulation – nowhere near the $10 million or $15 million Mr Ponzi claimed to be trading. So where was Ponzi getting his coupons from? Furthermore, the US Postal Service had announced, on 2nd July 1920, that Postal Reply Coupons would no longer be redeemable in lots larger than ten. So how was Ponzi converting his coupons into stamps?

Finally, Barron asked, if Ponzi is doubling everyone else’s money, why does he keep his own funds in regional banks? The Boston Post knew that Ponzi kept millions of dollars on deposit at seven or eight New England banks, and that the accounts were ballooning. How could a man who was paying 100% interest every 90 days, put up with drawing just 4% on his holdings? Barron concluded:

‘Right under the eyes of our Government, Mr Ponzi has been paying out US money to one line, with deposits taken from a succeeding line’ (another bank).

All of a sudden, all the doors which had flown back on their hinges at the sight of Mr Ponzi, were slamming tight shut. The Massachusetts District Attorney ordered Ponzi to cease and desist. His customers demanded their money back, and Ponzi was eventually jailed for Federal mail fraud, then deported. He wound up destitute in a poor house in South America (1).

Reference:
(1). ‘How Charles Ponzi pulled it off: Making a fine art out of a pyramid fraud’, International Currency Review, Volume 27, Number 3, December 2001, pages 51-52.

ANNEXE:

REITERATION OF THE STATUTES, SECURITIES REGULATIONS AND LEGAL PRINCIPLES OF WHICH THE CRIMINALISTS, THEIR ASSOCIATES AND RELEVANT BANKSTERS ARE IN BREACH:

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:

THEFT BY DECEPTION:

• “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:

• ‘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’.

U.S. SECURITIES REGULATIONS OF WHICH KEY INSTITUTIONS HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO BE IN BREACH:

• 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.

U.S. LAWS ROUTINELY BREACHED BY THE CRIMINAL OPERATIVES AND BANKSTERS:

• 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 cannot enter into email or other 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.

BUSH 41, CLINTON 42, BUSH 43 ARE PAID OUT, THEN RENEGE

‘THESE PEOPLE NEED TO BE SHOT ON THE WHITE HOUSE LAWN’

Saturday 30 August 2008 05:10

THREE PRESIDENTS TAKE THEIR SLUSH MONEY, THEN SABOTAGE SETTLEMENTS & BASEL-II

MONEY WAS STOLEN FROM THE SETTLEMENT FUNDS TO PAY OFF THE PRESIDENTS

NO-ONE ELSE HAS BEEN PAID, ACCORDING TO OUR SOURCES: AND THAT INCLUDES PUTIN

ARE MI6 AND SCARLETT SABOTAGING BASEL-II AND THE SETTLEMENTS, TOO?

UPDATE: 5.00pm UK time, 30th August: Information received since we posted does not call for any variation of the ‘snapshot’ description of the state of affairs prevailing when we obtained several briefings last night. New information, however, is added herewith. It may be Bushite (43) ‘spin’:

(1) Bush 41, ‘changed his mind’ after the three US Presidents had accepted their irregular stolen payoffs. He may well ‘change his mind’ again, as we understand that our posting has hit many raw nerves. Good. ‘Outsiders’ are not supposed to unravel ‘Black Ops’ and financial heists, you see.

(2) A Trustee in Europe who did not turn up yesterday when and where he should have done was arrested, subjected to very harsh interrogation, given a very hard time, and revealed that he had stayed at home under pressure from agents ‘working for’ Bush 41. This is direct confirmation of the inner workings of the ‘Never Pay’ model: remove one brick, and the entire wall becomes unstable.

• May we remind readers of these reports that their PRIMARY purpose is to GET THINGS DONE.
They are written with that objective in mind at all times. Yes, we can be very acerbic: but the world situation calls for harsh condemnation of ALL, including officials, who may be standing in the way. If they don’t like what we say, that’s tough. The Rest of the World has had enough of this US idiocy.

• UPDATE: 2.30pm UK time, 31st August: Funds corruptly sent to London on 29th August noted in the report below have been confused on another website with the ‘payoff’ funds paid out corruptly to Bush 41, Clinton 42 and Bush 43, revealed exclusively in this report. The monies corruptly paid to the three Presidents and stolen from the Settlements resources were of a far greater order of magnitude than the entirely SEPARATE sum of money that was corruptly sent to London, inter alia for the reasons that our report identified. As a consequence of the report below, ‘blood has been flowing in the streets’, as ‘they’ complacently assumed that the attempt to hijack the Settlements at the last moment having taken the payoffs, would never be leaked. We cannot elaborate further at the moment as enquiries are under way which have not yet been concluded.

• NEW: NOTES ON THE MEANING OF TRUTH: SEE FOOT OF REPORT, ABOVE THE ANNEXE

Advertisement:
NON-U.S. INTERNET SECURITY SOLUTION CD AVAILABLE: FAR BETTER THAN NORTON ETC
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.

MICHAEL C. COTTRELL’S PRACTICAL PROGRAM TO REPLACE THE DISCREDITED PROPOSALS FLOATED BY THE PREDIENT’S WORKING GROUP ON FINANCIAL MARKETS CAN BE ACCESSED
VIA THE ARCHIVE. THE REPORT IS DATED 22ND JULY 2008. A VERY EXTENSIVE GLOSSARY OF FINANCIAL MARKET AND RELATED TERMS AND LEGISLATION, INCLUDING NEW DEFINITIONS, IS APPENDED TO MR COTTRELL’S PROPOSALS, WHICH HAVE BEEN VERY WELL RECEIVED.

Economic Intelligence Review contains Michael C. Cottrell’s Rules-Based Reform Plan and the extensive Glossary of Financial Market Definitions. Publication date: Friday 15th August 2008.

• See our report dated 12th August 2008 inter alia for historical intelligence on GEORGIA. See reports dated 14th, 16th, 18th and 19th August for Georgia and Settlements Crisis Updates.

• INTERNATIONAL CURRENCY REVIEW, Volume 33, #s 3 & 4, all 972 pages of it, is making waves all over the world. It contains a blow-by-blow deconstruction of this crisis via the Wantagate plus our further analyses: and everything published therein is now well and truly ON THE GLOBAL PUBLIC RECORD. Accordingly the whole world owns a detailed, damning account of the serial criminality of the Bush-Cheney-Clinton ‘Box Gang’ and their associates, which CANNOT BE EXPUNGED.

• BOOKS: Edward Harle Limited has so far published FIVE intelligence titles: The Perestroika Deception, by Anatoliy Golitsyn; Red Cocaine, by Dr Joseph D. Douglass, Jr.; The European Union Collective, by Christopher Story; The New Underworld Order, by Christopher Story; and The Red Terror in Russia, by Sergei Melgounov. All titles are permanently in stock. We sell books DIRECT.

• Please Make a Donation, if you feel able to do so, to help finance Christopher Story‘s ongoing global financial corruption investigations. Your assistance will be very sincerely appreciated and will make a real difference, hastening the OVERDUE resolution of the worst financial corruption and linked financial fallout in world history. The Editor’s $35,000 Wanta bail-out money has been stolen.

• See the second white panel for details of our latest distributed intelligence publications.

• IF YOU ARE READING THIS REPORT ON SOMEONE ELSE’S WEBSITE and the links don’t work, it’s because they have been tampered with by NSA etc. Go to www.worldreports.org direct.

By Christopher Story FRSA, Editor and Publisher, International Currency Review, World Reports Limited, London and New York. For earlier reports, press the ARCHIVE. Order your intelligence subscriptions and our ‘politically incorrect’ intelligence books online from this website.

London, 30th August 2008:

REQUESTS FOR US TO GO QUIET WILL NO LONGER BE IMPLEMENTED
The first thing to say, before we begin, is that we will NOT agree again, in future, to remain silent or to ‘hold’ reports back in the face of requests to that effect, from any quarter. The reason for this is that we have again been deceived: not by those American enforcement people asking us through intermediaries to hold back, but by the ‘Box Gang’ criminalists and their associates.

Be it known, therefore, that ANY PARTY that DARES to ask us to hold back in future, will be ignored. It follows that any attempts by US agents to shut us up will go nowhere in future, either.

BUSH 41, CLINTON 42 AND BUSH 43 WERE ‘PAID OFF’ BEFORE THE CLINTONS BACKED OBAMA
Last weekend, we began to hear rumours of the fact that ‘someone has been paid off’. Naturally, we could confirm nothing at that stage. When Clinton made that euphoric speech in support of Obama, US observers who assist us with this exposure operation knew that some repulsive deal or other had been struck: otherwise the Clinton CIA Crime Family would have proceeded with their original plans (which were widely hyped even in UK intelligence circles, we were informed), to hijack the Democratic Convention in Denver in order to split the Democratic Party so that Mr John Cain wins in November. Remember that the Clintons ‘work for’ George Bush Sr., and their own backsides, not for the American people, whom, judging by their serial criminal behaviour, they thoroughly despise.

However PRIOR TO former President Clinton’s speech, a sordid deal had been struck backstage.
Private citizen-Godfather George H. W. Bush Sr., the world’s most wanted criminal, his successor former President Clinton, and President George Bush Jr., WERE ALL PAID SUBSTANTIAL SUMS OF OTHER PEOPLE’S STOLEN MONEY on the ‘pragmatic’ basis that they would at once sanction the Settlements releases, while the Clintons would support Obama 150% at the Convention.

We were told that the ‘last’ operatives still holding out and preventing the Settlements were the Clintons, and that this stinking arrangement had been stitched up in order to ‘enable’ the Basel-II deadline of Friday 29th (which we anticipated in our report dated 14th April 2008 from the IMF/World Bank Spring meetings in Washington DC).

In this connection, we hereby categorically refute an ignorant and probably malicious report that the ‘deadline’ for compliance is the end of September 2008. It is NOT. Our original date calculation and statement that Friday 29th August is the end of the 100 days that were permitted by the Group of Eight financial powers at their Washington meeting on 13th April this year, is correct.

The 100 days were allowed, to enable the US banks to become Basel-II compliant, which is to say, that their books must have been cleaned up and their overall financial position made shipshape: OTHERWISE MOST FOREIGN BANKS WILL BE PRECLUDED BY THEIR AUTHORITIES FROM DEALING WITH THEM. The date when this state of affairs will arise, if US banks are non-compliant with the Basel-II reform requirements agreed internationally, is TUESDAY, 2nd September 2008.

LIES FLOATED IN PARALLEL WITH THESE CORRUPT PAYOFFS TO THE CRIMINAL PRESIDENTS
On Thursday 28th August, the Editor obtained the following information from impeccable sources who collaborate with us. The information was passed via the Editor to further ‘special’ sources in the United States, including, via intermediaries, enforcement cadres. The entire package of data numbered below was confirmed within one hour of being conveyed by us:

1. Releases were started today (the phrase used was ‘the lever was pulled’).

2. The Basel-II banks are now being funded.

3. ‘Wholesale’ Trustee recipients should be able to spend/distribute to lower tiers at any time.

4. Former President George W. Bush Sr., former President William Jefferson Clinton, and President George W. Bush Jr. received very large sums of money in exchange for ‘sanctioning’ the releases, i.e. ceasing their endless blocking operations, prevarications and criminal acts.

5. The Labor Day weekend will be used as cover by the banks to complete the funding operations.

Since we receive a stream of information all day long from ‘connected’ sources, the Editor was able to ascertain that this information was the same as was being acknowledged by other parties.

IN FACT, the only element of the information enumerated above that was accurate, was ITEM 4.

Our notes and data suggest that there was every indication that arrangements had been made for the implementation of items 1, 2, 3 and 5. The usual high-level ‘reports’ of Trustees being in place and waiting for the ‘go’ were received, as has been the case for the past 18 months. It should be understood that these ruthless criminals couldn’t care less how many Trustees’ lives and families they destabilise, how many families and groups’ expectations and plans are destroyed, and, as we shall see shortly, whether they destroy the US financial economy or not. All they ever care about is satisfying their own LUST FOR MONEY AND POWER.

• They are DARK ACTORS PLAYING GAMES.

HIGH-LEVEL FUNCTIONARIES AND AGENTS WHO MISLEAD THE TRUSTEES EVERY DAY
Trustee figures tell us repeatedly that high-level functionaries and intelligence sources on both sides of the Atlantic are continually ‘assuring’ them that Settlement is imminent, and that they must be available at all times of the day and night when so advised, to ‘go in for closing’, etc, etc.

It is a notorious fact that certain Trustees have been ‘going in for closing’ for the best part of two decades. All those officials engaged in these charades should be arrested, shackled and taken into detention, and this should happen on both sides of the Atlantic IMMEDIATELY.

It is a CRIMINAL OFFENCE to disseminate inaccurate information and to mislead people who have burdensome responsibilities and are trying to do their jobs. Journalists have a certain permitted latitude because it is their task to expose irregularities and not to flinch from doing so. But ‘high functionaries’ who constantly mislead Trustees, who in turn through no fault of their own mislead journalists (such as the Editor of this service), are nothing better than common criminals.

They, like the World Class criminalists we are dealing with, can aptly be described as the scum of the earth. They should be handcuffed without further ado.

HAVING GOT THEIR MONEY, THE PRESIDENTS TORE UP THE AGREEMENT
At about 9.00pm UK time on Friday 29th August, the ‘deadline day’ for Basel-II compliance by the banks, the Editor received a telephone call. It appeared that the three criminalist Presidents had TAKEN THEIR SLUSH MONEY AND THEN AT ONCE TORN UP THEIR AGREEMENT NOT TO IMPEDE THE SETTLEMENTS ANY LONGER.

Now, anyone not sitting permanently on their brainboxes could have forseen that these Leninist traitors would do that: none of these criminal operatives has ever had the slightest intention of honouring any undertaking whatsoever: they are all serial thieves, liars, murderers and financial scamsters and THEY SHOULD BE ARRESTED NOW, ALL THREE OF THEM.

The other criminals who need to be arrested NOW, are ‘Paulson’, Cheney, Chertoff, Roberts, Bernanke (see below), Carlucci, Greenspan and Hillary Rodomski Clinton.

• By NOW, we mean THIS WEEKEND, not next week, next year or the next millennium.

BUSH 43 ON 29TH AUGUST 2008: ‘THE SETTLEMENTS WILL NOT BE PAID. PERIOD’
The Editor’s informants received confirmation from MULTIPLE SOURCES on the 29th August that President G. W. Bush 43 let it be known that HE WILL CONTINUE TO BLOCK THE SETTLEMENTS, COME WHAT MAY. We reiterate that this information was received in London FROM MULTIPLE SOURCES, and cannot be disputed. Bush 43 is blackmailed by his father, and in the report that we have held back on Bush 41 and the Deutsche Verteidigungs Dienst (DVD, Dachau, the pan-German Nazi strategic deception continuum), we will describe WHAT THIS BLACKMAIL CONSISTS OF.

We will also reveal what we know about the various attempts each of these Bush creatures has made to murder the other. Well, we are dealing, after all, with WORKERS OF DARKNESS.

DVD DACHAU’S SUBVERSION OF BRITAIN AND AMERICA WILL BE EXTENSIVELY EXPOSED
In addition to the information on Dachau, we will reveal what we know about various notorious abominations with which it has been involved, and we will show to what extent this crisis is a crisis fabricated by the Nazi long-range strategists in collaboration with organised criminalist cadres, and how compromised Bush Sr. is in respect of this nexus of criminality. Under the circumstances, the CIA and elements of its affiliates can be described as a subversive Fifth Column which is not only rampaging around the world causing death and destruction, but is further engaged in destroying the United States of America (the United Kingdom is being destroyed by the DVD, but by different means), in order, inter alia, to reverse the outcomes of the two World Wars.

HUGE LONG POSITIONS IN OIL AND NATURAL GAS BOUGHT ON 29TH AUGUST
In addition to the above boasting by 43 (on orders from his father) and to the fact that our sources were UNABLE to obtain ANY verification that any Settlement ‘levers’ had in fact been pulled at all, we have established that huge LONG positions in oil and natural gas were bought on Friday. Why?

HURRICANE GUSTAV TO BE USED TO CLOSE DOWN GOVERNMENT, CRASH THE SYSTEM?
Rumours surfaced in Friday to the effect that the hurricane conditions were thought likely to be used as a pretext for aborting the ‘compliance operations’ that are supposed to have been taking place and are programmed to continue throughout the long weekend.

Whether the clouds have been seeded or not, this intention is authoritatively put to us as being part of the ‘Black’ picture we are having to describe.

With the Gulf oil installations in jeopardy, the rumour (which may be a leak from concerned officials) asserted that the White House would declare a State of Emergency entailing a Government shut-down, WHICH ACTION WOULD PRECLUDE FURTHER BANKING OPERATIONS. And by the way, after this information had been gathered and treated as rumour, IT WAS CONFIRMED AS ‘FACT’.

LARGE SUM OF SETTLEMENTS MONEY SENT TO LONDON FRIDAY
A large sum of corrupt money, stolen from the Settlements, was transferred to London on Friday 29th August. The figure repeatedly mentioned to us is $18 billion. It was transferred by the Federal Reserve-controlled Inter Bank Settlement Fund, thereby yet again implicating Dr Ben Bernanke, who is turning out to be just as dirty as his discredited criminalist predecessor. [FACT: This ‘just happens’ to be the value of the US Treasury instruments that were missing from Leo Emil Wanta’s briefcase, as reported in the Wantagate reports: see ARCHIVE. Coincidence, of course].

The money has been remitted OFFSHORE by way of a bribe or other form of corrupt payment. Given that these funds will immediately have been leveraged 30:1, and given the long position taken on oil and gas, predicated on an expected spike in the manipulated oil price of perhaps $30 per barrel, in the context of the hurricane threat to the oil installations, you can imagine what degree of profits are being lusted after here. But it gets worse…

U.S. BANKS MUST BE BASEL-II COMPLIANT AT START OF BUSINESS TUESDAY
As previously explained, the US banks should have been Basel-II compliant by close of business on Friday 29th August, not by the end of September, as floated by a disinformation source recently in order to throw sand in our faces.

This means that when they open for business on Tuesday 2nd September,US banks will be unable to handle business with European, Japanese and other foreign correspondent banks if they are not Basel-II compliant. Some US banks may then collapse.

They will then be forced to sell assets at fire-sale prices next week if the crooks get their way and are not stopped NOW from going through with this diabolical plan.

OBJECTIVE: ANOTHER 1929: CROOKS TO BUY UP EVERYTHING AT CENTS ON $…
According to our impeccable sources, having taken their slush money, reneged on their solemn undertakings, and boasted that the Settlements will continue to be blocked, the criminalist clique fully intends, with the criminal collaboration of their corrupt associates in London (Carlyle?) and elsewhere, to milk and bilk the system, to hang onto the money they have stolen, to leverage via PARIAH mini-states like Dubai the funds and assets they have filched, and to crash the system.

… BY SABOTAGING BASEL-II
It needs to be said here that, exercising his responsibility as a veteran professional investigative journalist of 45 years’ standing, the Editor was reluctant to accept that these criminals do indeed have every intention of implementing this Samson option. However given the above, our sources are unanimous that this is indeed the case (at the time of posting. It could change after posting!)

The intention of George H. W. Bush Sr., who is no more than an octogenarian private citizen but continues to tell his pathetic son what to do, is to SABOTAGE BASEL-II. This has been the plan all along. And that is what these criminals are doing and intend to do.

WHERE IS MI6? WHAT IS H.M. THE QUEEN GOING TO DO ABOUT THIS?
ARE MI6 AND SCARLETT SABOTAGING BASEL-II AND THE SETTLEMENTS?
In previous reports we have alluded to the fact that John Scarlett, the head of MI6, ‘works for’ the Germans. Since this information was provided to the Editor by intelligence sources, and since it is quite clear that MI6 has FAILED SO FAR to exercise the powers of enforcement that it acquired as a consequence of the sequence of events described on this website earlier, it would appear that MI6 under Mr John Scarlett is itself engaged in SABOTAGING BASEL-II and now in defying Her Majesty The Queen by failing to carry out its remit, and in accordance with her commands. If this is the case, Gordon Brown should get hold of this fellow and sack him. UK intelligence is blackmailing Brown. But he should seize the initiative in accordance with the following equation:

• BLACKMAIL: The blackmailer relies upon the fear of the targeted person for the effectiveness of the blackmail. When it comes to actually perpetrating the blackmail, i.e. revealing the information that the blackmailer holds over the target, THAT IS AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT MATTER.

If the target shows that he can stand up to the latent blackmail threat, the usual response of the blackmailer is to back off. Brown should seize the initiative and dismiss Scarlett who, we think, is sabotaging the operation to implement the Settlements and to finance the Basel-II anti-corruption and banking reforms: joint international measures which are indispensable if the world is not to experience, in the immediate future, probably the most precipitous decline into economic anarchy in history, with beggar-my-neighbour trade warfare aggravating the generalised and accelerating disintegration of social cohesion, lubricated by the corrosive social subversion that has been going on, as part of the ‘Black’ operation to steal, control and enslave the whole of humanity.

MICHAEL C. COTTRELL AND OTHERS SAY THESE CRIMINALS SHOULD ALL BE SHOT
A ‘foreigner’ such as the Editor of this service cannot make suggestions about foreign traitors who happen to be, or to have been heads of state. But the gross betrayal of the American people is so extreme now, that we know for a fact that highly intelligent and switched-on observers whom we consult and know very well, are unanimous that these people MUST be rounded up ‘for the sake of the whole of humanity’. Michael C. Cottrell, M.S., has authorised the Editor to quote him as having stated on the transatlantic telephone line on 29th August that:

‘These criminals should be taken out and shot as traitors in time of war’.

Since THE SAME SENTIMENT was SEPARATELY expressed to us on the same day, also via the transatlantic telephone line, and since we have separately been advised that certain identified cadres in the United States LIKEWISE AGREE WITH THIS SENTIMENT, we are no longer under any constraint from reporting this fact. Similar sentiments, in even more graphic language, have been expressed to us for at least a year or more: with the White House lawn considered to be the most appropriate place for the relevant activity to occur.

Failing that, one or more of these clowns needs to be arrested and cuffed IN FRONT OF THE TV CAMERAS AND WITH ALL THE NETWORKS PRESENT.

IS THE UNITED STATES GOING TO LET THESE CRIMINALS DESTROY THE REPUBLIC?
The issue, then, is this: notwithstanding that the vast majority of the great American public is fast asleep and running after distractions (including variations on the obscene Presidential election farrago), are those who are NOT ASLEEP going to continue sitting simultaneously on their brains and other parts of their anatomy and just let these deceitful, duplicitous, hypocritical, murderous liars go on stealing and holding both the United States and the whole world to ransom, OR ARE THEY GOING TO GET MOVING AND INSIST THAT THE NECESSARY DRASTIC MEASURES ARE TAKEN NOW: NO, NOT NEXT WEEK, BUT NOW?

• Forget the barbecue. Forget your fishing trip.

GET ON THE PHONE AND THE INTERNET AND MAKE LIFE LIVING HELL FOR THESE PEOPLE, STARTING WITH THE THREE U.S. PRESIDENTS WHO TOOK THEIR STOLEN SLUSH MONEY PROMISING THAT THEY WOULD ALLOW THE SETTLEMENTS, AND THEN RENEGED ON THEIR UNDERTAKING. THIS BEHAVIOUR LENDS A WHOLE NEW MEANING TO THE TERM SCUMBAG.

GRU-PRIME MINISTER PUTIN IS NOT AMUSED EITHER
As you can see by observing the body language of GRU-President Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, he remains distinctly unamused. Has his $87 billion been paid out? NO SIREE, IT HAS NOT. What is he going to do, sit on his backside, too? No, he’ll deprive 41 and 42 of the corrupt payments they leach off the pipeline oilflow. Then he’ll leverage the situation and take over the whole of Georgia. Then he’ll leverage that state of affairs further and ‘restore’, by various means, the ‘former’ Soviet Union.
The GRU (Soviet Military Intelligence: Glavnoye Razvedyvatelnoye Upravlenie) never, at any time, changed its spots or acknowledged that the Soviet Union ceased to exist. ‘Collapsible Communism’ was a Leninist ploy directed by Mikhail Gorbachev, who was head of the most powerful entity in the Communist structures, the CPSU Administrative Department, under Yuri Andropov (Lieberman).

THE ‘COLLAPSE OF THE USSR’ WAS A LENINIST PLOY: SEE THE PERESTROIKA DECEPTION
‘Collapsible Communism’, a long-term strategic deception operation based upon Lenin’s fake New Economic Policy of the 1920s, was exposed by Anatoliy Golitsyn to the CIA and British and French intelligence in the 1960s. After being ‘strung along’ for years, Golitsyn published his further open exposure of this strategic deception in ‘New Lies for Old’ (1986). In 1995, the Editor of this service published his edited version of Golitsyn’s Memoranda to the CIA, The Perestroika Deception, which the CIA had tried to suppress. This work can be ordered from the intelligence books section of this website. It is essential reading for those who wish to know how this crisis evolved.

The reason it is essential reading is this: Golitsyn revealed to the CIA the existence of the long-range strategy to wave a magic wand and suddenly ‘implode’ Communism, a typical Leninist ruse designed to hoodwink the complacent and opinionated West.

In the second half of the 1980s and especially from 1990 onwards, US Financial Warfare operatives of which Leo Wanta was one of the most impressive and effective, were instructed to assist the Soviets to implement ‘collapsible Communism’. After all, the CIA knew all about that project.

So it was decided to call the Soviet strategists’ ‘bluff’, to take them cynically at their word, to seize the initative and to ‘help’ them implement the strategy. Gorbachev received his $10 billion bribe, and GRU operative Putin, working with the Stasi in East Germany, supervised the orchestration of the successive takedowns of the East European regimes.

The ransacking of the USSR that then took place was accompanied by the false ‘privatisation’ of the assets of the Party-State into the hands of a cabal of (mainly Jewish) KGB and GRU operatives, who became powerful ‘oligarchs’. However what the West overlooked was the habit of the (now covert) Party-State of clawing back its assets, known as ‘The Party’s Gold’ syndrome. This old Leninist ploy was used, and is being used, as well. The Soviets allowed the plundering to take place, but at the same time, driven by lust and greed for control over Soviet energy assets, the US and Western oil corporations, which rig the oil price not least because they operate an external cartel (they can’t operate a domestic cartel, which would be illegal), transferred all the advanced technology that the Soviets needed to rehabilitate their moribund energy sector. This having been achieved, they then started to kick the Western usurpers out (hence the BP fiasco); and they will continue doing so.

CONCLUSION
The United States has completely botched its period as TOP NATION and is heading for a very nasty hard landing. Its intelligence community is consumed with internal rivalries and criminality, can be described as a subversive Fifth Column as well as a ‘Black’ criminal enterprise, and has driven the country towards meltdown. Its de facto controller is one of the most evil men alive today, a traitor to his country and the most dangerous financial fraudster and crook ever to have surfaced, who tells his feeble son what to do, and will brook no opposition to his mad determination now to bring about the fulfilment of his life’s work of destruction on behalf of DVD, Dachau, which began with the planned assassination of President Kennedy. He is a menace not only to America and the American people, but to the whole world. Treating him like a god, as though he cannot be touched because he was once President of the United States is pathetic, despicable, and weak.

The three Presidents who took their STOLEN slush money and then reneged on their ‘agreement’ to stop blocking the Settlements on Wednesday 27th August, should be arrested immediately.

• THESE TRAITORS AND CRIMINALS ARE SABOTAGING BASEL-II AND THE SETTLEMENTS

• UNTAINTED U.S. LEGISLATORS ARE BESIDE THEMSELVES WITH ANGER AND FRUSTRATION

• GET OFF YOUR COMPLACENT, PENSION-BACKED BACKSIDES, LAW ENFORCEMENT.

• GET AS ANGRY AS THIS EDITOR IS, AMERICA. WHY ARE WE DOING YOUR JOB FOR YOU?

• NO, YOU CANNOT WAIT UNTIL TUESDAY. TUESDAY WILL BE TOO LATE.

NOTES ON THE MEANING OF TRUTH, TO ENCOURAGE THOSE OF FAINTING HEART…

WHAT IS TRUTH? PONTIUS PILATE’S PAINED QUESTION ANSWERED:

• ‘Then Pilate entered into the judgment hall again, and called Jesus, and said unto him,
Art thou the King of the Jews?

Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me?

Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done?

Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.
Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.

Pilate saith unto him, What is truth?’.

John, Chapter 18, verses 33-38.

• ‘Truth is an accurate representation of the subject under consideration:

(1) As it relates to all other things;

(2) As it always has been in the past;

(3) As it universally holds in the present; and:

(4) As it shall hold without exception in the future.

Error is not the opposite of truth. Error is anything except truth.

If there are any exceptions, it is error’.

Dr Stuart Crane, with acknowledgements to the Editor’s friend, Des Griffin.

• Truth is often confused with candour, which cannot be relied upon to contain the truth. Candour is used by Soviet disinformation operatives, especially, as a means of perpetrating deception. US disinformation operatives, having been trained in the Nazi tradition of Dr Josef Goebbels, prefer the devices of obfuscation, diversion, lies and confusion, rarely using candour to mask truth.
They wouldn’t know how to begin!

• Discerning the truth:

‘Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come: and even now already is it in the world’.

First Epistle of John, Chapter 4, verses 1-3.

• ‘Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron’.

First Epistle of Paul to Timothy, Chapter 4, verses 1-2.

• ‘This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boastful, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, truce-breakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. For of this sort are they which [are] ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth’.

II Timothy, Chapter 3, verses 1-5, 7.

ANNEXE:

REITERATION OF THE STATUTES, SECURITIES REGULATIONS AND LEGAL PRINCIPLES OF WHICH THE CRIMINALISTS, THEIR ASSOCIATES AND RELEVANT BANKSTERS ARE IN BREACH:

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:

THEFT BY DECEPTION:

• “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:

• ‘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’.

U.S. SECURITIES REGULATIONS OF WHICH INSTITUTIONS
HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO BE IN BREACH [SEE REPORTS]:

• 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.

U.S. LAWS ROUTINELY BREACHED BY THE CRIMINAL OPERATIVES AND BANKSTERS:

• 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.

ACT ONE OF DIE MEISTERSCHWINDLERN ENDS THIS WEEK

GEORGIANS DELIVER SENSITIVE U.S. MILITARY ASSETS INTO RUSSIAN HANDS

Wednesday 27 August 2008 00:57

PLANNED KICKS IN THE PANTS HELD BACK GIVEN ‘NEW SETTLEMENTS INFORMATION’
Unfortunately we cannot responsibly elaborate right now on the nature of these developments…

THE PURPOSE OF OPINION POLLS: TO GUIDE THE STRATEGISTS AND MANIPULATE OPINION

Advertisement:
NON-U.S. INTERNET SECURITY SOLUTION CD AVAILABLE: FAR BETTER THAN NORTON ETC
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.

MICHAEL C. COTTRELL’S PRACTICAL PROGRAM TO REPLACE THE DISCREDITED PROPOSALS FLOATED BY THE PREDIENT’S WORKING GROUP ON FINANCIAL MARKETS CAN BE ACCESSED
VIA THE ARCHIVE. THE REPORT IS DATED 22ND JULY 2008. A VERY EXTENSIVE GLOSSARY OF FINANCIAL MARKET AND RELATED TERMS AND LEGISLATION, INCLUDING NEW DEFINITIONS, IS APPENDED TO MR COTTRELL’S PROPOSALS, WHICH HAVE BEEN VERY WELL RECEIVED.

Economic Intelligence Review contains Michael C. Cottrell’s Rules-Based Reform Plan and the extensive Glossary of Financial Market Definitions. Publication date: Friday 15th August 2008.

• See our report dated 12th August 2008 inter alia for historical intelligence on GEORGIA. See reports dated 14th, 16th, 18th and 19th August for Georgia and Settlements Crisis Updates.

• INTERNATIONAL CURRENCY REVIEW, Volume 33, #s 3 & 4, all 972 pages of it, is making waves all over the world. It contains a blow-by-blow deconstruction of this crisis via the Wantagate plus our further analyses: and everything published therein is now well and truly ON THE GLOBAL PUBLIC RECORD. Accordingly the whole world owns a detailed, damning account of the serial criminality of the Bush-Cheney-Clinton ‘Box Gang’ and their associates, which CANNOT BE EXPUNGED.

• BOOKS: Edward Harle Limited has so far published FIVE intelligence titles: The Perestroika Deception, by Anatoliy Golitsyn; Red Cocaine, by Dr Joseph D. Douglass, Jr.; The European Union Collective, by Christopher Story; The New Underworld Order, by Christopher Story; and The Red Terror in Russia, by Sergei Melgounov. All titles are permanently in stock. We sell books DIRECT.

• Please Make a Donation, if you feel able to do so, to help finance Christopher Story‘s ongoing global financial corruption investigations. Your assistance will be very sincerely appreciated and will make a real difference, hastening the OVERDUE resolution of the worst financial corruption and linked financial fallout in world history. The Editor’s $35,000 Wanta bail-out money has been stolen.

• See the second white panel for details of our latest distributed intelligence publications.

• IF YOU ARE READING THIS REPORT ON SOMEONE ELSE’S WEBSITE and the links don’t work, it’s because they have been tampered with by NSA etc. Go to www.worldreports.org direct.

By Christopher Story FRSA, Editor and Publisher, International Currency Review, World Reports Limited, London and New York. For earlier reports, press the ARCHIVE. Order your intelligence subscriptions and our ‘politically incorrect’ intelligence books online from this website.

London, 27th August 2008:

WE HAVE BEEN ASKED TO HOLD OFF DELIVERING TWO PLANNED KICKS IN THE PANTS
The Editor has prepared two reports: (1) An explanation of what both the Clintons are up to at the Denver Convention (IT’S ALL ABOUT THE MONEY); and (2) A detailed analysis of the endless evils perpetrated by the pan-German Nazi strategic Continuum, Deutsche Verteidigungs Dienst (DVD), around the world, and especially in collaboration with the Bush++ Crime Family and the German elements of the Central Intelligence Agency. Both these reports have been adjudged to be MUCH TOO HOT to be publishable at the present hypercritical juncture, given developments that we are aware of in the United States in connection with the long overdue but finalising Settlements.

Contrary to the facile suggestions of some onlookers, we are not withholding reports in kneejerk fashion or in deference to mistaken assumptions concerning requests from the United States. We are doing so because we have been asked to hold back by parties of impeccable standing and in the overall interests of bringing ACT ONE of Die Meisterschwindlern, the hideous opera by Georg H. W. Busche, conducted by his son, and starring Prima Donna soprano Mme Hillaria Rodomski in the leading lady role, to an imminent conclusion. We expect the curtain to come down on Act One THIS WEEK. August 29th is the end of the 100 days allowed by decision of the Group of Eight at the IMF Spring Meetings on 13th April 2008, which runs from 14th April to next Friday. The 100 days were agreed as the period during which recalcitrant US banks must put their books in order for Basel-II purposes and compliance. Our original calculation of the 100 banking days was correct.

It is disappointing that the foregoing kicks in the pants cannot be delivered immediately, as had been intended; but in the light of new developments, we have no sensible choice in the matter.

The kicks in the pants are being held back at least until the curtain falls on Act One. Obviously, if any further reneging on undertakings takes place, they can be delivered without further ado.

PUTIN’S RESPONSES TO NON-PAYMENT OF THE $87 BILLION HE DEMANDED AND IS OWED
So we post herewith the 25th August updates added to the report of 19th August, with further data:

As previously reported, GRU-Prime Minister Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin did not receive the $87 billion that he demanded must be placed in his bank account by Monday 18th August. The trail of exactly what happened next went tepid, if not cold: but in essence, the Soviet military, directed by the GRU (Glavnoye Razvedyvatelnoye Upravleniye, or Soviet Military Intelligence, a.k.a. the Chief Directorate of Intelligence of the General Staff, the most effective military intelligence organisation in the world), positioned forces strategically located so that the Georgian segment of the pipeline can be seized at any time. Putin then let it be known that payment would have to be completed by the close of business EDT on Friday 22nd August, or he reserved all his options.

Overnight, in the early hours of Saturday morning 23rd August 2008, a train carrying crude oil was bombed on the railway line running between Baku, Tbilisi, Gori and the port of Poti that has been extensively destroyed so that it has become useless for US purposes (which explains why the USS McFaul has been unloading so-called ‘aid’ deliveries into the southern port of Batumi, in the semi-autonomous Georgian province of Adjaria, which is still controlled by a tin-pot quasi-dictator).

THE BOMBING OF THE CRUDE OIL TRAIN WAS PUTIN’S RESPONSE TO THE FACT THAT HIS EXTENDED DEADLINE OF FRIDAY EVENING EDT WAS IGNORED. He was then still holding back on his option of taking the Georgian segment of the pipeline, which clearly remained in the frame.

EXCLUSION OF THESE REPORTS FROM THE CONTROLLED U.S. ‘MAINSTREAM’ MEDIA
It is STILL the case that NO MENTION OF THE BOMBING OF THIS TRAIN HAD YET SURFACED IN THE U.S. ‘MAINSTREAM’ MEDIA AT THE TIME OF THIS NEW REPORT.

By contrast, the whole of page 29 of The Times, London, of 25th August, was devoted to this matter, complete with a large and horrifying picture of the Azpetrol (Azerbaijani Petrol) train on fire, while the whole of the upper portion of page 13 of The Daily Telegraph (same date) was devoted to a like report with a similar graphic photograph.

It can be taken as read that these photographs were distributed by ‘authorities’, since of course no Western photojournalist could possibly have known about this attack in advance, and in any case no access to the railway line would have been feasible.

As soon as we heard about this attack (on Sunday morning), from a UK source, the Editor knew that the Settlements had not ‘happened’ by Friday evening. Furthermore, when discussing this matter on the transatlantic telephone on Sunday evening and Monday afternoon UK time, eavesdropping activity and interference with the calls was more than usually evident. We concluded that the intel cells operating inside all US news rooms were ordered to ensure that no reference to this attack appeared in the US media. NOW WHY WOULD THIS BE?

QUESTIONS ABOUT THE EXCLUSION OF THE OIL TRAIN BOMBING FROM U.S. REPORTS
The colour photographs of the burning petrol train were taken at the hight of the fireball event by one or more photographers who were standing inside the railway cutting on the railway line itself.

Let’s review this more carefully.

• Question #1: How come press photographers were present on a railway line, which is heavily guarded, in the middle of the night/early morning of Saturday 23rd August? The only possible explanation must be that they were tipped off in advance, in the middle of the night.

• Question #2: How come these photographs in the British press carried no provenance? Normally, such pictures are attributed, for instance, to Associated Press, Agence France-Presse, Reuters, or whatever. So, WHY NO PROVENANCE?

In our Update of 25th August to the preceding report, we hinted at the possibility that this was a US or Georgian provocation (same thing) but then opted for the interim conclusion that it represented a further response by GRU-Prime Minister Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin to the non-payment of the $87 billion (his Reagan-Mitterrand Protocols $30 billion plus compound interest), first by Monday 18th August, and then by the Putin deadline of close of business EDT on Friday 22nd August.

But in the light of the above unanswered questions, we can now see more clearly that this could have been US RETALIATION, which could be considered to serve the Bush White House’s ‘Black’ agenda of ‘Blackening’ perceptions of Russia and Putin, especially in the light of a White House statement dated 25th August that the White House is now reviewing its entire relationship with Russia from top to bottom. We can translate this for you, too: WHAT THIS MEANS is that the entire corruption-driven ‘Black Operations’ nexus over which Bush Sr. has presided ever since the early 1980s (not to mention earlier dimensions thereof) is COLLAPSING and HAVING TO BE ROLLED UP.

As posted in a second Update on 25th August:

‘The White House has announced (Monday) that it is now reviewing its entire relationship with Russia. In other words, the Bush-directed operation focusing on the USSR triggered after the death of Andropov has now collapsed, as the unravelling of the US Black Operations mounted against the Rest of the World in conformity with the DVD agenda, accelerates’.

COLLAPSE OF THE ENTIRE HISTORICAL U.S. INTEL ‘BLACK OPERATIONS’ PLATFORM?
This is an indication of how momentous are the consequences of STANDING UP TO THESE EVIL TRAITORS TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, these crooks who have ‘enronised’ not only the United States itself, but many other countries, among which we would mention Japan, Ireland, Iceland, Spain and Argentina, as well as the ‘former’ Soviet Union. The COLLAPSE of the entire US ‘Black Operations’ platform is indeed an earth-shattering and grossly overdue development.

GEORGIANS DRIVE 5 HUMMERS LADEN WITH U.S. WEAPONRY AND DATA INTO POTI
And it looks as though the US intermeddlers in other countries’ affairs have ‘lost it’ in the present context, in other ways, too. For example:

A report from Moscow dated 21st August (bylined: Nikolay Barsegov) stated that an elite group of Georgian SPECIAL FORCES drove into Poti, which is fully controlled by Russian troops who have established a defensive ring in the countryside right around the port, in five US military Hummers.

The vehicles carried explosives, firearms and top-secret satellite technology. The incoming trucks were spotted by satellite, backed by HUMINT reports from local Georgians. A very senior Russian General told the author of this report, provenanced in Moscow, that ‘we knew there was a lot of negligence going on in the Georgian army, but not to this degree’.

As a consequence of this breach, it is speculated that NATO may have to re-encode their entire military and space coordinates, which will be time-consuming and expensive. This operation was clearly a covert attack, and has left the Americans, we understand, in a prospectively perilous situation. No wonder President Bush has suddenly invoked the services of his Vice President Richard B. Cheney, who, the Associated Press reported on 26th August, is being despatched to Azerbaijan, Georgia, Ukraine and Italy, to patch up the mess that he and his boss have created.

Why italy? Ask the Pope.

OIL TANKER SINKS IN THE BLACK SEA SATURDAY
A Georgian (supposedly) oil tanker sank in the Black Sea on Saturday, we reported on the 25th.

The cover story was that it sank in a violent storm. However we understand that there was no violent storm in the Black Sea yesterday. This grim event should therefore be seen as a further response by Putin and the GRU, following on from the blowing up of the oil train early Saturday morning in the above context of non-payment of the $87 billion due to him.

HOWEVER…

(1) It is not in Moscow’s interest to have international relations in such turmoil during the run-up to the obscene parody of democracy labelled the US Presidential election, LEST the great American people vote for Mr Cain, who is Bush III and would be EVEN MORE DANGEROUS.

Yes, Okay, the ballots will again be rigged by fiddling with the Diebold hardware and software, as previously. But this can only ‘deliver’ provided we have a nice ‘neck-and-neck’ situation which the opinion pollsters have obligingly orchestrated. See the comments about the opinion polls below.

(2) As indicated in outline above, we expect that the curtain may be brought down on Act One of the long-running, tiresome opera entitled Die Meisterschwindlern THIS WEEK. Accordingly:

(3) We anticipate that the international stand-off and tension may unwind to some extent over the next few weeks, in good time for US electors to have forgotten all about Mr Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, who only got overtired of waiting for the US arch-criminalists to meet their grossly overdue financial obligations, that’s all. All interpretations of the Georgia situation which ignore the MONEY DIMENSION are unreliable, and basically a waste of space.

END NOTE: A WORD ABOUT THE PURPOSE OF OPINION POLLS
You will be aware, or should be, that opinion polling is used by the ‘controllers’ for two devious purposes: first, to gauge which way the wind is blowing and what ordinary people are thinking, in order to guide strategic and tactical decision-making; and secondly, to plant perceptions into the public domain, usually by means of asking loaded questions, or the wrong questions, and then publicising the answers to those wrong questions, which are the answers the pollsters require.

These functions were fulfilled on 25th August when a CNN/Gallup poll revealed that ordinary US voters are not in the slightest interested in the issues exposed, for instance, on this website; for although reports of the results of this opinion poll, taken by Mr Frank Luntz, a ‘leading US pollster’, carefully omitted to state how many people were interviewed, the reports asserted as follows:

• Just 17 people identifed their primary concern as ‘ending wasteful Washington spending and balancing the Federal budget’. If, instead of this bromide, the pertinent question had been asked, the responses might have been less to the liking of the manipulators of public perceptions.

The correct approach would have been to identify ‘relentless and open-ended financial fraud and criminality by the holders of the highest offices in both US political parties’ as a ‘concern’ which interviewees could be invited to select in response to the questionnaire.

• An objective, honest pollster would have included such an option.

• However the phrase ‘objective, honest pollster’ is a contradiction in terms.

The point here is, these crass polling operations are exercises in the cynical manipulation of public perceptions. Certain criminalist operatives received confirmation that their old corruption would be unlikely to surface at the Convention, which would be all that mattered from their perspective.

ANNEXE:

REITERATION OF THE STATUTES, SECURITIES REGULATIONS AND LEGAL PRINCIPLES OF WHICH THE CRIMINALISTS, THEIR ASSOCIATES AND RELEVANT BANKSTERS ARE IN BREACH:

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:

THEFT BY DECEPTION:

• “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:

• ‘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’.

U.S. SECURITIES REGULATIONS OF WHICH INSTITUTIONS
HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO BE IN BREACH [SEE REPORTS]:

• 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.

U.S. LAWS ROUTINELY BREACHED BY THE CRIMINAL OPERATIVES AND BANKSTERS:

• 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.

SETTLEMENT FUNDS SCAMMED DAILY, PUT BACK AT 4.00PM

MI6 BETRAYING THE QUEEN, FAILING TO ENFORCE THE LAW

Tuesday 12 August 2008 09:01

CONTINUATION OF THE SAME BUSH, GREENSPAN GIGA-SCAM MONITORED FOR YEARS

CHINESE PAID OFF? WHY DID THEY LET BUSH GO HOME AFTER ANOTHER FALSE PROMISE?

U.S. LAW ENFORCEMENT TALKS BIG, BUT LACKS THE GUTS TO DO WHAT IS NECESSARY

PELOSI LIES TO ENFORCEMENT: SAYS SHE KNOWS NOTHING ABOUT THE SETTLEMENTS

TRUSTEES CAUGHT PILFERING FUNDS ARE ORDERED TO BE SHOT ON SIGHT

PRESIDENT BUSH’S SELF-INTERESTED MOTIVE FOR THE CYNICAL GEORGIA DIVERSION

HE CAN’T ATTACK IRAN AS PLANNED: FRENCH SUPPLIED TEHRAN WITH PLUTONIUM IN 2003

REFURBISHED GERMAN WORLD WAR II E-BOATS USED TO TRANSPORT DRUGS

TWO DVD-CONTROLLED DRUG CARTELS THAT FINANCE BRITISH POLITICAL PARTIES

Advertisement:
NON-U.S. INTERNET SECURITY SOLUTION CD AVAILABLE: MUCH BETTER THAN NORTON ETC
We use a proprietary FOREIGN Internet Security program which defeats 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 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 do and say, to centralised US electronic facilities set up for the purpose. You can now BREAK FREE from this syndrome while at the same time assisting us to MAINTAIN VERY HEAVY PRESSURE ON THE CRIMINALISTS WE HAVE BEEN EXPOSING, by ordering the 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 the attacks we have suffered from the NSA nerds who appear to have a collective mental age of about five years, judging by their output.

• On this Home Page, at World Reports Limited, which displays our printed publications, please scroll right down to the foot of that section and order it! Help yourself and us, at the same time!

MICHAEL C. COTTRELL’S PRACTICAL PROGRAM TO REPLACE THE DISCREDITED PROPOSALS FLOATED BY THE PREDIENT’S WORKING GROUP ON FINANCIAL MARKETS CAN BE ACCESSED
VIA THE ARCHIVE. THE REPORT IS DATED 22ND JULY 2008. A VERY EXTENSIVE GLOSSARY OF FINANCIAL MARKET AND RELATED TERMS AND LEGISLATION, INCLUDING NEW DEFINITIONS, IS APPENDED TO MR COTTRELL’S PROPOSALS, WHICH HAVE BEEN VERY WELL RECEIVED.

Economic Intelligence Review contains Michael C. Cottrell’s Rules-Based Reform Plan and the extensive Glossary of Financial Market Definitions. Publication date: Friday 15th August 2008.

By Christopher Story FRSA, Editor and Publisher, International Currency Review, World Reports Limited, London and New York. For earlier reports, press ARCHIVE. Order your subscriptions and our ‘politically incorrect’, hence correct, intelligence books from the Edward Harle segment.

• BOOKS: Edward Harle Limited has so far published FIVE intelligence titles: The Perestroika Deception, by Anatoliy Golitsyn; Red Cocaine, by Dr Joseph D. Douglass, Jr.; The European Union Collective, by Christopher Story; The New Underworld Order, by Christopher Story; and The Red Terror in Russia, by Sergei Melgounov. All titles are permanently in stock. We sell books DIRECT.

• Please Make a Donation, if you feel able to do so, to help finance Christopher Story‘s ongoing global financial corruption investigations. Your assistance will be very sincerely appreciated and will make a real difference, hastening the OVERDUE resolution of the worst financial corruption and linked financial fallout in world history. The Editor’s $35,000 Wanta bail-out money has been stolen.

• See the second white panel for details of our latest distributed intelligence publications.

London, 12th August 2008:

THE ORGANISED CRIMINALS RUNNING THE U.S. GOVERNMENT CONTINUE THE CAROUSEL
As previously reported, the 159 payee countries were paid off many weeks ago, the object being to get them off the backs of the high-level organised criminal gang which is stealing the money for self-enrichment purposes and in order to continue, in collaboration with US banks which prefer to perpetuate the carousel rather than to implement the Basel-II requirements, the financing of the World Revolution, which is cover for taking down ‘the Main Enemy’, Britain and the United States.

Following the ‘Belfast sequence’ of events which led to the promulgation by President Bush of two Executive Orders relating to the Settlements after he had been caught ‘in flagrante corruptio’ on 16th June 2008, as we reported, MI6, assisted by Interpol and supposedly also by US Marshals, was given formal authority to procure the Settlements. President Bush then adopted his ‘Pilate’ stance, having ‘washed his hands’ of the matter, so that he could then blame Cheney, ‘Paulson’, Roberts, or whichever other co-conspiring collaborator suited the needs of the moment. YING-YANG.

This of course is the standard dialectical modus operandi that started in earnest under George Bush Sr. when the criminalists were ransacking Continental Illinois Bank and Trust Co, pre-Clinton. It is the methodology, central to the ‘Never Pay’ model, which has been employed non-stop by the gang ever since, AND IT IS STILL BEING EMPLOYED TODAY: by which we mean THIS DAY.

SETTLEMENT FUNDS ARE SITTING IN AN ACCOUNT AND ARE BEING EXPLOITED EVERY DAY
Specifically, the Settlement funds are sitting in an account inside the US Treasury. Every day, the fellow calling himself ‘Paulson’, encumbers and exploits the funds for his self-enrichment and on behalf of George Bush Sr., George Bush Jr., Vice President Cheney, Robert Rubin, the Clintons, and whoever else is on the top list of slush money recipients.

• This pattern of treacherous financial fraud has never changed, US and external law enforcement know all about it AND THEY ARE DOING ZILCH TO BRING THIS CRIMINAL CHARADE TO AN END.

The latest instance of this methodology of which we have primary information direct from Trustee sources is that a highest-ranking ‘Technical Supervisor’ in the United States ‘could not get into his place’ because he supposedly had a ‘personal problem’.

The Editor now holds an IMMENSE PAPER TRAIL OF SUCH RATIONALES AND EXCUSES, all dated, and all of which (despite the acknowledged integrity and the wholly impeccable moral standards of the US Trustee sources in question) represent a tragic misreading of the situation.

But we can take this latest information as an example, to illustrate the point:

• WHY did the ‘Technical Supervisor’ absent himself from the bank or wherever he was supposed to be on Monday 11th August, which was supposed (yet again) to have been the last of the last of the final days on which the Settlements were to have been paid out, after which drastic measures were reported to us to be imminent (see below)?

ANSWER: Because ‘Paulson’ instructed him not to show.

AND THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR MONTHS. The Editor of this service is now in the probably unique situation of having accumulated so much evidence of this ongoing treachery and top-level scamming that we are in a position to provide the entire international financial and intelligence community with a documented, day-by-day summary of the way the gang is and has been operating.

• AND STILL, NOTHING IS DONE TO STOP THEM.

• WHAT, ARE THESE CRIMINALS GODS?

• IS THERE SOME SUPERSTITION SURROUNDING THEM?

• No, its simpler, more basic and much more scary than that.

HEAD OF MI6 DE FACTO WORKS FOR LONG-RANGE PAN-GERMAN ‘BLACK’ INTELLIGENCE
For starters, John Scarlett, head of MI6, CANNOT BE TRUSTED. No, he belongs to the segment of MI6 which is betraying the United Kingdom because it is in bed with Deutsche Verteigungs Dienst (DVD), Dachau, the long-range pan-German ‘post’-Nazi successors of the Abwehr and the post-war German Geopolitical Centre, Madrid, set up by the Nazi intelligentsia and the Gestapo in 1941-42 to plan long-range strategy for the continuation of the pan-German global hegemony agenda, which the German-penetrated sector of the CIA, headed by George Bush Sr. (agent for the DVD, former Director of Central Intelligence, Vice President of the United States and then President), serves.

• That is why Langley is named the George Bush Center for Intelligence. The CIA serves George H. W. Bush Sr., who serves German secret long-range counterintelligence. So the CIA has ‘divided loyalties’, with the Frankfurt-based component and the ethnic German elements of the domestic CIA in bed with this Nazi FIFTH COLUMN which is destroying the United States. THIS IS THE REALITY.

ONGOING PSY-OPS OPERATION TO MANAGE EXPECTATIONS AND PERPETUATE THE SCAM
Now, the embedded pattern is that a massive Psy-Ops operation has been running ever since we shook the entire situation up in 2006 with the Wantagate reports, and especially since the events of 19th October 2007 (Petition for a Writ of Mandamus) which represented a formal confirmation of the Leo Wanta funds dimension, followed by those notorious events at Citibank’s Midtown, New York, offices on 20th November 2007, when the payee appeared at the bank to demand payment.

Since we had published these facts, they could not be denied; and the pressure for Settlement, augmented by the presence of representatives of the 159 payee countries in New York for many months, took on a life of its own.

HOW IT’S BEING DONE, AND WHY THE SCAMS ARE CONTINUING WITH IMPUNITY
Yet despite all that we have reported, the top gangsters have CONTINUED to operate exactly as before, taking the money, hypothecating it via a ‘friendly’, participating banker like Robert Rubin at Citibank, taking the profits, and replacing the funds at 4.00pm daily so that no-one is any the wiser.

And no-one is supposed to be any the wiser because these self-interested transactions which are holding the whole world to ransom are conducted via the Federal Reserve-controlled Inter Bank Settlement Fund, over which there is no oversight, so that there are NO CHECKS AND BALANCES.

And the object of this exercise is to perpetuate this carousel until the very end of the Presidential term of office, and to ensure that the successors of Bush II and Cheney, who will likewise be the same type of cynical, controlled, handled intelligence operative servicing the ‘Black’ requirements of the decadent, criminalised Intelligence Power, will be able to continue seamlessly with the same fraudulent finance ‘business as usual’. This is a recipe for a catastrophic global ‘train wreck’.

Every Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday, ‘Paulson’ plays the same game, whether he is the phantom Paulson, the real Paulson, or the much younger ‘Paulson’ fellow who appeared on Tom Brockaw’s ‘Meet the Press’ on Sunday 10th August, with no bags under his eyes as though he’d had a facelift. No matter that a ‘Paulson’ was simultaneusly reported to be in China, where Bush Jr. had had to be helped out of his chair by Secret Service operatives after the overdose of cocaine that he appeared to have taken following certain setbacks supposedly suffered by the Bush Criminal Family over the preceding several days. Or was this another CIA fabrication, by any chance?

‘I’LL RELEASE THE SETTLEMENTS FUNDS WHEN I GET HOME. LET ME GO, PLEASE. BY-EE’
According to one source, Bush Jr. is said to have told the Chinese that he would release the funds only on his return to the United States. Since the Chinese let him out of the country, and since they are known to loathe, with good reason, both him and his father, who have a relationship described by UK intelligence ‘friends’ as ‘one of unrelenting confrontation’, they must have had some reason for believing that this duplicitous rascal would deliver: which HE HAS NEVER, EVER, DONE.

On the contrary, this evil man has outperformed Lenin by a wide margin. Lenin taught that all agreements with the bourgeoisie may be torn up when the ‘correlation of forces’ so dictates.

• But Bush Jr, reneges on every undertaking he gives as an IMMEDIATE matter of course, and cannot remember from one hour to the next what agreement he reneged on last, or when.

Since the highly savvy Chinese intelligence officers must certainly know all this, there can only be two possible reasons why the Chinese allowed Bush to leave Peking without settling:

• Bush has seen to it that the relevant INDIVIDUAL Chinese have been bribed (again?), which is standard DVD procedure. (Bribery is so much more efficient than military action).

• The Chinese are fully signed up to the Bush-DVD-pan-German control and hegemony agenda in general, and to pressing to its ultimate conclusion the lethal offensive against ‘the Main Enemy’ which is made possible by treachery from within. After all, this serves their interests, since the Chinese are owed such vast amounts of stolen money that they can buy the whole of America.

They ought surely to have realised now that their action in holding Neil Bush under house arrest in Hong Kong since late 2005 or early 2006 has had no effect at all on the behaviour of the Bush Crime Family. The reason for this is that the Bush Crime Family is riven with internal tensions, so that the fate of one member is a matter of indifference to father and son alike. After all, both have tried on numerous occasions to assassinate the other. Details of these botched attempts, some of which were stopped by British intelligence, will be dealt with later.

UNACCEPTABLE, CORROSIVE AND FECKLESS BEHAVIOUR OF THE WORLD COURT/ICJ
Friday 8th August was supposed to have been the very last ‘deadline’, and the day when the latest of an innumerable series of ‘immunity awards’ made to President Bush Jr., expired. By repeatedly having his lawyers appear at the World Court/ICJ to ask for ‘immunity’ extensions, George W. Bush Jr. reveals that HE IS PERFECTLY WELL AWARE THAT HIS BEHAVIOUR IS CRIMINAL.

However on each of the multiple occasions of which we have chapter and verse of this farce, Bush has allowed the immunity to expire without fulfilling his obligations.

The same cycle is then repeated and he sends his lawyers to ask for immunity again, and again, and again, and again. We will be compiling an inventory of all these recorded ‘immunity’ events, which convey the diversionary impression that the World Court is upholding the Rule of Law, whereas in reality all it is doing is facilitating this world class criminal operative, and those inside his gangster entourage starting with the Godfather, to repeat their cycle of crimes: which, as stated above, they have been doing every day, with impunity.

Even so, by continually seeking ‘immunity’, Bush and his associates who do this clearly know that they have a problem: otherwise, why do they bother? Are they doing this just to act the part, given that these mental defectives are all DARK ACTORS PLAYING GAMES?

THREATS HAVE NO EFFECT ON THESE HARDENED CRIMINALIST OPERATIVES
What is crystal clear is that Bush Sr. and Bush Jr., couldn’t care less what threats are issued by law enforcement, how many temporary transactional immunity periods are granted, or what anyone who is being inconvenienced by this end-game thinks or does. They believe that they are immune from all adverse consequences and that they can continue playing the carousel ad infinitum. Because:

• On 11th August, long after the expiry of the Friday ‘deadline’, George H. W. Scherf Bush Sr. had a visitation. The officials (unspecified) in question demanded that he release the funds. Now, bear in mind that he had long since been told that if he didn’t do so, he would be shot dead. More recently and with practical effect after last Friday, he was told that if he impeded the Settlements he would be arrested. Was he arrested? He was not. So what did he tell his visitors on Monday 11th August:

ANSWER: ‘I’m not releasing the money. It belongs to me’.

Against this background, what did President Bush Jr., who has now stoked a diversionary war in Georgia as an OBFUSCATION EXERCISE because he can’t attack Iran (see below) say, when also asked when he was going to fulfil his undertaking to the Chinese before he left Peking, that he would release the funds on his return? This is what he is reliably reported to us to have said:

‘I’ll release it when I’m good and ready’: which is exactly what the real Mr Paulson said (in nastier language) back in the fall of 2006, AS YOU WILL DOUBTLESS RECALL from our reports.

NEW WAR STARTED IN ORDER TO PROVIDE OBFUSCATION COVER FOR BUSH
Last week, these top level criminals were told what would happen if they continued to block the Settlements. Over the weekend, we ourselves were authoritatively advised that if these gangsters and others in positions of power interfered on Monday 11th August, arrests would be made and the arrests would be publicised. Georgia, egged on by the United States, therefore embarked upon a reckless attack on South Ossetia.

WHY? To save present GEORGE W. BUSH JR.’S BACKSIDE, THAT’S WHY. Because Georgia was taken over after the US-assisted removal of legitimately elected Georgian President Gamsakhurdia from power in Tbilisi on 7th May 1992, when George W. Bush Sr.’s corrupt Soviet trading partner Eduard Shevardnadze was ‘parachuted in’ to replace him. Georgia was then developed into one of Bush’s hidey-holes, via the Central Bank of Georgia, where the Bushite criminalists were able to ‘run the money’. See further analysis on Bush’s Georgian diversion, as he can’t attack Iran, below.

CNN et al are broadcasting NOTHING BUT GEORGIA, saying how bad it is, when in fact this is a war provoked by President Bush in order to provide him with the cover he needs in order to avoid the worst outcome for Bush and his co-gangsters personally:

• BECAUSE WE CAN’T HAVE A DOMESTIC CRISIS WHILE THERE’S ANOTHER WAR ON, CAN WE?

TRUSTEES CAUGHT PILFERING FUNDS ORDERED TO BE ‘SHOT ON SIGHT’
On the 8th August 2008, the Editor received IN WRITING from an impeccable source the following statement: ‘I heard from my ‘High Functionary’ something very shocking for his level. He said orders have been given to arrest and replace anyone who isn’t in place or who stalls in any way and that any trustee caught pilfering funds will be shot on sight. This man never talks like that, so I take it to be serious’. We were subsequently informed by two completely separate ‘connected’ sources that these were indeed precisely the orders that had been given.

News of arrests of bankers, especially at the CIA’s criminal enterprise institution Bank of America, were also reported and verified earlier. But none of these verified arrests or threats has had THE SLIGHTEST EFFECT ON THE BEHAVIOUR OF THE FOLLOWING GANGSTERS:

• George H. W. Bush Sr.

• President George Bush Jr.

• Henry M. Paulson or whoever his proxy du jour may be.

• Vice President Richard B. Cheney.

• Former President William Jefferson Clinton (William Jefferson Blyth IV).

• Mrs Hillary Rodomski Clinton

• Dr Alan Greenspan, WHO IS STILL AT IT, TO THIS DAY, assisted by…

• Dr Ben Bernanke, who controls the Federal Reserve Inter Bank Settlement Fund…

• Plus the INTELLIGENCE POWER which controls everything and is completely out of control.

The INTELLIGENCE POWER is watching its ‘Black Operations’ and its Fascist ‘corporation’ deceit going back to President Eisenhower and NSC 68/1 unravel, and is more interested in frustrating this process and in justifying its own behaviour than in serving the American people, whom it has never actually served at all because it exists to serve the President of the United States and the oil corporations. And since the President of the United States is the hated son of the head of German secret ‘Black’ Intelligence, and is one of the ‘Blackest’ operatives on earth, and since no-one in the United States appears to have the GUTS to take these organised criminals down, the prospects facing the United States and the entire world are now being degraded at an ever steeper angle of decline, with absolutely no indication that law enforcement is going to do what it is paid to do:

• UPHOLD THE LAW.

• If they can’t be bothered to do more than just talk about what needs to be done, perhaps they should get out and go stack shelves in foodstores instead. Maybe they’d be more useful.

• And if the Chinese or other foreign powers imagine that the collapse of the US dollar which this FAILURE OF WILL is going to precipitate will do them any good, they are living in a Black dream.

PEOPLE ARE DISAPPEARING AND SOME ARE BEING SUMMARILY EXECUTED
Do any of these gangsters care that people are disappearing all over the place? The numbers of those who have been disappearing run into considerable figures, we are informed.

• Is it of the slightest concern that some of those who are vanishing ARE BEING EXECUTED, and that photographs of these hideous gangland events are reportedly being sent to President Bush?

We didn’t INVENT any of the above information.

It was given to us by SEVERAL separate sources, and adjudged, on Friday 8th August, to be well over 90% accurate, according to OFFICIALLY SOURCED and very carefully double-checked input.

OUTLINE OF THE SITUATION AS IT STANDS, AND WHAT SHOULD BE DONE
To summarise, therefore, the dreadful situation that has developed:

(1) The criminal gang operating at the highest level of the US Federal Government is CONTINUING the SAME, previously identified, carousel system of extracting money from the Settlements funds, that was being used to exploit, divert, hypothecate and steal the Wanta money.

(2) This being the case, they are circumventing the reality that the $6.2 trillion of REAL cash-cash funds loaned by Her Majesty The Queen and Prince Alaweed of Saudi Arabia, which is sitting in the suspense account at Citibank, has been frozen.

(3) Since it can be taken as read that Robert Rubin, within Citibank, is facilitating the daily carousel orchestrated thievery operation, IN OUR OPINION HM THE QUEEN AND SAUDI PRINCE ALAWEED SHOULD NOW RECALL THE $6.2 TRILLION THEY HAVE LOANED TO THAT BANK.

If this is refused, The Queen should request the British Government to take immediate retaliatory and punitive action against all bank accounts in the United Kingdom owned by American interests.

(4) In order to provide a diversionary smokescreen and to create an environment in which drastic action against the top level gangsters is stalled (AS APPEARS TO HAVE HAPPENED), the Americans have concocted a crisis in Georgia, in accordance with the following equation:

• Knowing of course that GRU-Prime Minister Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin and the Soviet military strategists are bent on reversing the ‘Georgian Settlement’, Bush or his proxies arranged for the impetuous, unreliable Georgian military, equipped by the United States in a reckless gamble since 2002, to embark upon an operation against South Ossetia. That Mr Putin intervened, either by prior arrangement or predictably, SUITS BUSH PERFECTLY.

• Because the propaganda arms of the US Government such as CNN are focusing on the dreadful things that the Russians are doing and will do, so that the dreadful crimes that the President of the United States has committed are disappearing from the screen like a bad smell.

• Betray the brave people of Georgia? So what?
The United States did precisely that back in 1990-92. What else is new? [See below].

BUSH SR. ABUSED NSC 68/1 ‘BLACK OPS’ TO MAXIMISE THEIR MONEY-MAKING POTENTIAL
For Georgia to be finally disillusioned with the West is yet another ‘irrevocable’ gain for the covert Soviets. And these events are all attributable to the unravelling of the Bush Sr.-instigated financial scamming operations, mounted when George H.W. Bush Sr. started abusing, believe it or not, the US ‘Black Operations’ tradition going back to Eisenhower in order to convert it into a money-making operation for himself and his corrupt associates.

Being duplicitous at every turn, Mr George H. W. Bush Sr. saw the ‘Black Operations’ for which he became responsible, as a platform from which to mount the biggest series of bank raids in human history, WHICH ARE CONTINUING TO THIS DAY AS THOUGH NOTHING THAT HAS HAPPENED SINCE JULY 2005, AND THAT WE HAVE REPORTED, HAS HAD ANY EFFECT WHATSOEVER.

MI6 AND THE QUEEN MUST FULFIL THEIR DUTY AND OBLIGATIONS
Therefore we say that the following must immediately take place:

• MI6 MUST GET OFF ITS COMPLACENT BACKSIDE AND DO ITS JOB.

• BROWN MUST ORDER SCARLETT TO DO WHAT HE IS REQUIRED TO DO, OR SACK HIM.

• THE PRIME MINISTER MUST NOT CONCERN HIMSELF ABOUT WHAT MI5/6 MAY HAVE ‘OVER’ HIM. HE’S THE BOSS. HE CAN MOVE SWIFTLY AND SACK SCARLETT IF HE HAS THE GUTS.

• THE QUEEN MUST EXERCISE HER AUTHORITY SUPPORT OF THE RULE OF LAW.

WHY THE UNITED STATES HAS SUBSTITUTED GEORGIA FOR IRAN
Georgia was selected as a safe place for the criminalists to ‘run the money’ after the successful and illegal overthrow, covertly assisted or condoned by the United States, for several reasons.

First, the former dictator of Georgia, known as ‘Stalin II’, Mr Eduard Shevardnadze, who served as Gorbachev’s Foreign Minister, was a ‘partner’, like Saddam Hussein, of George Bush Sr. Secondly, Georgia has always been a brittle, unruly, faction-ridden place where ancient rivalries never die, so that any realistic prospect of the Rule of Law prevailing, was always minimal.

The supposedly (but falsely) ‘independent’ new ‘post’-Soviet Leninist Republics offered boundless opportunities for setting up counterparties to secret high-yield trading operations in nanomoney, which the naturally clever Georgians warmed to. Also, the oil corporations, lusting foolishly after the oil assets of the Caspian, wanted the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline to ‘happen’.

But the original plan for this stage of the waning Bush II Period of Abomination (Presidency is too polite a word) had been to attack Iran, not least for diversionary purposes. Too late! Iran is already a nuclear power. It possesses 12 plutonium nuclear weapons, built with weapons-grade plutonium supplied in 2003 by the French.

• The French used refurbished World War II German E-Boats for the purpose.

• The Germans (DVD) have since been training Iranian crews to operate these E-Boats.

SO THE GEORGIAN CRISIS HAD TO BE WORKED UP FOR DIVERSIONARY PURPOSES, INSTEAD.

DRUGS CONVEYED IN WORLD WAR II GERMAN E-BOATS
These refurbished World War II-era German E-Boats are hired out by DVD, Dachau, for illicit drug distribution purposes. In 2005, HMS Campbelltown intercepted and stopped one of these E-Boats, which was found to have a skipper and crew from the Dominican Republic. The E-Boat was carrying 3-4 tonnes of Colombian pure.

President Hugo Chavez, AN ASSET OF GEORGE BUSH SR. and therefore of the DVD (contrary to the opposite impression that he deliberately fosters) presides over the distribution of drugs by means inter alia of German E-Boats via the Dominican Republic into South Africa, where the corrupt Mbeki takes his cut and the consigments are routed on to the corrupt and oil-soaked dictatorship satrapy of Equatorial Guinea, for further distribution into Europe and the United Kingdom.

WHAT THE BRITISH POLICE DISCOVERED IN CERTAIN SAFETY LOCK BOXES
When the Safety Lock Boxes were opened after the armed Metropolitan Police raided those three safety lock box centres in Mayfair, Hampstead and Edgeware (see previous reports) on 2nd June, assets belonging to the following operatives were allegedly found, we have been advised:

• Hamid Reza Pardis: This man is involved in one or more Iranian drug cartels and is a high-up in one of the two drug cartels distributing drugs with disastrous consequences into Britain.

• Ali Ghabami, another Iranian, who is reported to have been married to the sister of John Major, the former British Prime Minister. Ghabami is close to the current President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and also knows Jack Straw, formerly the British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.

• John Scarlett, head of MI6 and in charge of GO-2, which handles the drugs.

FINANCING OF BRITISH POLITICAL PARTIES BY THE TWO DRUG CARTELS
The two main British political parties (and probably also the third) are reported by furious British intelligence circles to be financed in part by the aforementioned two drug cartels. These cartels have been handling drugs brought into the country by the DVD’s refurbished E-Boats. The way the parties are or have been financed is that an up-and-coming British entrepreneur, or perhaps some other figure aspiring to join the so-called ‘Great and the Good’, will be ‘tapped’ and asked to cough up, say £1.0 million. It will be put to the target that if he obliges, £2.0 million (all derived from drug-trafficking proceeds) will be placed in the ‘donor’s’ offshore bank account. It is probably also made clear that the Inland Revenue will be quietly advised to pay no attention (although we don’t think the tax authorities go along with this any longer).

We further understand that the flow of drug-money into the Labour Party’s accounts, which was plentiful under the corrupt Tony Blair, has dried up under Gordon Brown. This would imply that Brown draws the line at drug financing, which is a good sign, and at the same time explains why concerted moves are being made to undermine the Prime Minister and then to replace him with a figure who would have no scruples on this score.

Deutsche Verteidigungs Dienst, Dachau, controls both of these drug cartels. As noted above, John Scarlett, head of MI6, is reported to ‘work with’ the Germans and DVD. He is therefore in a position to turn the drug money spigot on or off, depending on the priorities conveyed by the DVD, although we understand that not least following exposures of its operations against Britain and the United States, the DVD are now ‘talking’ to British authorities. Germany’s ‘Black’ agency was given a nasty shock when, arising out of their usual torpor, certain British authorities confronted the DVD with its complicity in the 7/7 terrorist attacks on the London Underground and on a double-decker bus, and threatened that if DVD did not immediately cease all acts of war against Britain, including its long-running sponsorship of the Irish Republican Army (IRA) and its splintered factions, Britain would pull out of the European Union Collective. The DVD complied. But this website has maintained the pressure on this ‘Blacker-than-Black’ criminal enterprise; and the fact that it is in discussions with certain British authorities may or may not have implications for the tenure of John Scarlett.

BUSH’S CYNICAL CALCULATIONS IN CONNECTION WITH THE GEORGIA PROVOCATION
From Bush’s perspective, an international crisis at this juncture of extreme difficulty for him and his criminalist associates, could hardly be more appropriate. Bush’s calculation (or that of his non-drug-addicted handlers) will have been that ‘amid such a crisis, neither I nor any of my associates, nor any other senior figures engaged in these doings, are likely to be arrested, with such arrests being made public’ (as the perpetrators were all warned in no uncertain terms over the weekend of the 9th-10th August). ‘Therefore, although my State Department will make the usual rude noises and will draft a resolution condemning Russia for the Security Council, in reality I am over the moon that we have provoked the Georgians in turn into provoking my very good friend Mr Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin to intervene militarily in the region, which he and his generals have been itching to do ever since we started arming the Georgians in 2002, as this gets me squarely off the hook back home’.

In other words, Georgians who have been loudly complaining that they have been let down by the United States and the West (as they did under Gamsakhurdia when the Soviets/US were engaged in operations to overthrow the legitimately elected President of Georgia and after Shevardnadze had been ‘parachuted’ into Tbilisi on 7th March 1992) have not understood that they and their country have again been sacrificed, this time round, to help save the skin of the most evil and relentlessly brainwashed criminal operative currently holding power anywhere in the world.

That will be as bitter a pill for Georgians to swallow as their disappointment when the West actively assisted the installation of the hated Shevardnadze in the place of the ousted Gamsakhurdia. Few in Tbilisi will understand that the latest developments reflect a combination of Soviet ‘Blowback’ from the Georgian events of 1990-92, plus a cynical calculation by Mr Bush Jr. that allowing Putin to devastate parts of Georgia, to attack the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline and possibly to follow through with the de facto re-Sovietisation of Georgia, is a price worth paying for avoiding the publicised arrests of senior figures that were planned if the Settlements were again frustrated.

In addition to the predicaments faced by the Bush Crime Family, who are collectively the biggest gangsters in world history in terms of the volume of funds and assets they have stolen and the numbers of deaths for which they are responsible, Bush Jr. has presided over the conversion of Georgia, historically a highly individualistic, ancient country riven with generational hatreds and internal rivalries, into an aspiring military power. This nefarious process began when the United States started intermeddling in the Caucasus during the Gorbachëv era.

SOME HISTORICAL BACKGROUND TO THE GEORGIA DIVERSION
Following the ‘loosening’ in the late 1980s, the Georgian electorate voted for a patriotic leader, Zviad Gamsakhurdia, the son of Georgia’s most famous writer du jour, Konstantin Gamsakhurdia. The Gamsakhurdia Government was motivated most of all by genuine Georgian patriotism, given that the nation had been subjected to Soviet rule from the early days of the Soviet régime, which overthrew its revolutionary Menshevik settlement after 1917.

Ironically, Georgia then provided the Soviets with two of their most satanic leaders, both Georgian Jews – Josef Djugashvili-Kochba (Stalin), and Lavrentii Beria, who became Stalin’s Interior Minister (MKVD chief). When the time came for Beria to be liquidated, and his executioners entered his cell to perform the deed, this Beria, the murderer of millions, wept and begged for mercy, clinging onto the boots of his unwelcome visitors. Such butchers as Beria and Bush are trained to inflict pain on others without flinching, but, as Beria’s performance (subsequently recounted by one of those who were present) showed, they are not so keen on other people inflicting pain on themselves without flinching. Recall that George Führer Bush was prone to blowing up frogs with firecrackers in his youth. Accordingly, the fact that the Soviet Military Intelligence (GRU) officer he was sitting next to in Peking (who left suddenly afterwards) was in the process of presiding over the destruction of populated centers in Georgia, was hardly likely to phase the American butcher in the slightest.

Thanks to US intermeddling, Georgian President Gamsakhurdia’s Government came under almost immediate pressure ostensibly from the Soviets, with the GRU mounting a total of three attempted coups against Gamsakhurdia in the Georgian capital, Tbilisi, and finally, in March 1992, succeeding in driving him and his entourage from what had become the Presidential Palace.

On 7th March, the former de facto dictator of Georgia, Eduard Shevardnadze, was ‘parachuted’ into Tbilisi, having been invited to assume the Presidency by an ‘ad hoc’ Georgian junta consisting of Soviet intelligence agents, after Gamsakhurdia and associates had fled into the countryside.

Before being elevated by Gorbachëv to the position of Soviet Foreign Minister, Shevardnadze had treated Georgia as his private fiefdom, had acquired a reputation for ruthlessness and mendacity so notorious that he was known as ‘Stalin II’, and, in the tradition of mediaeval monarchs, kept his political prisoners in dungeons beneath his offices. This ancient practice was conspicuous, it may be recalled, when Feliks Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky was modelling the Cheka in 1917: his prisoners were housed in the basement beneath his offices in St Petersburg.

During these events, the Editor of this service, who is also the Editor of Soviet Analyst, noticed that the BBC’s reporting of the Georgian violence, appeared to be back to front. The invariably biased and disgracefully selective BBC was reporting the wholly false ‘line’ that Zviad Gamsakhurdia had behaved like a dictator, a brazen lie based upon the fact that he had been obliged to take action against certain elements which were considered to be a danger to internal stability – actions which had been characterised by humanity and were in accordance with the law.

THE UNITED STATES’ SORDID RECORD OF BETRAYAL AND SELFISHNESS IN GEORGIA
As early as 1990, President George Bush Sr. had warned Mr Gamsakhurdia that he was wasting his time ‘sailing against the wind’, by which he meant (a) that ‘Shevardnadze is my trading partner’ and I will install him instead of you as you aren’t ‘cooperating’; and (b) that Mr Gamsakhurdia’s position in seeking Georgian alignment with the West and proper independence, would not be tolerated by the intermeddling United States, which had its eye on port facilities, the pipeline project, and other assets in the region. In May 1992, having been illegitimately installed in the place of Gamsakhurdia, Shevardnadze appeared on a balcony flanked by the former US Secretary of State, James Baker.

According to Western propaganda, Baker, the dubious Bush Crime Family’s ‘Mr Fixit’, flew ‘against the advice of his aides’ (a blatant fabrication) to Georgia immediately following a conference on the Middle East in Madrid, ‘to demonstrate his support for the former Soviet Foreign Minister’. In other words, Baker, on behalf of Bush Sr. and the US Government, endorsed the illegal seizure of power by force from the legally elected President Gamsakhurdia.

To make matters much worse, Mr Baker proceeded to deliver a sycophantic speech in which he invoked the Georgian national mythology about the Golden Fleece. After Baker had been waffling for about 20 minutes, his boring speech was sharply interrupted by the noise of tanks and gunfire from adjoining streets. According to eyewitness reports (reconfirmed to the Editor in 2007, by the way), Shevardnadze and Baker took refuge inside the ‘Presidential Palace’. When the shooting had ceased, Baker and ‘Stalin II’ calmly returned to the microphones, whereupon Mr Baker resumed his speech as though nothing had happened.

TEMPERATURE AROUND SHEVARDNADZE REPORTED TO BE COLDER THAN ELSEWHERE
Concerning Shevardnadze, the Editor was informed on separate occasions by two American women of his acquaintance, that each of them had observed, when in Eduard Shevardnadze’s presence at events in Washington, that the temperature surrounding ‘Stalin II’ was much lower than elsewhere in the building and even at the other end of the room.

The only other notorious character of whom the Editor has personally been told of rather similar conditions is former President Clinton. In that case, the informant is a well-known Israeli-American lady who is also a respected analyst and criminologist. One of her tasks in the past has been to debrief serial killers in US penitentiaries, in the course of her investigations and studies into the behaviour and mental make-up of such murderers. Thus it can be said of this lady, known to the Editor, that she is nothing if not knowledgeable about the very worst features of humanity.

In 1999, this informant told the Editor of this service that she and a friend happened to be present in a ladies’ boutique located in the Rockefeller Center, New York. The boutique sells handbags and other female accoutrements. All of a sudden, 18 brisk security men blew into the retail space and ordered everyone to move to the wall and/or freeze. The Editor’s informant and her girlfriend were stuck in the middle of the retail floor close to a counter, and unable to move. Ten seconds later, in walked President Clinton, evidently to make a purchase for a female acquaintance.

President Clinton (a.k.a. William Bly, the illegitimate son of Governor Winthrop Rockefeller) stood close to the Editor’s informant: if she had stuck her hand out, she would have touched him. As she explained it to the Editor, the three or four minutes that they stood there, unable to move, felt like half a day. Moreover this woman, who had seen everything there is to see about the underside of humanity and was therefore hardened to such matters, told the Editor that she had NEVER felt so uncomfortable in her life. The vibes emitted by this operative made her flesh creep, which had not happened when she had debriefed serial murderers. When Clinton turned round, having made his purchase, his face turned bright red. After he and his security thuggists had vanished as quickly as they had arrived, the two women rushed out of the boutique: they could not stay there any longer.

What you have just read represent real-life, first hand accounts to the Editor by women who have been in the presence of both Clinton and Shevardnadze, who, by the way, maintained his apartment in Moscow all the time that he acted as President of Georgia. Normally, Soviet (and covert Soviet) officials were allowed only one private residence. Shevardnadze chose as his Interior Minister a man called Mikheil Saakashvili – a fact that has been almost completely suppressed, given that this photogenic fellow, equipped with a Dutch wife and nice children, was later selected to emerge as the ‘respectable face’ of Georgia for international public consumption, being duly elevated to the Georgian Presidency after the West had ‘finished’ with Bush Sr’s. trading ‘partner’, Shevardnadze, under whom various US figures, such as George Shultz, had entered into ‘commercial’ contractual arrangements for their own enrichment.

GAMSAKHURDIA FOUND DEAD IN A SHALLOW GRAVE IN WESTERN GEORGIA
Having been forced to flee Tbilisi, Gamsakhurdia, with a diminishing band of followers, wandered the Georgian countryside, ending up with just his former Prime Minister, Bessarion Gugushvili, who was the last man to see Gamsakhurdia alive.

The former legally elected Georgian President was found over the New Year of 1993-94 buried in a shallow grave in Western Georgia, having been both poisoned and shot. Since Gamsakhurdia had corresponded with the Editor of Soviet Analyst and had provided him with a great deal of inside information about the former Soviet régime and how Gamsakhurdia’s Government was undermined by the Soviets with American assistance, the Editor was so sickened by this development that he underwent a period of being absolutely unable to handle further news from Georgia.

This was actually a physical reaction. During this period, too, we were treated with contempt by the British Foreign Office. In particular, an obnoxious ‘mandarin’ who was then serving as head of the Eastern Department pronounced loftily in the British press that ‘the one thing we cannot put up with is all this support for Gamsakhurdia’.

That support, dear friends, was coordinated by the Editor through Soviet Analyst from our London office. And it was causing problems for the cosy business relationships that the US criminalists had established with their corrupt ‘partner’, Shevardnadze, even jeopardising the establishment of closed trading operations via the Georgian Central Bank.

OVER 100 BRITISH COMPANIES NOW FACE PAYING THE PRICE FOR THE F.O.’S STUPIDITY
Since then, on the misguided advice of the wishful-thinking Foreign Office, more than 100 British companies have established operations in Georgia where they now find themselves, predictably, at extreme risk of losing their entire investment, just as will happen to British Petroleum (BP).

In this connection, please review the announcement in our Subs/Books Update panel introducing the publication of Soviet Analyst, Volume 30, Numbers 7 & 8, which exposes the KGB/GRU-thuggist background of the shifty majority ‘owners’ of TNK-BP, who are all controlled, Leninist criminalist intelligence ‘oligarchs’, engaged in clawing back the previously temporarily ‘privatised’ (alienated) assets that were ‘stolen from’ the Party-State to bamboozle the West, in accordance with the long-established logic of ‘The Party’s Gold’.

‘THE PARTY’S GOLD SYNDROME’ IGNORED BY THE IGNORANT WEST
‘The Party’s Gold’ was the title of a book published in Kiev in 1986, authored by Igor Bunich, who related what happened after Stalin had put Lenin’s false New Economic Policy (NEP) into reverse, and was ‘cleaning up’ afterwards. Stalin commanded his Interior Minister, the NKVD Chief Genrikh Grigoryevich Yagoda (1934-36), to provide him with a full list of all the secret Swiss bank accounts maintained by the revolutionary ‘Comrades’. Yagoda duly obliged, but omitted details of his own secret Swiss bank accounts. Djiugashvili-Kochba (Stalin), however, maintained a separate secret, secret, secret inner intelligence service under his direct control, which then carried out the same research and came up with the same list of bank account details, except that the listing included Yagoda’s secret Swiss bank account references.

Accordingly, in 1936, Yagoda, like the rest of the Comrades, duly received the standard bullet through the temples. The only exception to this was Krupskaya, Lenin’s widow, who broke down and cried at Stalin’s feet. For some unknown reason, Stalin relented in her case only.

The moral, laid on thick by Igor Bunich, was that ‘liberalisation’ in the Soviet Union is invariably provisonal, temporary and Leninist in nature, which is to say that it is false. When the Party-State alienates some of its (originally stolen) assets, there comes a time when it will demand or seize these assets back, with interest. This is exactly what is happening now that Russia has refurbished its previously collapsing oil and gas sector after importing Western technology and expertise.

This is the straightforward lesson that British Petroleum and the complacent British Foreign Office, not to mention the US oil corporations, failed to grasp, or pooh-poohed as their eyes turned bottle green and they salivated as TEMPORARY access to the coveted Soviet energy assets was granted.

UNSOUND FOUNDATION FOR ANY LONG-TERM RELATIONSHIP
This access was granted, however, upon an unsound foundation. It consisted of bribery operations spearheaded inter alia by Leo Wanta, who subsequently embarked upon unprecedented financial warfare initiatives under cover of four Reagan-era Executive Orders to ransack the ‘Evil Empire’ – a ‘game’ that the ‘subverted’ Soviet officials and operatives holding high office went along with, for several reasons. First, they were each personally enriched by collaborating with this typically Bush-facilitated operation (using the DVD’s main technique: bribery); and secondly, they went along with the US and the other Western operatives, including Marc Rich (a.k.a. the long-range DVD operative, Hans Brand) as they ransacked and pillaged the Party-State: since the KGB-GRU-Party intended in due course to resort to ‘The Party’s Gold’ option, clawing back 100% of these assets at a time to be dictated by the ‘correlation of forces’.

Thirdly, their collaboration with these Western criminalist operatives was undertaken, from the outset, in the usual Leninist spirit of absolute (100%) cynicism. We recall the arrogance of Western and US commentators and other ‘experts’ in the 1990s who maintained that Soviet Analyst and its Editor had ‘lost the plot’, and had failed to understand that a fundamental shift in Soviet/Russian attitudes to the real world had taken place. The UK Ministry of Defence threw out its entire library on Soviet Communism (a fact that the Editor knows, because he purchased a complete set of ‘The Communist International 1919-1943: Documents, selected and edited by Jane Degras’, in a dusty Bloomsbury bookshop, stamped ‘Ministry of Defence Library Services: WITHDRAWN’, in the 1990s.

It was separately reported to the Editor that the Foreign Office likewise threw out its own library of books on Communism following the so-called ‘collapse of Communism’. WHAT SHALLOW FOOLS!

Our repeated warnings to the effect that ‘Collapsible Communism’ was a typical, classic Leninist ruse, fell on arrogant, opinionated, dogmatic, supercilious and second-rate British official ears. (As for the so-called ‘mainstream’ media and the biased BBC, they lacked ears to hear altogether).

U.S. MILITARY ARMING OF GEORGIA
From about early 2002 onwards, the revolutionary United States poured armaments into President Mikheil Saakashvili’s Georgia. The initial wave of substantial military assistance flowed in under the Georgia Train and Equip Program, which was infiltrated under cover of the spurious pretext that it had become necessary to counter ‘Al Qaeda operations’ in the remote Pankisi Gorge region (Al Qaeda having originally been established by US operatives).

Later, under the ludicrously pretentious Sustainment and Stability Operations Program, Georgia committed a large number of its troops to US operations in Iraq, doubling their contingent in the autumn of 2007 so that it became the third largest within the so-called US-led coalition (initiated by Der Führer in part to ransack and steal the assets of the Central Bank of Iraq and Rafidain Bank, as previously discussed). It is also a fact that the Bush Crime Family, having ‘retrieved’ all the assets stolen and generated by Bush Sr.’s former ‘trading partner’, Saddam Hussein, needed to wind up with Saddam Hussein hanging form a rope: and the reason they needed this to happen, which will be revealed in a later report, will shake many readers of this service.

As a consequence, the Georgian army acquired battle-hardened military experience, training and an extensive inventory of US military equipment. They had to withdraw half of their contingent from Iraq for their operation against South Ossetia. As for the United States, its intermeddling in Georgia was responsible for setting light to ancient rivalries which the ignorant Americans probably knew little about. The United States’ behaviour in this region can also be considered highly provocative and calculated to inflame regional tensions, not least given Georgia’s geographical location. North of Georgia, located adjacent to Ingushetia and Chechnya, is the huge Soviet military territory of Mozdok, from which former Soviet military supremo, General Grachev, once boasted that ‘we can wage world war from this single territory’. It seems reckless in the extreme, to put it mildly, for the stupid US military and their cokehead President to have become embroiled so deeply in this area which bristles with ancient tensions, and where there are only two types of human being: friends, in which case you are a friend of the family for life; and enemies, in which case the opposite applies.

IT’S ALL ABOUT MONEY, STUPID
Yes indeed: IT’S ALL ABOUT THE MONEY. After all, Shevardnadze was George Bush Sr.’s partner, along with Gorbachëv, Putin, and subsequently, Yeltsin. Fully aware of all dimensions of the Bush Crime Family’s behaviour and the Settlements crisis, Putin arrives in Peking and demands payment and the completion of the Settlements forthwith. This demand was the culmination of wrangles with the Kremlin that have been continuing behind the scenes, given that post-Gamsakhurdia Georgia was identified and used, as we have seen, by the Bush-led criminalists to run the money through, and as a wedge against the covert Soviets, for activation in the event that the ‘partnership’ with these corrupt Soviet operatives went sour. All Bush ‘partnerships’ decay and turn sour, because Bush Sr., like his criminalist son, ALWAYS double-crosses his ‘partners’.

The United States armed the hot-headed and revanchist Georgians in part so as to heighten covert Soviet awareness of the Bushites’ expectation that their continued ‘cooperation’ with respect to the money-running ‘partnership’ was mandatory. When this facile delusion collapsed, the United States ‘did not stand in the way’ of Georgia attacking South Ossetia, and obliged the Georgians by flying half the Georgian contingent in Iraq back to Tbilisi in a hurry, thereby advertising their direct involvement in the Georgian provocation, which was nothing more nor less than a typical Bushite reprisal associated with ongoing behind-the-scenes wrangling over money and ‘the partnership’, upon which ‘the end of the Cold War’ (which Soviet Analyst never believed in) was based.

This dangerous eruption of military activity and atrocities is simply yet another manifestation of the breakdown of the global gangsters’ operations, an outbreak of gang warfare, with the difference that it has the obvious potential to escalate into general hostilities. World Wars have an historical habit of being ignited in the month of August, for some reason. But the main point here is that the Bush Crime Family’s relentless and ruthless abominations, which have brought the world to the verge of economic and financial catastrophe, are now identifiable as the underlying cause of open warfare in a region notorious for its ancient feuds, and its historical instability. The US Ambassador to Georgia is a Bush criminalist crony, just as is the case in Poland, where the covert Soviets are being provoked by the US ploy to locate anti-missile defences, which Moscow understandably sees as directed not against Iran, as the Americans maintain, but against the covert Soviet Union itself.

All of which illustrates the dangerous recklessness and lethal potential of the furious and bitter enmities, rivalries, conflicts and black anger that the Bush-led criminalists’ standard procedure of double-crossing their so-called financial ‘trading’ partners has predictably unleashed, as the entire convoluted US/DVD ‘Black Operations’ programme nexus going back to President Eisenhower and predicated upon National Security Council Order # 68/1, unravels as a direct and specific sequel to the Settlements crisis arising out of Wantagate and the Editor’s provision of $35,000 of his scarce private funds to shorten the illegal probationary period being served by the ‘dead’ oligarch and US operative, Leo Emil Wanta, in July 2005.

ANNEXE:

REITERATION OF THE STATUTES, SECURITIES REGULATIONS AND LEGAL PRINCIPLES OF WHICH THE CRIMINALISTS, THEIR ASSOCIATES AND RELEVANT BANKSTERS ARE IN BREACH:

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:

THEFT BY DECEPTION:

• “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:

• ‘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’.

U.S. SECURITIES REGULATIONS OF WHICH INSTITUTIONS
HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO BE IN BREACH [SEE REPORTS]:

• 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.

U.S. LAWS ROUTINELY BREACHED BY THE CRIMINAL OPERATIVES AND BANKSTERS:

• 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.

U.S. FINANCIAL MARKET REVAMP IS FALSE PROSPECTUS

ALTERNATIVE PLAN IS SIMPLE, TIMELY, EFFECTIVE AND MUCH LESS EXPENSIVE

Tuesday 22 July 2008 00:15

Update, 9th August 2008:

The Editor has deliberately left this large report up in order for its crucial information and lessons to be widely read and understood. Also, the Glossary is a useful and pertinent resource.

• Further reports on the corruption crisis, and on the unravelling of US ‘Black Operations’ that have bedevilled the whole world since the Eisenhower Presidency, and the concomitant decay of The New Underworld Order (a.k.a. the World Revolution), will follow.

In the meantime, you may be interested to know that the NSA is bombarding our computers with about 1,000 illegal ‘Returned’ emails per hour. This is happening in clear response to the Editor’s comments on the monitored transatlantic phone when he discovered that his Verizon telephone bill contains a demand for a false monthly fee which has been illegally transposed onto the bill by US intelligence eavesdroppers working for Mr Cheney embedded inside Verizon, which is a known intelligence operation. The cadres overheard and transcribed the Editor’s comments and, given their habitual mental age of about five years, are trying to get their own back and to intimidate us.

What they didn’t know, the fools, is that we use a proprietary FOREIGN Internet Security program which defeats every Trojan, worm, scam, porn attack and virus these evil people throw at us.

The Editor has had the bright idea (!) of offering this program to all 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 World Revolution and the financial corruption which was financing it: BUT HAS NOW, THANKS TO THESE EXPOSURES, BEEN VERY SEVERELY JEOPARDISED.

• They NEVER thought there would be any opposition, see: and they imagined that they could continue their fraudulent finance operations ad infinitum, with impunity.

The familiar US proprietary Internet Security programs are all cynical by-products of US corrupt counterintelligence, and are intended NOT to solve your Internet security problems, but to spy on you and to report what you do and say to centralised US electronic facilities set up for the purpose.

You now can BREAK FREE from this syndrome and at the same time can ENABLE US TO MAINTAIN VERY HEAVY PRESSURE ON THE CRIMINALISTS, by ordering the top quality FOREIGN (i.e., non-US) INTERNET SECURITY SYSTEM that we have started advertising on this website.

• On this Home Page, at World Reports Limited, which displays our printed publications, scroll right down to the foot of that section and read all about it! Help yourself and us, at the same time!

PRESIDENT’S WORKING GROUP ‘REFORM PLAN’ EXPOSED AS A SELF-SERVING RUSE

BETTER PLAN BY MICHAEL C. COTTRELL, B.A., M.S. CAN BE UP AND RUNNING IN MONTHS

CONVOLUTED ‘PAULSON’ FABRICATION WOULD COST IMMENSE $ SUMS TO IMPLEMENT

TREASURY’S PROPOSALS REQUIRE SEVEN NEW AGENCIES, MR COTTRELL’S JUST ONE

THREE-STAGE ‘PAULSON’ PROPOSALS CALCULATED TO UNDERMINE MARKET PSYCHOLOGY

ALTERNATIVE PLAN SUPPLEMENTED BY A COMPREHENSIVE SECURITIES MARKET GLOSSARY

By Christopher Story FRSA, Editor and Publisher, International Currency Review, World Reports Limited, London and New York. For earlier reports, press ARCHIVE. Order your subscriptions and our ‘politically incorrect’, hence correct, intelligence books from the Edward Harle segment.

• BOOKS: Edward Harle Limited has so far published FIVE intelligence titles: The Perestroika Deception, by Anatoliy Golitsyn; Red Cocaine, by Dr Joseph D. Douglass, Jr.; The European Union Collective, by Christopher Story; The New Underworld Order, by Christopher Story; and The Red Terror in Russia, by Sergei Melgounov. All titles are permanently in stock. We sell books DIRECT.

• Please Make a Donation, if you feel able to do so, to help finance Christopher Story‘s ongoing global financial corruption investigations. Your assistance will be very sincerely appreciated and will make a real difference, hastening the OVERDUE resolution of the worst financial corruption and linked financial fallout in world history. The Editor’s $35,000 Wanta bail-out money has been stolen.

• INTERNATIONAL CURRENCY REVIEW, Volume 33, #s 3 & 4: Our Royal Mail did an absolutely first class distribution job on Friday 11th July. On Saturday afternoon, a subscriber in the Orkneys had received his copy, and control copies in various parts of the United Kingdom had been received. On Monday we were advised that copies had already been delivered in parts of the United States, and on Tuesday morning we learned that copies had been delivered in Japan. This represents a fine achievement by the often criticised Royal Mail, and the Editor informed them accordingly.

• Please see ARCHIVE for report dated 12th July 2008 about this special world crisis issue.

SIMPLE RULES-BASED MARKET STABILISATION PLAN BY MICHAEL C. COTTRELL, B.A., M.S.
In the first quarter of 2008, Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., President of Pennsylvania Investments , Inc., contacted the Editor of this service to brief him in detail on the dubious stratagems behind the disparate proposals that were finally unveiled at the end of last March by the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets, a.k.a. the ‘Paulson proposals’.

As a result of several conversations, Mr Cottrell, one of the foremost securities markets experts in the United States, prepared a critique of the US Treasury’s extraordinary ‘Plan’, which he was easily able to demonstrate is highly destablising, not least since its plainly confused recommendations undermine financial market confidence while demonstrably serving the interests of the criminalist kleptocracy at the expense of the genuine investment community. This analysis is presented here.

In short, the Working Group’s ‘blueprint’ is shown herewith to be a false prospectus.

Having discredited the Working Group’s proposals, which would call for the creation of no less than SEVEN expensive and mischievously overlapping new US regulatory bureaucracies and for the abolition of the essential rules-based securities market environment, which would be phased out over an imprecise but prolonged timeframe, Michael Cottrell presents his own effective and simple solution to the chaos brought about by years of officially condoned fraudulent finance.

This will require just ONE new US regulator, will call for the revalidation by Congress of the Glass-Steagall Act and for the decisive re-establishment of the essential rules-based system which the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has neglected to enforce in recent years, and can be implemented in full within the space of just a few months, at most. Additionally, Mr Cottrell’s simple Plan will be infinitely cheaper to implement than the top-heavy Working Group proposals.

The Editor has incorporated Mr Cottrell’s proposal into this analysis; and the extensive Glossary, built around Michael C. Cottrell’s original framework, has been expanded so that all concerned can readily understand what has to be done. Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., can be contacted direct on: 814-455 9218 (voicemail), and at: pii-mcc@msn.com.

Mr Cottrell’s reform framework has been elaborated by the Editor to incorporate ideas for which he alone is responsible but which Mr Cottrell has graciously approved.

• Important Note: We can only report US law as it stands. We cannot make exceptions and neither can we speculate as to the prospective actions of authorities given, for instance, the admission by UBS that it broke the law, and the consequences of that admission for some US investors who may consider that they are eligible for Settlement payouts. Nor can we enter into ANY correspondence concerning that matter. The only issues that we will discuss arising from this post are Mr Cottrell’s practical and straightforward recommendations: and these issues should be raised with him direct.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This paper describes, exposes and then systematically demolishes the credibility and relevance of the so-called ‘Paulson’ proposals, a.k.a. the mish-mash of convoluted notions brought forth by the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets at the end of March 2008.

In passing, it questions the basis upon which expectations of repayment by some US participants in ‘humanitarian’, Omega and other often unregistered, and therefore usually (in the United States) illegal, Ponzi schemes are predicated, shows why these schemes are illegal by comparing them to what the US securities and other relevant US legislation requires, and presents inexpensive and constructive proposals to replace ‘Paulson’s’ dog’s dinner – which, incidentally, would call for the establishment of no less than SEVEN expensive new US bureaucratic agencies, whereas the Plan, devised by the securities expert Michael C. Cottrell, M.S., which is advanced here, would require just ONE new agency instead. Further, Mr Cottrell’s scheme could be up and running within a few months, whereas the ‘Paulson’ dog’s dinner is phased over an indeterminate timeframe.

OFFICIAL PROPOSALS ARE MISCHIEVOUS
On investigating this matter, we were quite surprised at the ease with which the Working Group’s spurious obfuscation operation could be shown to be a glaringly false prospectus that has been jumbled together in order to disguise what can only be described as its underlying mischievous intent. For these proposals dishonestly seek to convey an impression of regulatory reform (in response to the chaos in the financial markets which has been brought about exclusively by the serial criminality of holders of high office) – whereas their actual purpose is to mask the objective of precluding meaningful reform in favour of cosmetic adjustments consistent with an even more permissive and crime-friendly environment than exists today.

Indeed a pattern of nefarious US official behaviour has become clear since the deregulation of the Savings and Loan Associations in 1982. It can be summarised as follows. Far from entertaining any clear intention of curbing excesses and seeking to contain financial sector crises and instability brought about by organised financial fraud condoned at the highest levels of American power, the participating US authorities typically allow the prevailing crisis of confidence and its real economic consequences to escalate until, as happened at the end of the 1980s with the messy ‘responses’ developed by Congress to the ‘hollowing out’ (enronisation) of the thrifts, the problems become so huge that radical departures are agreed upon ‘under duress’ which, in turn, provide the intended basis for a proliferation of fraudulent financial operations ‘by other means’.

FOLDING THE CRIMINALISTS’ CRISIS INTO A ‘UNIVERSAL SOLUTION’
This is exactly what these cynical ‘Paulson’ proposals are predicated to achieve. The underlying motive here is to ‘fold’ the contemporary financial and economic crisis into a ‘ universal solution’ which will, if this Treasury has its way, give the arch-planners of fraudulent finance practices, carte blanche to proliferate their scams and aberrations for many years to come.

Accordingly, the fraudulent prospectus disgorged by the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets needs to be consigned forthwith to the trash can. This report will help to achieve that.

As indicated, we present a simple, straightforward, constructive, inexpensive and quickly and easily implemented alternative Plan to replace it. Its author, Michael C. Cottrell, M.S., one of the United States’ foremost securities markets experts, argues that no further attention should be paid to the dishonest and discredited ‘Paulson’ proposals, which have in any case more or less run into the sand; and that the straightforward measures advocated below should be adopted, instead.

They would immediately inject the necessary discipline into the marketplace, precluding scope for securities scamming models to which the notorious American kleptocracy has become accustomed.

This paper is supplemented by an extensive Glossary of securities environment terms, for the benefit of the lay reader. The Editor has incorporated several appropriate new terms in the list.

SELF-SERVING PLAN TO ‘CLEAN UP’ MESS THE CRIMINALISTS THEMSELVES CREATED
Among the most distasteful characteristics of the world-class financial criminals exposed through our reports is their habit of advising the Rest of Us how the distasteful consequences of their own glaring criminality are to be overcome. The flip-side of the accomplished US financial criminalist is typically an unimpressive ‘angel of light’, who preaches the virtues of sound finance, in order to mask the fact of his endless reprobate financial misbehaviour.

Thus, having presided over and orchestrated the stealing of colossal sums of other people’s money, the US intelligence operative calling himself Henry M. Paulson Jr. [but see Memorandum below], as advertised, promulgated, in March 2008, a set of goofy and confused proposals for the ostensible ‘reorganisation’ of the way the US financial markets are regulated, which amounts to a pre-planned ‘new regulatory order’ – but the purpose of which, on investigation, turns out NOT to be improved financial sector discipline, but rather the cynical and surreptitious institutionalisation of market conditions that will facilitate replication of the abuses and fraudulent finance that have so far been exposed, but on a far broader scale, in the years to come.

A prerequisite for understanding what follows, and the prevailing financial days of reckoning and their origination generally, is to recognise the subversive reality of the ‘angels of light’ deception model. The financial sector traditionally clothes itself in a mantle of assumed righteousness, which is reinforced by generational layers of perception yielding a belief that financial institutions are, generally speaking, models of rectitude which cannot deviate from the strict codes of conduct that are presumed to surround them, and therefore from the Rule of Law.

BELATED, GRUDGING REALISATION THAT WHAT HAS BEEN REPORTED IS ACCURATE
Because this general lazy presumption is rarely, even today, called into question, it took, to our certain knowledge, certain British and American circles over two years to reach the staggered conclusion that what we have been reporting was accurate, both in general terms and more often than not, in terms of specifics as well.

By the same token, the underlying assumption that the exotic Treasury proposals developed by the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets, which will be demolished here, are of beneficial and enlightened intent, has no basis in reality, as will now be examined. On the contrary, as might have been expected, they represent ANOTHER pathetic scam, a deception, a diversion, a PLOY.

We will begin with a ‘straight’ summary of the ‘Paulson’ proposals, which will then be exposed as representing a false and deceitful prospectus.

THE FALSE PROSPECTUS AS ANNOUNCED
Following our exposures of financial fraud between June 2006 and the same month a year later, tensions rose to such a pitch behind the financial sector scenes that the US authorities felt the sudden need to be seen to be ‘doing something’ – an urge that resulted in the establishment of the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets.

But by ‘doing something’, the criminalists actually meant leveraging the financial crisis which has developed as a direct consequence of their criminality through the advocating of false ‘reforms’ under cover of which they intended to institutionalise a permissive US environment which would guarantee that their addiction to manufacturing liquidity out of thin air through untaxed high yield investment programs (out of bounds to ordinary mortals because outside the officially protected corruption zone, they are lethally risk Ponzi scams: see below), would be OK’d without recourse.

The phrase ‘Working Group’ is a designation used by Israeli intelligence to describe an operation inside the Israeli Government structures (viz., intelligence), with a focus on developing a modus operandi to achieve an instructed objective, according to Robert Littell [‘Vicious Circle’, Overlook Press, Peter Mayer Publishers, New York, 2006].

After ‘labouring’ for eight months, the Working Group brought forth a convoluted, fragmented and opaque ‘THREE-STAGE plan’ to ‘reform’ US regulation of the very financial institutions with which the now disgraced ruling kleptocracy has been collaborating to scam ordinary American citizens, mortgage ‘holders’, the US Government itself, and foreigners who fail to do their ‘due diligence’.

The overall effect of the regulatory fragmentation plan put forward in bad faith (as we demonstrate below) by the Working Group would be to place the control of all financial markets wholly under the power of the President of the United States – which, given the criminality of the present and recent incumbents, would be a recipe for the institutionalisation of fraudulent finance, the elimination of all remaining checks and balances, and consequently for a corrosive financial market environment leading to a financial meltdown in a few years’ time which would make the present crisis look like a pleasant afternoon by the seaside.

Before we go any further, we must summarise the Working Group’s proposals without commenting in any detail immediately on their implications:

STAGE ONE, AS PROMULGATED BY THE PRESIDENT’S WORKING GROUP:

• The President’s Working Group on Financial Markets would be expanded to add banking sector regulators not hitherto participating in its deliberations, in order to broaden the Working Group‘s supposed focus to incorporate the whole of the US financial sector, rather than just the financial markets as such (begging the question: what was the problem? Why the delay?).

• Lending by the Federal Reserve: Because non-bank financial institutions have, since December 2007 (thanks to the chaos brought about by fraudulent finance operations over which this ‘Paulson’ himself presided) had access to the US Federal Reserve, the Fed would be able to conduct on-site examinations of such borrowers and impose conditions on their operations.

• Establish a Mortgage Origination Commission to consist of six Board Members, taken mainly from Federal structures. The new entity would proceed to establish minimum licensing standards and testing criteria, and would gauge and grade the adequacy of each State’s mortgage control system. This would be accompanied by clarification of which Federal body is to enforce mortgage lending legislation (which, for some unexplained reason, the Working Group could not manage to do).

STAGE TWO, AS PROMULGATED BY THE PRESIDENT’S WORKING GROUP:

• Federal Oversight of State-Chartered Banks: It was reported that the US Treasury recommended a study to determine whether the Federal Reserve or the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) should have oversight of State-chartered banks. (Great! So we need a ‘study’. Why didn’t the Group perform that study, then? Why the ‘need’ for further delay while the ‘study’ is carried out?).

• Thrift Charter to be eliminated: The following banking sector regulator was categorised as ‘past its sell-by date’: The Office of Thrift Supervision. This entity, which oversees US Savings and Loan Associations (so-called ‘Thrift Institutions’) should be closed down and folded into the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, which has oversight of National Banks. (No reason given).

• A new (optional) Federal Insurance Charter: The US Treasury proposed the creation of a Federal regulator to cover the insurance sector, which is extremely corrupt in the United States. The first step would be to ask Congress to create an Office of Insurance Oversight within the US Treasury, to focus on international issues and to advise the Treasury on insurance sector affairs. This would be the first step towards the creation of step two, namely the creation of a new Federal Insurance Charter. (Notice that everything is ‘spaced out’, laid-back, confused and overlapping).

• Revised payments and settlement arrangements: Under the eccentric proposals brought forward by ‘Paulson’, it was suggested that the Federal Reserve Board should be given oversight and rule-making authority over the payment and settlement systems for the processing of payments and the transfer of securities between financial institutions and their clients. (Hence, de facto regulation of the securities markets would devolve into the hands of the untrustworthy Federal Reserve).

• Futures and Securities markets: The US Treasury used this report to call for the merger of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the CFTC) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC), neither of which has been doing its job properly, given the sheer scale of the bribery and corruption behind the scenes, plus reports that the SEC has itself been engaged in trading on own account (see below).

In particular, the Treasury proposed that the Securities and Exchange Commission, which operates (or should operate) on the basis of precise rules and regulations backed by rigorous enforcement, should ‘preserve’ the modus operandi of the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which is that business should instead be conducted in accordance with stated ‘principles’.

In other words, the Treasury wanted to scrap the rules-based system (required under the 1933 and 1934 Securities Acts) and to replace it by a vague ‘principles- based’ system’, which would mean that enforcement would be almost impossible – because a régime of relativism would prevail and key terms would remain undefined.

Securities professionals are taught and intensively trained to operate exclusively on the basis of the SEC’s ‘rules-based’ system, which precludes any deviation whatsoever from the established rules (provided the regulations are enforced, which has not been the case for years because of corruption within the Securities and Exchange Commission itself).

STAGE THREE, AS PROMULGATED BY THE PRESIDENT’S WORKING GROUP:

A new US regulatory structure would be imposed over the longer term, under which US financial institutions would be asked to choose between one of three Federal Charters:

• Federally Insured Depository Institution:
This would be applicable to all lenders with Federal deposit insurance.

• Federal Insurance Institution:
Applicable to all insurers offering retail ‘products’ which entail some degree of Federal guarantee.

• Federal Financial Services Provider:
This charter would cover all other categories of financial services firms.

Under this regime, the following SEVEN NEW FEDERAL AGENCIES, each with its own hyper-expensive self-serving bureaucracy would ‘regulate’ US financial institutions:

• The Market Stability Regulator: Under this vague proposal, the Federal Reserve was to ‘look out’ for threats to the stability of the United States’ diverse financial system, whether they originated with banks, insurance corporations, mortgage lenders, investment banks, hedge funds, or with any other type of financial institution.

The Federal Reserve could require corrective measures to be taken to address current risks or to curb future risk-taking, but these powers could only be exercised if overall financial stability was threatened. In other words, this entity would essentially achieve nothing at all, leaving the financial markets alone (until it was too late), thereby passively facilitating a progressive repetition of the near-catastrophe experienced since the mid-1980s, but on a far larger scale.

• Prudential Financial Regulatory Agency: This new entity would regulate US financial institutions buttressed by explicit Government guarantees associated with their operations, such as Federal deposit insurance. The new US agency would assume the rôles of the current Federal prudential regulators, including the Office of the US Comptroller of the Currency and the Treasury’s Office of Thrift Supervision. Yet another (subsidiary) regulator would focus on the hitherto unrestrained and unregulated off-off-budget Government-Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) which, though established by the Federal Government, were placed (on creation) into the ‘private’ sector and have implicit Government backing, such as the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) and the Federal Home Loan Bank System. See our report dated 26th December 2007 for insights into how Fannie Mae, for instance, has been used to perpetrate fraudulent financial transactions in the US mortgage sector [Archive].

• Conduct of Business Regulatory Agency: This new regulator would be charged with ‘consumer protection’ with respect to all categories of financial entities. The agency would watch disclosures and business practices, and would supervise the licensing of certain types of financial firm.

It would absorb many of the functions of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), and would undertake some responsibilities that are currently handled by the Fed, state insurance regulators, and the Federal Trade Commission.

• Federal Insurance Guarantee Corporation: This new agency would replace the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, charging premia to guarantee bank deposits and insurance payouts.

• Corporate Finance Regulator: This new entity would take over other functions of the Securities and Exchange Commission, such as the oversight of corporate disclosures, governance issues, accounting, and other matters.

In other words, SEVEN NEW BUREAUCRACIES would regulate everything and achieve nothing.

THE PURPOSE OF THE FALSE PROSPECTUS: OBFUSCATION
Confused? That’s precisely what is intended. As can be seen, this curious pot-pourri of convoluted arrangements matches the intentions of those who framed it (and who will not see it implemented, we feel sure). Those intentions can be summed up in the single word: OBFUSCATION.

For these proposals were developed during the immediate aftermath of the emergence of overt financial sector strains arising from the ongoing exposures of the open-ended financial fraud; and their purpose, from the outset, was not to enhance regulation and to make it ‘more efficient’, but rather to bring forward a novel framework under cover of ‘overdue reforms necessitated by the credit crunch and the financial crisis generally’, which could be exploited and leveraged to cover up, rather than to further expose, the serial financial criminality that blew up in the faces of the US kleptocracy as a consequence of the exposures of its endless criminality.

In other words, the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets appears to have been briefed in bad faith, its task being to develop a platform and framework of proposals which would serve the purpose of obfuscating financial criminality, while appearing to do the opposite. This was, in short, nothing less than a typical deception, intended to convey the dubious impression that ‘reform’ was (belatedly) being recommended, while in practice substituting the existing regulatory system which has not been properly enforced, with a vague, woolly régime framed so as to facilitate the very free-wheeling fraudulent finance and risk-taking that the proposals are supposed to deter.

Since, however, the proposals were brought forward by deception operatives whose speciality has all along been dialectical ying-yang behaviour, duplication and duplicity, the discovery that these proposals are a sham, comes as no surprise. Whether those who listened to ‘Paulson’ making this pitch on 2nd July 2008 at the Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House) in London (the globalist UK think-tank which masquerades as a free-standing institution of the British nation state while constantly undermining it), understood this duplicity, seems improbable.

On that occasion, ‘Paulson’ presented a series of vague generalities for the consideration of the British ‘Great and the Good’ assembled to hear this pitch, such as that ‘the financial landscape has changed, and non-bank financial institutions play a significantly greater role’ than used to be the case. (When one of our special contacts attempted to make himself known to this ‘Paulson’ fellow, he vanished out of sight).

But the existing US regulatory régime has not ‘failed’ because it is no longer ‘fit for purpose’. It has ‘failed’ for three straightforward reasons:

(1) Some of the regulatory agencies, such as the Federal Reserve Board itself, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, are/have been corrupt.

(2) The corrupt regulators have accordingly failed to regulate, let alone to enforce their regulations.

(3) The focus of the corrupt regulators is to prolong the obfuscation operation, to verbalise their dereliction of duty through spinning for the benefit of the likes of The Wall Street Journal, and to seek to draw a veil over such issues as the SEC’s ‘legitimisation’ of naked shorts for a restricted group of participants, whereas a regulator should be completely impartial. The overall objective is self-preservation, protection of their own personal interests, and staying out of jail themselves.

• In respect of ‘naked shorts’, has the SEC conveniently forgotten the old securities market adage:
‘He who sells what isn’t his’n, Must put it back or go to prison’?

TERMS DELIBERATELY LEFT UNDEFINED UNDER THE INTENDED ‘PRINCIPLES-BASED’ REGIME
In place of the existing (albeit unenforced) regulatory régime, ‘Paulson’ proposed a system not of rules-based regulation, which could be enforced if the regulatory agencies themselves were not corrupt, but of ‘principles’-based regulation, which, by definition, would entail that there would be no rules to be enforced, terms are not defined, and that breaches of ‘principles’ are liable to be irrelevant because it would always be a nuanced matter of relatavist judgment whether principles were being flouted, or not. In otherwise, such a régime would not amount to a regulatory régime at all, but rather to a crooks’ charter and paradise. ALL OVER AGAIN.

If the existing US regulatory agencies were doing their jobs properly, they would be adequate for the purpose – and certainly far more adequate than the deliberately complexified, overlapping and obfuscatory framework suggested by the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets.

But while the Working Group may be redundant and has discredited itself, the financial market issues that it was supposed to have addressed, remain in existence and as intractable as before.

THE EXISTING U.S. REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
The existing US regulatory framework, for the record, consists of the following agencies:

• Federal Reserve System: Supposedly regulates the US monetary system and oversees bank holding companies. Historically lacked real assets apart from its contract to print the currency of the United States, which ought to be a function of the US Treasury,

• Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC): Established by the Congress in 1934 to regulate the securities markets in accordance with stated rules and under the 1933 and 1934 Securities Acts, to maintain ‘fair’ markets and to protect investors. The SEC also, as a primary element of its oversight powers, reviews corporate financial statements, is supposed to enforce the securities regulations, and provides guidance for the framing of accounting rules.

• Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC): This regulator insures deposits lodged by bank customers against the failure of banks. The FDIC was created in 1933 to build and maintain public confidence and to encourage stability in the financial system by fostering sound banking practices.

• Office of the Comptroller of the Currency: This traditional arm of the US Treasury Department was established in 1863 to supervise and regulate National Banks and the Federal branches of foreign banks. Its purpose is to promote the safety and soundness of the banking system and to conduct on-site examinations of banks across the nation.

• Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC): Established as a US agency in 1974, this entity is supposed to ensure the open and efficient operation of the US futures markets, which started out trading agricultural futures, and now trade sophisticated synthetics (derivatives).

• Office of Thrift Supervision: This agency issues and enforces regulations governing the United States’ Savings and Loan sector (Thrift Institutions). It is responsible for ensuring the safety and soundness of deposits with Thrift Institutions.

SHORT HISTORY OF U.S. FINANCIAL TRANSPARENCY

(A) 1890 to the 1920s:

Leading American financiers of the late 19th century, such as John J. Astor, Cornelius Vanderbilt, John D Rockefeller and J. P. Morgan (1), provided capital to finance the establishment of very large corporations and combines, also known as the trusts, which came to wield enormous power across entire industrial sectors. As a consequence, by the year 1890, the control of 5,000 corporations was held by about 300 such trusts operating all over the country. By 1900, the largest dozen of these combines were capitalised at over $1.0 billion (2) .

Accordingly, investment bankers became corporate directors – with Morgan, for instance, having board representation on 78 investment bank companies.

Therefore, when these large corporations needed injections of capital, the bankers who were sitting on their Boards claimed to represent the bondholders (3).

Disclosure of financial information was entirely voluntary, even though disclosure of predator practices could only be revealed via the balance sheet (4). The Sherman AntiTrust Act of 1890 was enacted in order to define and make the monopolistic activities of such trust companies illegal (5).

In 1914, the Clayton Anti-Trust Act sought to increase competition across the business sector by restricting predatory corporate activity such as acquiring other competing corporations and the practice of allowing interlocking corporate directorships (6).

And the Federal Trade Commission Act, passed in the same year, established a regulatory authority, acting as the ‘watchdog of competition’, to protect the American consumer from ‘unfair methods of competition’ (7). In other words, raw, unregulated capitalism was by now seen as being prone to abuse and in need, therefore, of official constraint.

(B) 1920s to 1941:

During this period, the number of investment companies that were formed in the United States steadily increased from six in the year 1921, to 46 in 1925 (8).

While most of these investment companies were subject in some measure to the ‘Blue-Sky’ [see Glossary] requirements, the State statutes and regulations appear not to have treated investment companies much differently from the general run of corporations and business trusts (9).

As previously, disclosure of financial information remained voluntary, even though the disclosure of predatory practices could only be conveniently disclosed through the balance sheet (10).

Between 1927 and 1929, these investment companies raised approximately $2,300,000,000 from the sale of new securities. Their assets increased from $550,000,000 in 1927 to almost $2,600,000,000 in 1929 (11). Distribution of the shares in these fixed trusts reached peak levels during 1930 and 1931, when $600,000,000 of their shares were sold, inducing the passage of various US statutes and the promulgation of regulations which brought the expansion of these fixed trusts to an end (12).

In 1933, North Carolina adopted a regulation (which in due course was adopted as Section 11 of the Investment Company Act of 1940) which prohibited the charging of any sales load on the switching of trust shares (13). As a consequence of the lessons learned the 1920s and early 1930s, including bitter experiences suffered by investors with ‘bucket shops’, the original and copycat Ponzi and Pyramid-selling schemes, and other forms of fraudulent finance that flourished in this free-for-all environment, the Congress passed the stringent Securities Acts of 1933 and 1934, followed by the Maloney Act of 1935; and in the banking sector, the Banking Act of 1933 and the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 which restricted US banks to banking operations and precluded their participation in the securities markets. The Securities Acts were updated by the Securities Acts Amendments of 1970.

THE EXPENSIVE FALSE PROSPECTUS ANALYSED:

U.S. TREASURY’S 2008 REGULATORY ‘REFORM’ PROPOSALS (14), (15)

Astonishingly, in view of the obvious fact that these proposals would be bound to have an impact on fragile financial market confidence, the Working Group’s suggestions were phased, with short- medium- and long-term proposals set within an imprecise timeframe, interspersed with periods of reflection for ‘study’, and personnel being liable to be poached from old regulatory agencies that would remain alive in one phase, but not the next, and with every opportunity taken to ensure that the responsibilities of no less than SEVEN newly proposed, expensive agencies would overlap as much as possible, while existing agencies would languish in a state of limbo or uncertainty pending prospective abolition, or not, as might be decided in a later phase.

Self-evidently, this confused prospectus is a recipe for undermining confidence in the integrity of financial market regulation, and therefore in the integrity of the financial markets themselves, as well as maximising the potential for obfuscation, as will be seen:

(A) THE SHORT-TERM PROPOSALS:

The President’s Working Group on Financial Markets is/was intended, we read, to be composed of a Coordinator of Financial Regulatory Policy and to cover the entire American financial sector, as indicated above, not merely the financial markets.

It was thus to incorporate banking regulators not currently participating in the study group, and would need to broaden its financial focus to capture the whole of the financial sector.

Hence the Working Group was to facilitate inter-agency coordination and communication, with a view (ostensibly) to developing proposals to mitigate all systemic risks to the financial system, to enhance the integrity of the financial markets, to promote protection of consumers and investors, and to support the efficiency and competitiveness of the financial markets.

Since overall ‘competitiveness’ covers the stance of any given financial market environment by comparison with foreign counterparts, the Working Group would or will have had to consider the impact of any proposals it puts forward on the competitiveness of the market in question, with its equivalents abroad; and the moment that such considerations had to be considered, the knee-jerk response of the Working Group’s membership is liable to have been to opt for the most lenient and liberal ‘solution’ on the drawing board.

As for the proposed creation of a Federal Mortgage Origination Commission (MOC), this huge new bureaucracy would be headed by a Director appointed by the President of the United States for a four- or six-year term – which means that, in accordance with the standard corrupt US practice, the job would be likely to go to a presidential crony.

The six Board members would be supplied from the Federal Reserve, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), even though the last of these three agencies were to be abolished under the proposals, and the Federal Reserve itself remains vulnerable, under unpublished H.R. 2778 of the 110th Congress, to be abolished and merged within the US Treasury.

The other two Board Members would be supplied from the National Credit Union Association and the Conference of State Bank Supervisors.

The new Mortgage Origination Commission would develop minimum licensing standards, testing criteria and a system for grading the adequacy of each State’s financial regulatory arrangements. The drafting of regulations covering national mortgage lending legislation would, the Working Group apparently proposes, remain exclusively with the Federal Reserve, as provided for under the Truth in Lending Act.

Finally, the States should be given clear authority to enforce Federal mortgage legislation upon independent mortgage originators, that is to say, those mortgage originators considered to have been responsible for originating most of the so-called ‘sub-prime’ loans.

There was no reference to the practice of collectivising such mortgage loans, let alone with false documentation purporting to represent other mortgages but which lack any underlying asset at all, for the purpose of ‘securitisation’ and marketing to gullible investors at home and abroad who may not perform adequate (or any) due diligence.

For the short term, too, the Treasury’s blueprint put forward two considerations relating to the overall stability of the financial markets. Specifically:

(1) The prevailing temporary liquidity provisioning process, designed to alleviate threats to market stability (launched in December 2007 in the face of the crisis of confidence which overwhelmed the American authorities given the accumulated consequences of their incompetence, criminality and mismanagement of the US financial system), must ensure:

• That the process is calibrated and transparent (with no definition of terms here);

• That appropriate conditions are attached to the lending, (with no explanation of ‘appropriate’);

• That information flows to the Federal Reserve System via on-site examinations, and/or that other conditions or means can be imposed as determined by the Federal Reserve, with no recourse and without any indication here of what the Federal Reserve might have in mind.

(2) The President’s Working Group should consider broader regulatory issues related to discount window access for non-depository (i.e., investment banking) institutions. So, this Working Group has not yet undertaken such considerations? What, then, was it doing between August 2007 and March 2008, exactly?

(B) THE MEDIUM-TERM PROPOSALS:

Under this heading, the Treasury recommended, as summarised above:

• Elimination of ‘redundant’ banking regulators, without providing any rationale for such a drastic and reckless measure, and without having practical alternative proposals formulated or in place;

• Closing down the Office of Thrift Supervision, ditto;

• Folding the responsibilities of the Office of Thrift Supervision into the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, again with no rationale for such action being provided.

Having shredded key existing regulatory institutions without replacing them (at this stage), the Treasury proposed that the next step should be that a leisurely ‘study’ should be undertaken, to establish whether the Federal Reserve or the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the FDIC) should have oversight of the State-chartered banks.

This seems to us to be quite ridiculous, and asking for trouble. First, some existing regulators are abolished, without the Treasury at this stage having a clue what should take their place. Secondly, having abolished the regulators, the Treasury would then embark upon a ‘study’ to decide what to do next, as it says it is undecided (cannot make up its mind) whether the Fed or the FDIC should oversee the State-chartered banks – a confused recommendation akin to throwing all the furniture out of the window before deciding what, if anything, should replace it.

A moment’s reflection will convince even the most enthusiastic supporters of the corrupt US ‘Paulson’ Treasury that these proposals are, of put it mildly, mischievous.

Nobody who cares about US financial market stability can possibly take them seriously: indeed, the proposals , even as far as has so far been described here, are so mixed up and destabilising, that it is no exaggeration to ask whether they represent some kind of spoof.

Has some malevolent gremlin substituted this mischievous verbiage for what the Working Group actually submitted? Given the track record of ‘Paulson’s criminalist Treasury, that may not be as far-out a proposition as it may appear to be.

The third element of the intermediate recommendations brought forward by this muddled report departed from common sense by recommending that the Federal Reserve – which has achieved notoriety thanks to its two-tier policy of purporting to represent the Rule of Law while at the same time surreptitiously condoning and facilitating corrupt financial practices through exploitation of the unaudited and secretive Federal Inter Bank Settlement Fund – should acquire oversight and rule-making authority over payment and settlement systems that process payments and transfer securities between financial institutions and their clients.

This would be worse than placing the fox in charge of the chicken coop: it would ultimately lead to the liquidation of the chickens by guaranteeing the perpetuation of the fraudulent finance model that has been exposed by notorious recent developments. And again, no coherent rationale for this supposed ‘reform’ was presented with the recommendations.

Put another way, the report then recommended that the Federal Reserve should acquire oversight and, inconsistently, rule-making authority, over the payment and settlement systems that process payments and transfer securities between financial institutions and customers.

Since this all-embracing ‘reform’ would include ALL institutions, this would mean inter alia that the Federal Reserve would in practice acquire rule-making authority over securities broker-dealers. Hence, the rule-making authority to be abolished with the folding of the Securities and Exchange Commission (see below) would reappear under the aegis of the Federal Reserve, although we are not told what category of rules the Fed would promulgate. It can be taken as read that the rules to be promulgated by the Federal Reserve would bear no discernible relationship to the rules long since established (but lately, not enforced) by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

On top of this nonsense, the proposals recommended a further unresolved ‘solution’, calculated to maximise uncertainty – this time in the insurance sector. First, the Working Group floated the idea of creating a Federal regulator to oversee the insurance industry.

Then, after floating this suggestion, the Treasury wants to ‘ask Congress’ to create a new Office of Insurance Oversight (OIO) which would function from within the Treasury, meaning of course that the Treasury would control the insurance sector directly. Since the Treasury, like the US Federal Reserve, has demonstrated that it is thoroughly corrupt, this recommendation would simply enable the corrupt Treasury to capture and channel the well-known corruption that bedevils the insurance sector in the United States. The OIO would supposedly focus upon international insurance sector issues, while also providing the Treasury with ‘advice’ – a completely meaningless concept since the entity, resident within and therefore a part of the Treasury, would accordingly be advising itself.

[The probable hidden intention here would be to replicate the Federal Financing Bank (FFB), which is likewise an office (plus some filing cabinets) situated within the US Treasury but which for many years enjoyed off-budget status, thereby providing the Treasury with increased ‘wriggle-room’ for its usual ‘smoke-and-mirrors’ financial shenanigans. As matters stand today, the Federal Financing Bank is one of the basic mechanisms that enables the Secretary of the Treasury to manipulate the Government’s finances by exploiting the fact that is allowed by statute to have $15.0 billion of debt outstanding at any one time, so that by means of creative bookkeeping, up to $15.0 billion extra can be borrowed on those occasions when the Congress has deployed its residual ‘control’ over the spending of the Executive Branch by refusing to raise the Statutory Debt Limit, in exchange for some Federal Budget concession or other that it seeks to extract from the Executive Branch].

In short, and Office of Insurance Oversight inside the Treasury would simply be leveraged by the corrupt Treasury for its own purposes, and in furtherance of the dubious interests of the official perpetrators of fraudulent finance operations who have been cornered and are running for cover.

Even worse are the quite appalling proposals affecting the securities sector. The Working Group suggested, as mentioned above, that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) should be merged – again, providing no rationale for such a radical shake-up. The actual purpose here would be to end the settlement reached by the Securities Acts of 1933 and 1934, which provided for the securities sector to be governed by the strict application of precisely defined rules – the settlement that ended the chaos arising out of the undisciplined free-for-all allowed in the 1920s, when bucket-shops ripped American investors off and investors enjoyed no protection from sharks other than that provided by the ‘Blue Sky’ above – in favour of standardising the so-called ‘principles-based’ approach employed by the ineffective Commodities Futures Trading Commission. Neither the SEC nor the CFTC have, in recent years, fulfilled their regulatory responsibilities, due to internal corruption; but scrapping the rules-based approach in favour of the CFTC’s permissive ‘principles-based’ approach would guarantee and perpetuate financial corruption perhaps for generations to come.

An indication of the deceptive nature of this recommendation can be gauged by the mealy-mouthed language employed to present this sorcery for public consumption. Specifically, the Working Group postulated that the Securities and Exchange Commission should seek to ‘preserve’ the CFTC’s principles-based approach, presupposing of course that the SEC should DROP its rules-based approach: but in order to mask this deception, THIS CENTRAL RUSE WAS LEFT UNSTATED.

‘Preserving’ the principles-based approach used by the ineffective CFTC would, self-evidently, be inconsistent with ‘preserving’ any rules-based approach – which is the point of this proposition.

What the Treasury is seeking to achieve here is to pass off a fraudulent reform as a key element of an improved regulatory system, when what would be perpetrated would be the de facto elimination of the existing framework which, if properly applied, would protect investors from fraud and make it impossible for fraudulent finance operations such as those that have been exposed, to exist, let alone to flourish. In other words, this recommendation represents a typically diversionary fraud by the ‘Paulson’ Treasury, consistent with the reputation it has earned for itself as an institution of the Federal Government in which no trust can currently be placed, not least because, on the basis of its recent behaviour, it cannot be relied upon to honour its obligations.

(C) THE LONG-TERM PROPOSALS:

Not content with the chaos that would be created as a consequence of this wrecking operation to date, the Working Group, true to its false prospectus, capped this truly shambolic mish-mash with a series of half-baked long-term proposals, the net effect of which would be to leave everything up in the air, thereby maximising scope for a 1920s-type free-for-all – and ensuring that the investment environment of future years would be consistent with the underlying intention of this dog’s dinner of spurious proposals – namely to facilitate the perpetuation of fraudulent finance, following the shocks administered to the criminalist kleptocacy by recent developments.

By staging its fitful proposals over a prolonged and imprecise timeframe, the US Treasury has of course already compromised the prospects for global financial stability, since no-one now knows what is coming next. The fact that proposals have been put forward in such a vague, disjointed and dissonant manner has itself added to the febrile atmosphere of uncertainty, although the Treasury doubtless hopes that the deceptions encased within these proposals will have passed its targeted audiences by – an example being the attendees at the Chatham House event in London addressed by ‘Paulson’ at the beginning of July. These people will have been easily impressed by anything that the Secretary of the Treasury might have told them – the purpose of such presentations being to build an unthinking ‘consensus’ (in London, especially) for the treacherous ‘reforms’ that the corrupt ‘Paulson’ Treasury is putting forward.

The so-called long-term proposals (with no timeframe mentioned) would involve, to begin with, a revolution in the status of all US financial institutions. All lenders equipped with Federal deposit insurance would be granted a brand new charter certifying them as a Federally insured depository institution. All insurers offering retail products involving some degree of Federal guarantee, would be chartered as a Federal insurance institution, under the direct regulatory control (see above) of the Treasury. Finally, all other types of financial institution would receive a charter signifying their status as a Federal services provider. Note the crucial use of the adjective ‘Federal’ here: what is intended is the usurpation or duplication by the Federal Government (it is not yet clear which) of ALL the regulatory functions currently exercised by the State Governments. Whether usurpation or duplication is intended, this proposition must have gone down like a lead balloon in State capitals.

Under the first of this final batch of dubious proposals, a so-called Market Stability Regulator, namely the Federal Reserve itself, or else an entity that is subservient to it (unclear), would be established, which, however, would hardly undertake any regulating of the financial markets at all. Instead, it would ‘look out for’ threats to the stability of the US financial system, whether they might originate with mortgage lenders, banks, insurance companies, investment banks, hedge funds or any other category of institution. The only environment in which the so-called new Market Stability Regulator would intervene would be when it had formed the subjective judgment that corrective action needed to be taken to address current risks, or that it is necessary to constrain further risk-taking. This proposal appears to have nothing to recommend it at all.

Establishing further expensive bureaucracies without any teeth is a pernicious practice equivalent to a fudge, and the impression given here is that the Working Group needed somehow to convey the impression that the permissive environment that it was subversively recommending would be watched closely for aberrations, whereas the underlying and thoroughly dishonest intention and consequences of these proposals will be to maximise potential for market abuses across the board.

The next piece of gross mischief would entail the establishment of a so-called Prudential Financial Regulatory Agency, with a brief to regulate financial institutions which have explicit Government guarantees associated with their business operations. Hence this new agency would regulate all institutions equipped with Federal deposit insurance. This agency would also take over the roles of the current Federal prudential regulators (for no discernible reason), such as the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Office of Thrift Supervision.

The agency should, the report argued, focus on the protection of consumers and ‘help’ to maintain confidence in the financial system (by unspecified means). The agency would operate on the basis currently applied to the regulation of the insured depository institutions – in which case, since this new agency would replicate existing practice, why do the existing regulatory arrangements need to be changed? – using the standard capital adequacy requirement techniques, imposing investment limits, circumscribing the scope of an institution’s activities, and directing on-site risk management supervision. The agency would be focused on institutions, rather than operating generically.

On top of all this, a separate new regulator was proposed, to focus on the powerful and wayward Government-Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) which have been surreptitiously exploited to facilitate fraudulent finance operations, such as the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) and the Federal Home Loan Bank System. As we discussed in our report dated 26th December 2007, corrupt mortgage lenders have been transferring the full risk and ownership of mortgages to these off-off-budget entities which were established by the Government but positioned immediately upon their foundation, into the private sector, so that they could be excluded from the scrutiny of the Federal Budget process.

The crisis surrounding Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that blew up during the week ending 11th July 2008 – over seven months after we posted our report on the abuse of the foreclosure process on 26th December 2007 – illustrated the mischievous and destabilising nature of the Working Group’s proposals, because this dimension of the crisis ‘suddenly‘ ran out of control in July 2008, despite the fact that the President’s Working Group had intended to ‘deal with’ the Government-Sponsored Enterprises problem under its ‘long-term’ category, rather than as an immediate, burning issue of the greatest significance, as flagged by our report dated 26th December last year.

This miscalculation alone showed the Working Group to be extremely incompetent, in dereliction of its self-appointed duties, and quite incapable of handling the huge mess for which its own largely corrupt membership has been specifically responsible. Fancy treating the US GSEs as a long-term problem when several of the key GSEs have all along been at the very centre of the machinery of fraudulent finance that is in the process of being widely exposed, and which the Working Group was meant to be addressing! This was surely taking OBFUSCATION too far.

No rationalisation was presented for the proposal that a separate regulator should be established to ‘regulate’ these off-budget entities, other than the spurious one that implicit Federal backing is qualitatively differentiated from explicit Government backing. Presumably the woolly thinking here is that the legal status conferred by Federal Statute on the GSEs would be violated if the proposed Prudential Financial Regulatory Agency were to assume regulatory responsibility for the GSEs – which have hitherto, by the way, escaped all regulation and have thus provided fruitful ongoing scope for organised criminal and financial fraud operations.

The other agencies proposed by the Working Group simply would compound the confusion and the seemingly deliberate dispersion of responsibilities which this dog’s dinner of recommendations perpetrates. Specifically:

• A so-called Conduct of Business Regulatory Agency would cut across the ‘responsibilities’ of the mish-mash of other agencies, establishing the basis for endlessly unresolvable turf wars that lead nowhere. This bureaucracy would ‘observe’ disclosure information and business practices (with no indication of what it would do with these observations), and would also engage in the licensing of certain categories of business firms (so that its personnel would be tin gods).

It would supposedly absorb ‘many of’ the functions of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Commodities Futures Trading Commission, the Federal Reserve System, of the State insurance regulators and even the Federal Trade Commission. The rationale of all this is left unclear.

However it would do so, according to the Working Group’s blueprint, after an undefined period of uncertainty and therefore turmoil – during which hiatus the usual pork-barrel lobbying operations would have been deployed at full throttle, with no-one knowing which way any of the cats would be liable to jump, and a state of officially contrived chaos having long since been generated.

By this stage, the divisions of regulatory responsibilities will have multiplied to such an extent that every agency would have burgeoning responsibilities overlapping with some or all of the others, so that nothing at all could ever be resolved – a remarkably classical Leninist formula for ensuring the definitive perpetuation of the collective will of a small clique at the centre. Lenin established two orders for his Party-State, under which all the institutions of the State were replicated by Party entities. This meant that a complainant making representations to the State structures would find that his case would be frustrated by the parallel Party structures, and vice versa. This is exactly the state of affairs, albeit a much more fragmented and complicated one, that the President’s Working Group has put forward. This blueprint would have the following overall consequences:

• It would complete the process of discrediting capitalism which the free-wheeling fraudulent finance operations perpetrated by the exposed criminalist operatives and institutions have successfully initiated to date; and:

• By ensuring the perpetual overlapping of responsibilities with their concomitant bureaucratic turf warfare, it would institutionalise and confirm absolute power and freedom of corrupt action for the central controlling élite, namely for a successor group of organised financial criminals who would build upon this new foundation of institutionalised US regulatory confusion, to create the conditions for the next global financial showdown, which would certainly be terminal.

Since, whether ideologues like it or not, the ultimate objective is the destruction of free enterprise and the abolition of all private property except for the privileged criminalised élite, that showdown would be terminal. It is not going to happen, but that is the long-range objective.

Two other expensive US agencies would, under the convoluted blueprint, be tacked on to the contrived ramshackle mess so far recommended. The proposed Federal Insurance Guarantee Corporation, which is to replace (for no apparent reason) the existing Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), would charge premiums to ‘guarantee’ bank deposits and insurance payouts.

No terms are defined here (as is the case throughout this false prospectus), so it is not clear why the FDIC cannot, if really necessary, have its existing statute amended so as to expand or modify its responsibilities in accordance with this proposal. What is wrong with the existing structure?
This unanswered question is applicable throughout.

Finally, the Working Group floated the batty idea of a Corporate Finance Regulator which would supersede the functions of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and would focus on corporate disclosures, corporate governance, accounting matters, and other issues. Presumably the idea here is that there should be a special agency which sticks its nose into the affairs of US corporations generally – a suggestion that may mask a cynical political objective to subject all US corporations to an officially sponsored espionage system which would be abused, if information gathered by this agency fell into the ‘wrong’ hands. If we assume, as we must, given recent past experience, that the underlying intentions here are malevolent and mischievous, the creation of such an agency would signal to anyone who is not sitting on his or her brains that an ever more socialist United States had essentially finished with capitalism altogether.

There is also an obvious sense that these convoluted ‘regulatory’ proposals have been brought forward in bad faith for yet another reason: their purpose includes the need to deflect criticism that ‘nothing is being done to stop this happening again’. Meanwhile, the socialist European Union has predictably responded with various trial balloons suggesting that the unprecedented display of financial scandal that has been partially exposed, can at long last be exploited as a rationale for the imposition of European-style socialist (Communist) regulation which, by its nature and intent, would smother risk-taking and close off innovation.

For example, Tony Robinson, chief spokesman for the Socialist Group in the Soviet-style European Parliament, said on 3rd July 2008, quite correctly, that the capitalist system had disgraced itself and must now face much stricter regulation. Since we must agree that the capitalist system has indeed disgraced itself as a consequence of the hijacking of the American official structures by organised criminal cadres, it is hard to argue against what Mr Robinson had to say:

‘There is a groundswell of opinion building up for action at a European level. Our group wants a ban on all investment funds speculating on food. We support a proper functioning market, but what we have seen in this crisis is a most distasteful morality where decisions are driven by greed. Hedge funds have used debt to take over companies and strip out their assets. This must stop’.

Leaving aside the ideological hang-ups and ignorance of the market system embedded in these comments, it is a fact that although proposals for a pan-European regulator have not yet been crystallised into a draft EU Directive, the European Parliament has been ‘debating’ three separate proposals to crack down on private equity, hedge funds, and banking sector bonuses.

(Actually, no debate ever takes place inside the European Parliament: rather, the Members (MEPs) address the podium just as they do in the covert Soviet system. Indeed, the European Parliament chamber precisely replicates the Soviet model. In order to complete the transformation, all that would be necessary would be to replace the esoteric European flag above the podium with the familiar bust of Lenin and a nice red star plus a hammer and sickle, and we would all be back to square one. The Editor witnessed this reality in Brussels with his own eyes several weeks ago).

Should such an outcome materialise over time, as intended, the process would have been given decisive added momentum by the pillaging and fraudulent finance that have been exposed since June 2006. This would be a supposedly ‘unintended consequence’ of the organised criminality.

RESULT: EXTREME LACK OF REGULATION ENFORCEMENT
That the proposals put forward by the President’s Working Group are damaging and would have grim consequences has been well attested by people who know what they are talking about.

For instance no less than THREE former Chairmen of the Securities and Exchange Commission, David Ruder, Arthur Levitt and William Donaldson, have condemned these proposals outright, although the language they have used to date has been inappropriately circumspect.

Their general view is that a Treasury initiative to adopt the ‘principles-based’ regulatory approach applied by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission would be ‘a mistake’ (16) . David Ruder, an SEC Chairman under President Reagan, has commented that:

‘It’s not at all useful for the Securities and Exchange Commission to function on the basis of ‘a prudential-based attitude’ in which regulators solve problems by discussing them informally with market participants and asking them to change… we have an enforcement approach’ (17).

For his part, the former SEC Chairman, Arthur Levitt, a Bloomberg Board Member, has commented:

‘That proposal does more violence to protecting America’s investors from the standpoint of transparency as anything in the Paulson proposal’ (18) – referring specifically to substitution of a ‘principles-based’ approach for the tried and tested (until wantonly unenforced) rules-based approach which the existing securities market legislation requires of the SEC.

As matters stand the SEC is, however, considering the easing of its rules to allow foreign stock exchanges and brokerages to sell securities direct to US investors, under supposed surveillance by overseas regulators (such as the British Financial Services Agency) ‘who have rules that are similar to those in the United States’ (19).

In other words, even as we speak, the Securities and Exchange Commission is thinking of watering down its currently poorly enforced rules-based system to allow various foreign stock exchanges and brokerages to deal directly with US investors, rather than going through US intermediaries – so that there would be no control over the volume of dodgy financial ‘products’ that could soon be sold back into the United States, given that non-institution US investors would not necessarily be subjected to any surveillance at all. This might very well be hazardous in the future.

As for the immense problems surrounding derivatives – leveraged, securitised, hypothecated products yielding accruals that are not denominated in real US dollars, but rather exclusively as digitised entries generated electronically in just nanoseconds on bank statements – the Working Group’s proposals sidestepped them altogether: a sure indication that the real purpose of these proposals has never been to ‘solve’ any of the intractable problems created by the invasion of the capitalised system by organised crime, but rather that their purpose is precisely to obfuscate what has been happening so as to draw a veil over the criminal activities that have led to this crisis.

The irresponsible securitisation of ‘sub-prime’ loans and the hoodlum practice of mixing them up with fraudulent paper backed by no assets at all, were not even addressed.

THE ‘PROGRAMS’, OMEGA PONZI SCAMS, ETC.
Exotic investment schemes marketed by scamsters promising sky-high returns into which many Americans entered and ploughed their savings a number of years ago, and which have not paid out, may have purported to be exempt from registration under the Securities Acts of 1933 et seq. [see Glossary below] and in terms of State securities registration requirements.

Such unregistered schemes, unless narrowly they are exempt from registration in conformity with relevant stringent statutory restrictions (such as being confined, for instance, to no more than 35 subscribers nationwide), are all illegal and violate the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) and SEC regulations, and were/are also further illegal as they may not have been registered with the relevant State Securities Commission.

When considering such participations, such US investors, in conformity with the Prudent Man Rule under the 1933 Act [see Glossary] should, in performing their Due Diligence, have been in receipt, and should have reviewed, the necessary registration and prospectus documents meeting the requirements of the NASD, the SEC and State Regulators.

In cases where the issuer was a bank, the participants have undoubtedly been victimised. In all other instances, they will have acted on the basis of fraudulent documents which made them co-conspirators. The issuers were and remain engaged in Ponzi schemes, as we have several times reported [see Glossary and Appendix] and are all co-conspirators and open to prosecution under R.I.C.O. and other relevant US legislation, including multiple anti-money-laundering legislation.

Furthermore, it is likely that some American participants will have signed Non-Disclosure forms or agreements, a fatal error which will have meant that they can have no recourse to US authorities for relief from being scammed, not least because in having participated in any of these schemes and signing such forms, they became co-conspirators themselves, as indicated.

They cannot therefore seek protection from the relevant regulators, and neither can they disclose their participations, especially where money-laundering will likely have been intended, since this presupposes tax evasion: and under the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act (TEFRA) of 1982, US taxpayers are required to report all sources of income, wherever it was earned anywhere in the world. It follows that all receipts by US taxpayers since the passage of this Act which have not been reported to the Internal Revenue Service are taxable, which means that all US taxpayer holdings in offshore accounts that are not declared for tax are vulnerable to payment of the tax and penalties. Imprisonment is also dished out to tax evaders in the United States with abandon.

But the participants in these programs have received nothing and have so far forfeited 100% of their investments. Having signed Non-Disclosure documents purporting to protect the program organisers or distributors from the consequences in the United States of their criminality, and the participants from the consequences inter alia of prospective tax evasion and of co-conspiring in a felonious transaction, some participants have been left dangling and are at the mercy of ruthless MK-ULTRA-style perception manipulators who have been managing their expectations for years.

Under the regular securities laws of the United States, investors and participants have to show source of funds. How can they take receipt of the proceeds of these ‘program’ and Omega-type Ponzi schemes without exposing themselves to US authorities, in many cases with prospectively grievous consequences?

These participants need to ask themselves: are the websites that may have been managing their expectations for years disclosing both sides of the equation, or have they simply been expressing justified anger and frustration at the brazen evil of the high-level, well-connected perpetrators of these scamming programs, thus deceiving their intended readerships by failing to look at the other side of the issue, namely the possibility that the scamsters may have compromised the investors?

They also need to consider whether it is likely that the hitherto ‘protected’ perpetrators of these scams have, all along, also been relying upon their knowledge that their victims may be impotent because they may be engaged in prospective tax evasion, as a rationale for the integrity of the Greenspan-Bush Sr. ‘Never-Pay’ model. In this connection, it is axiomatic that crooks always seek to compromise their victims, thereby ensuring, for instance, that they cannot testify against them.

In the case of the Swiss banks that marketed such participations, their first priority is understood to have been to obtain the targeted investor’s signature on the coveted Non-Disclosure document. Then the participant was typically asked to prove his or her funds. Thirdly, the participant may have been requested to travel to Europe, or to courier funds to the bank’s European address, where their account would have been be opened. In cases where very large amounts were put up, the bank’s aircraft was actually dispatched to collect the participant and his funds..

Participants in these schemes may be caught, if any of these unfortunate conditions apply to their circumstances. Co-conspiracy is a function of motive. If the motive was to receive inordinately high yields and/or to evade taxes in breach of the Prudent Man Rule, TEFRA and/or Internal Revenue Service regulations, it is not at all clear on what basis expectations of repayment of principal with interest may be predicated. The fact that the perpetrators (‘principals’) of these scams are indeed despicable, ruthless snakes is no comfort for the participants because the perpetrators may have taken care to ensure that those whom they have scammed are co-conspirators as well as victims.

Even more disconcertingly, the professional perpetrators of these fraudulent finance operations were fully aware of what they were doing from the outset, and may have deliberately ensured, in these cases, that their participants became co-conspirators and would therefore become impotent to recover their funds, which the perpetrators always intended to steal.

Their evil intentions will have been based upon extensive experience of the psychological reality that victims of financial Ponzi and Pyramid scams often collapse into a state of permanent denial, unable to move beyond the mental barrier that they have lost everything. This attitude is typically associated with embarrassment at the fact that the victim has been scammed, a state of mind akin to the humiliation of being mugged or the victim of common theft.

What has been achieved to date as a direct consequence of these exposures, though, is that life has been made extremely uncomfortable for the professional and official sector perpetrators of all categories of fraudulent finance, and will most certainly become more uncomfortable day by day – as official enforcement procedures, which grind slowly but surely, bring more and more decisive pressure to bear on these snakes. Despite everything that has had to be said above, this may still provide some minimal degree of comfort, no doubt, for the victimised participants; but it may not alleviate their problems or their suffering.

What we can say with confidence is that the prevailing sense of pessimism in the United States is misplaced. Perceptions are often slow to catch up with reality. We are being bombarded with data which has almost no bearing on the current environment, which can be summed up as follows: the crooks are on the run, are being hounded day and night, have nowhere to turn, did not anticipate what was about to hit them, and have been caught completely unprepared for the onslaught.

S.E.C. ‘CORRUPTLY ENGAGED IN OWN ACCOUNT TRADING’
And here is another exposure: the Securities and Exchange Commission – still the chief securities market regulator, no less – is itself apparently corrupt. For instance, it has failed to enforce its own regulations, and has only (it appears) been galvanised into action very recently, in response to the cacophony generated inter alia by our reports. No-one has been impressed by Mr Cox’s statements recently, because the failure of the SEC to do its job properly has become widely known.

The SEC irresponsibly dismantled their own enforcement division, and to make matters very much worse, have been engaged in trading, or allowing insiders to trade, for their own account.

For what purpose? The likelihood must be that SEC personnel have been trading for their own personal enrichment, taking their cue from the Black House: the nefarious principle being that if the President of the United States and his most senior colleagues are content to exploit public office for self-enrichment purposes, then what is to stop lesser officials doing the same?

The fact that the Securities and Exchange Commission, which exists for the purpose of regulation only, has reportedly branched out into participating in exotic money-making programmes instead of concentrating on its job of regulating the securities sector, provides us with a further indication of the extreme decadence of the US financial system which can hardly hope to recover unless such grotesque abuses are eliminated.

COUNTER-PROPOSALS FOR CLEANING UP THE MESS
It is perfectly clear to anyone who is not sitting on their brains that the so-called ‘Paulson’ Treasury proposals, a.k.a. the mish-mash of half-baked notions served up by the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets, is not fit for purpose and should be relegated to the dustbin of history with immediate effect. It is further clear that these messy proposals have actually exacerbated the crisis by introducing new dimensions of uncertainty surrounding future US Government policies, thereby further undermining confidence in an environment so febrile that the entire edifice of fiat money cards has been teetering on the verge of collapse anyway.

Given the perverse effects of these proposals on financial market confidence, we can legitimately go further, and accuse the Working Group of irresponsible behaviour which is tantamount to the financial criminality which the proposals are intended to obfuscate.

To place consideration of the problems surrounding the Government-Sponsored Enterprises in the ‘long-term reform category’ when, within months of our report on the subject last December, this central dimension of the overall crisis blew up in the Working Group’s faces, surely provides all who ‘need to know’ with sufficient evidence of the Working Group’s incompetence, let alone its clearly mischievous intent, to warrant the Working Group being closed down forthwith – before it does any more damage, like the proverbial elephant in the china shop.

Michael C. Cottrell, M.S., the securities markets expert, has therefore prepared the following basic recommendations, which should be substituted for the cack-handed and extremely damaging false prospectus promulgated last March by the disreputable President’s Working Group on Financial Markets, fronted by this ‘Paulson’ fellow.

MR COTTRELL’S COUNTER-PROPOSALS ARE AS FOLLOWS:

(A) Comprehensive funding of the necessary enforcement structures, which must remain intact. The organisations most suited for this function remain the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Trade Commission. Before summarising Mr Cottrell’s proposals, here are some examples of what has happened when these regulators fail to do their jobs properly, or at all:

(1) The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC): This entity must enforce its regulations with vigour, in the context of the further reforms that Mr Cottrell recommends, below:

The Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, Christopher Dodd, and Senator Jack Reed, have asked the Government Accountability Office (formerly the Government Accounting Office, GAO) to investigate why sanctions imposed by the SEC plunged by 51%, to $1.6 billion, in the regulator’s most recent fiscal year. According to the SEC’s Annual Reports, it opened 15% fewer probes during the same period, than in the preceding fiscal year (20).

For instance, the Securities and Exchange Commission failed to enforce its regulations in the case of American Business Financial Services, Inc. (ABFS), located in Philadelphia, PA, which operated from 1988 until it declared bankruptcy in January 2005.

This case is revealing in the context being considered here.

ABFS financed its operations by selling its notes to the general public, by means of newspaper advertisements and mass mailings, which promised high interest yields. The notes it sold carried no collateral and were not insured, so that they were worthless when ABFS declared bankruptcy (21). More than 22,000 individual investors lost a total of approximately $750 million. The bankruptcy trustee has filed suit against Bear Stearns & Co., J. P. MorganChase & Co., Morgan Stanley and Crédit Suisse, to recover monies lost when these investment banks allegedly allowed or enabled ABFS to overstate the value of assets on its books (22).

ABFS extended loans to borrowers burdened with poor credit, worth more than $6.0 billion in the aggregate, which were then packaged for marketing purposes, but which essentially represented securitised pools of sub-prime loans. ABFS also secured cash from individual investors by selling the investors uncollateralised notes via public offerings (23).

The investment banks converted the sub-prime loans and uncollateralised notes into ‘interest only strips’, or ‘residuals’ which represented ‘the right to receive future cash flows from securitised loans’ (24). ABFS assigned to these securities a value much higher than their actual worth because the falsification of these values made ABFS look more financially sound than was in fact the case.

Specifically, ABFS booked more than $500 million in ‘fictitious assets’ when the investment banks allowed ABFS to underestimate early repayments of the ‘sub-prime’ loans. ABFS assumed its had a 23% prepayment rate when, in reality, Crédit Suisse had questioned the percentage as being too low. In fact, repayment rates were running at between 30% and 35% of total such ‘assets’ (25) .

Wall Street investment banks finally stopped securitising AFBS sub-prime loans when one investment bank received a letter dated 15th May 2003, addressed to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the SEC asking: ‘Who is protecting these (AFBS) investors?’

Notwithstanding this state of affairs, the Securities and Exchange Commission did not launch an investigation into the behaviour of ABFS until 2004, when ABFS asked for SEC approval to enable it to make another public offering (26). In this, as in so many other instances, the US Securities and Exchange Commission simply failed to enforce its own regulations.

We have summarised these regulations in our reports since 2006, in case this fact had escaped the SEC’s notice. It hasn’t escaped the notice of the financial community generally, so we are entitled to ask why the Securities and Exchange Commission appears to have been an exception.

The SEC regulations of specific relevance to these issues that NEED TO BE ENFORCED include the following [see also the usual Annex at the end of this report].

These details have been published here for at least 18++ months, so as to emphasis the chronic necessity of substituting the Rule of Law for the Law of the Jungle:

• 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

(2) Federal Trade Commission: This Government structure has authority to investigate fraudulent transactions in all markets.

According to a plea bargain agreement announced on 8th April 2008, a former Board Member at the New York Mercantile Exchange pleaded guilty to two felony counts relating to illegal natural gas trading. Mr Steven Karvellas, aged 48, made trades and then waited to watch how they turned out before assigning the trades either to his own account or to his client’s account – an abuse referred to as ‘trading ahead of the customer’, which is a violation of the SEC’s Fair Dealing With Customer rules. Karvellas was a floor Exchange Board Member of the publicly traded Nymex Holdings, Inc., and indeed headed up its compliance review committee when the illegal trades took place (27).

Under the supervision of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), floor brokers such as Mr Karvellas can operate both as broker for customers and trade for own account operations. This practice is referred to as the ‘dual trader’ mode, with the floor broker under an obligation to act at all times in the customer’s best interest, a responsibility that entails an obligation upon the broker to seek the best possible prices for the customer 28 .

Ironically (perhaps not, since we are of course dealing with the familiar double-mindedness here), in a letter addressed in 2002 to Nymex Holdings members as part of his campaign for re-election to the Board, Mr Karvellas opined that ‘the shocking collapse of Enron indicates that our Exchange does wear a white hat in the financial world. We illustrate how markets should operate, honestly and with openness and transparency that gains the public’s trust’ (29).

In January 2008, a Grand Jury subpoenaed a five-year-old trading ticket related to this investigation and to Mr Steven Karvellas, who pleaded guilty to tampering with physical evidence by ordering a subordinate to destroy the subpoenaed trading ticket (30).

Nymex, which has been or is currently being acquired by the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME, Inc.), and other floor exchanges, have been financially hurt by the emergence of electronic trading, and have attempted to reduce costs and to speed up the ‘open-outcry’ process [see Glossary] (31).

But floor trading remains vulnerable to manipulation: for instance, in 2005, 15 traders at the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) were indicted on charges of cheating investors. Although many of these traders actually won their criminal cases, the Exchange realised that it had to ‘do something’, and upgraded its surveillance systems at a cost of about $20 million (32).

These examples, which could be replicated here ad nauseam, illustrate the absolute necessity for a regulatory régime that is underpinned by enforcement, which must be implemented without fear or favour at all times – so that everyone participating in the financial markets is aware of the severe consequences of any breach of the rules and regulations.

Talk of operating on the basis of relatavist ‘principles’ is not only irresponsible and unprofessional: it encourages the misplaced belief among the easily swayed and the corrupt, that the ‘way forward’ need not include enforcement as conceived in the 1930s, so that everyone can feel comfortable and at ease – a recipe for the proliferation of fraudulent finance on an open-ended basis.

Moreover it is crystal clear that the dishonesty, hesitation and the sheer confusion surrounding the ‘Paulson’ proposals have severely exacerbated a fragile situation and the crisis of confidence which the criminal incompetents in charge of US financial affairs have never intended, on the basis of the massive evidence of their ongoing corruption, should be addressed in an orderly fashion, since their agenda has all along diverged from the public interest.

Almost as though it had suddenly woken up from a long slumber, the SEC was reported to have launched a probe on 13th July 2008 into the manipulation of stock prices through the spreading of false rumours, focusing on compliance controls which are supposed to be applied by traders and investment houses. This initiative appeared to mimic a similar attempt by the UK Financial Services Authority FSA) in London, to crack down on rumour-mongering and short-selling in the UK market following the plunge in the shares of HBOS (Halifax Bank of Scotland) last March.

The FSA was unsuccessful in its search, suggesting that the SEC’s response represents a belated cosmetic attempt to be seen to be ‘doing something’, since the SEC must certainly be aware of the FSA’s failed investigation. However nothing that the US regulator does now, with the benefit of any hindsight and with the fraudulent prospects implied by the Treasury’s proposals hanging over its head, can make up for its past failure to enforce its own regulations – as a consequence of which fraudulent securities operations/scams have assumed colossal and, as we have been observing, catastrophic proportions, in recent years.

The SEC’s failure and dereliction of duty is no reason for abandoning the enforcement approach in favour of a contrived, weak ‘principles-based’ approach. On the contrary, what remains essential is proper and rigorous enforcement of appropriate regulations.

(B) Mr Cottrell insists that the following structure and disciplines should be created and imposed:

Office of Inspector General for Financial Markets Compliance (OFMC):
A new regulatory entity with the function described by its title should be established by Statute, who would be required to report directly to the Chairman and ranking Member(s) of the following US Congressional Committees, who would be considered to be their superiors (Bosses):

• The US Senate Financial Services Committee.

• The US House of Representatives’ Financial Services Committee.

All management and field personnel employed by the Office of the Inspector General for Financial Markets would need to be fully trained and qualified compliance officers. Specifically:

• They must be field-tested and recognised as licensed compliance officers, and they must all be licensed under the following régimes:

(1) Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (created in July 2007 through consolidation of the NASD (National Association of Securities Dealers) and the NYSE (the New York Stock Exchange) member regulation régimes [see also: Glossary]) with respect to the following examinations:

• Series 24 [General Securities Principal];
• Series 27 [Financial and Operations Principal];
• Series 4 [Registered Options Principal];
• Series 51 [Municipal Fund Securities Principal]; and:
• Series 53 [Municipal Securities Principal].

(2) They must be licensed members of NYSE Member firms.

(3) They must be licensed as US Treasury compliance officers.

Nothing short of the deployment of management and field personnel qualified to these demanding industry standards will suffice. Because this is so, it is self-evident that the half-baked, confused and deliberately fragmentary proposals put forward by the President’s Working Group, which are intended to OBFUSCATE the situation and to lodge total power in the hands of the Presidency by default, with no checks and balances at all, represent a fraudulent prospectus, which should be consigned to oblivion forthwith. NO FURTHER CONSIDERATION SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THEM.

(C ) Michael Cottrell further demands (recommends is much too weak a word here) that The Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 must be re-enacted in order to re-establish once and for all the very stringent regulatory requirements enshrined in the 1933 and 1934 Securities Acts.

In the same context, and in parallel, the divisive Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act – written by lobbyists for the banking sector – must be repealed.

(D) Regulation of Credit and Debt Derivatives:
An essential further reform will be the development of overdue new securities regulations specifically focused on the creation, use and risk limitation of structured instrument vehicles (credit and debt derivatives). These new regulations would be enforced by the Securities and Exchange Commission (and the Federal Trade Commission, as appropriate), and of course subject to compliance oversight by the trained personnel of the newly established Office of the Inspector General for Financial Markets Compliance [see above].

(E) Finally, the revitalised regulatory regime for all US financial markets will be seen to be entirely rules-based, with all ‘legacy’ ‘principles-based’ thinking and language expunged from the system, which must be backed up by rigorous enforcement applied impartially and across the board.

SEC, FTA AND OFMC management and field personnel would be well remunerated, but at the same time subject to specified and appropriately severe sanctions in cases of official corruption within these structures. One reason why the regulations have not been properly enforced, or applied at all, in recent years is that the existing agencies, and/or certain personnel within them, have been corrupted. Fish rot from the head.

CONCLUSION
This far simpler regulatory régime requires a minimum of new legislation, building upon existing regulatory structures and experience, with the introduction of precisely ONE new US agency (the OFMC), compared with SEVEN new burdensome, confusing, bureaucratic, intentionally overlapping, obfuscatory agencies as proposed by the Working Group on Financial Markets (33).

Therefore, these straightforward reforms, instead of being spurious and deliberately opaque and spread out over an indeterminate timeframe, exacerbated by the carrying out of vague ‘studies’ as specified in the ‘Paulson’ proposals, could be implemented within a very limited timeframe at an early stage of the next Presidency. Establishing ONE new agency instead of SEVEN should, of itself, provide a powerful incentive for adopting Mr Cottrell’s straightforward proposals and for rejecting the hugely expensive and mischievous dog’s dinner put forward by the Working Group.

Such an initiative would do more to restore confidence in the battered US financial markets than innumerable further confused announcements by the ‘Paulson’ Treasury and other intermeddlers, and would place the incoming Administration on a sound financial market footing, without which everything it touches will disintegrate as has happened under the criminalised Bush II Presidency.

In short, these are straightforward, practical reforms which can be legislated for and implemented quickly. They can also be publicised with advantage ahead of their implementation, so that the US and world financial markets are made appropriately aware of the smack of firm, sound and decisive governance, with all that this approach will imply for the restoration of confidence in the battered financial markets in the United States and worldwide. (34).

Notes and References:

1. Howard Abadinsky, ‘Organized Crime’, 6th Edition, Belmont,
Wadsworth Thompson learning, 2000, pages 49-58

2. Gary Giroux, Ph. D., ‘A Short History of Accounting and Business’, available at: http://acct.tamu.edu/giroux/financial.html (Internet), page 1.

3. Giroux, op. cit., page 1.

4. Giroux, op. cit., page 2.

5. Michael C. Cottrell, M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’ thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for Master of Science, Mercyhurst College, 2001, page 33.

6. Cottrell, op. cit., page 33.

7. Cottrell, op. cit., page 33.

8. John H Hollands, Acting Director, Investment Company Division, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), ‘Government Regulation of The Distribution of Investment Company Shares’, dated 8th October 1941, page 2.

9. Hollands, op. cit., page 2.

10. Hollands, op. cit., page 2.

11. Hollands, op. cit., page 2.

12. Hollands, op. cit., page 2.

13. Hollands, op. cit., page 2.

14. ‘Treasury’s Summary of Regulatory Proposal’, The New York Times Company, 29th March 2008, available at: http://www.nytimes.com (Internet).

15. Kara Scannell and Michael R Crittenden, ‘Treasury’s Blueprint: the View from Washington’,
The Wall Street Journal, 31st March 2008, Section A, page 15.

16. Jesse Westbrook, ‘SEC Overhaul Bid by Bush Condemned by SEC Chairman (Update 1)’, New York, Bloomberg, L.P., 8th April 2008, available at: http://www.bloomberg.com (Internet), page 1.

17. Westbrook, op. cit.,, page 1.

18. Westbrook, op. cit., page 2.

19. Westbrook, op. cit., page 2.

20. Westbrook, op. cit., page 1.

21. Steve Strecklow, ‘Subprime Lender’s Failure Sparks Lawsuit Against Wall Street Banks’,
The Wall Street Journal, 9th April 2008, Section A, page 1.

22. Strecklow, op. cit., page A1.

23. Strecklow, op. cit., page A14.

24. Strecklow, op. cit., page A14.

25. Strecklow, op. cit., page A14.

26. Strecklow, op. cit., page A14.

27. Aaron Lucchetti and Gregory Meyer, ‘Dual Traders Under Fire’, The Wall Street Journal,
9th April 2008, Section C, page 1.

28. Lucchetti and Meyer, op. cit., page C18.

29. Lucchetti and Meyer, op. cit., page C1.

30. Lucchetti and Meyer, op. cit., page C18.

31. Lucchetti and Meyer, op. cit., page C18.

32. Lucchetti and Meyer, op. cit., page C18.

33. The seven new agencies recommended by the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets, which of course obfuscate the regulatory environment out to infinity, with intent, are: Mortgage Origination Commission; Market Stability Regulator; Prudential Financial Regulatory Agency; Government-Sponsored Enterprises Regulator; Conduct of Business Regulatory Agency; Federal Insurance Guarantee Corporation; and: Corporate Finance Regulator.

34. The one dimension of Mr Cottrell’s practical reforms that will require an appropriate lead-time concerns the recruitment of the necessary trained and licensed management and field compliance personnel for the new Office of the Inspector General for Financial Markets Compliance (OFMC).

In addition to the need to remunerate such expert personnel sufficiently well not least in order to minimise the temptation to succumb to bribery (which has bedeviled enforcement of late), financial compensation must reflect the expertise of recruited staff and the exceptional importance of their responsibilities. At the same time, it will not be necessary to recruit a large compliance staff. A tight ship is recommended, given that a modest staff can be motivated to higher levels of achievement, especially since the recommended ethos would be one of sober determination to stamp out market abuses and corruption generally. Despite the ravages inflicted by the permissive financial market environment in recent years, it is believed that the pool of such qualified experts who are keen to enforce the Rule of Law in the United States remains of sizeable proportions.

• MEMORANDUM:

SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THE ‘PAULSON’ END-YEAR ‘DECEPTION OPERATION’
On 31st December 2007, we and several other prominent monitors and contacts received disparate information about shootings that were reported to have taken place on 28th/29th December 2007. Among those reported to have been shot was Henry M. Paulson Jr., the US Treasury Secretary, who was alleged to be in a critical condition following that event.

These reports followed verified information that Paulson had attempted to blackmail the President of the United States, as we had reported earlier. On 2nd January 2008, the same sources reported that ‘Paulson’ had died of his wounds. Given the quality of the sources for this information (see below), the Editor took the decision to publicise these events, in a report dated 2nd January 2008.

For the next seven days, the Editor was bombarded with hate emails from people who knew better, for a total of about 70 such emails in all. On 9th January 2008, the Editor published a website report furnishing precise details of the provenance of the reports about the shootings, complete with the dates and precise times when the relevant information was received. The report also cited sources by name, including one well-known US Ambassador (Bennett) and a retired Governor of the Federal Reserve Board (Meyer). Given the extreme detail that we published on 9th January 2008, the email bombardment of the Editor of this service ceased abruptly, indicating to our forensic advisers that this was a coordinated operation intended to try to discredit not only this service, but also several other Fifth Estate outlets that had been carrying variants of the same information.

In other words, faced with our detailed provenance information, the counterintelligence diversion, redirection, obfuscation and discrediting operatives could not continue with it, and so had to ‘pull’ their operation. Since these events, further information on this subject has been assembled, and the Editor has routinely cited the name ‘Paulson’ in between quotation marks.

• Shortly after these events, we and others were advised that an attempt had been made on the life of Vice President Cheney, also by shooting. Since we and others know, from UK sources, about episodes (in detail) of extreme violence that have plagued the highest level of the United States’ criminal Federal Government under Bush II, this caused no surprise. But the Editor established that Cheney had only one diary appointment for a prolonged period, namely from 23rd December 2007 to 15th January 2008, when he was scheduled to meet the Prime Minister of Finland.

We waited until after 15th January and then contacted the Finnish Embassy in London to establish whether the Finnish Prime Minister had indeed been received by Cheney on 15th January. On 19th January, the Finnish Press Counselor in London telephoned the Editor to confirm that the meeting had taken place. It is now believed by several analysts that in both instances of alleged shootings a ‘double’ may have been the victim. Uniquely in the United States, where violence at high levels is quite commonplace, these holders of the US highest offices are often equipped with ‘doubles’ who are recruited by a special back-up unit and held ‘on the books’ against all emergencies. They are assisted by selected make-up artists from Hollywood who are controlled by the CIA.

• At a recent ‘impromptu briefing’ here (in the English countryside), the Editor was given a most encouraging assessment about the impact of our reports on what Lenin called ‘the unfolding of events’, and was advised that the ‘Paulson’ episode had not affected our credibility, both because of the reports’ general accuracy and the relevance of their assessments. These comments were accompanied by the observation that ‘it is nothing to worry about because EVERYONE HAS BEEN AND CONTINUES TO BE LIED TO’ by these people and by their criminal intelligence associates.

• This assessment coincided with our own view of the matter. It is to be observed that no official denial of anything that we published about ‘Paulson’, has ever materialised, and that it has been confirmed that US Treasury officials have been overheard referring to ‘Paulson’ as ‘the double’. Whether the real Paulson was wounded and later recovered, or a double was murdered, is not yet known. Nor has any explanation been forthcoming about the macabre videos of sessions of the Bush cabinet in which a motionless ‘Paulson’ figure, thought at the time to have been a cadaver, was on display. We have a new ‘take’ on this, immediately below. It is this:

• Given the lengths to which the relentlessly criminalised US counterintelligence disinformation community are known to go to deceive, in order to cover up their crimes (which is their full-time preoccupation), it is well within the bounds of possibility that the macabre video was itself part of the deception operation – the overall purpose of which will have been to seek to discredit those Fifth Estate outlets that have consistently exposed Paulson as a recalcitrant criminalist operative, the orchestrator of colossal financial thievery and scamming operations, a de facto financier of terrorism (which FinCEN, a bureau within the Treasury that this ‘Paulson’ controls is dedicated to rooting out), and, in short, a criminal who should be arrested and subjected to the full rigour of the Rule of Law. The overall purpose of this counterintelligence operation would have been to try to discredit ‘Paulson’s ‘main enemies’ (i.e., this service!) by embedding the idea that ‘Paulson’ had been shot, and then parading him in public later, as though nothing had happened. The same games were and are being played in respect of Vice President und Unterreichsführer Cheney.

• On the assumption that, despite all of the foregoing, we may still be dealing with the ‘real’ Hank Paulson, this man’s notorious arrogance would be likely to have blinded him to the reality that any elaborate deception operation associated with the shootings episode over the turn of the year did NOT succeed, as he may recklessly believe, in discrediting the Fifth Estate outlets, including this service, which have identified this crook for what he is. On the contrary, the man has been well and truly cornered, and is running around in ever decreasing circles as he seeks to extricate himself from the hell of his own making. To do this he will stoop to anything. For instance:

• It is likely that US Congressional figures seen as a threat to ‘Paulson’ are in the process of being blackmailed. One way this is being done is to expose the ‘Countrywide sweetheart deals’ that were extended (to the tune of some $400 million) to prominent members of the Legislative Branch on favourable terms. Moreover, all of a sudden, the Countrywide executive who did the paperwork has surfaced (in Conde Nast’s ‘Portfolio Magazine’) to assert that these US Congressmen all knew perfectly well that the mortgages of which they were in receipt were being made available to them on ‘special terms’ (and by implication were therefore not aware that they were victims of a ‘sting’ operation perpetrated with malicious intent). The purpose of this operation? To stall any moves to have Paulson impeached for his crimes and brought finally, at long last, to justice.

GLOSSARY OF U.S. FINANCIAL MARKET DEFINITIONS

References only entries specifically germane to the market issues purportedly addressed by the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets, and relevant to Mr Cottrell’s alternative proposal:

• Annunzio-Wylie Anti-Money Laundering Act of 1992:
This legislation enlarged the definition of ‘financial transaction’, and made money-transmitting, without reporting, a crime. Source: Howard Abadinsky, ‘Organized Crime’, 6th Edition, Belmont: Wadsworth/ Thompson Learning, Inc., 2000, page 411.

• Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988:
This law detailed undercover operations involving money-laundering. Source: John Madinger and Sydney A. Zalopany, ‘Money Laundering: A Guide for Criminal Investigators’, New York: CRC Press, LLC, 1999, page 43.

• Anti-Trust Laws:
US Federal legislation designed to prevent monopolies, cartelisation and restraint of trade. Landmark statutes include:
(1): Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890, which prohibited actions or contracts tending to create a monopoly and initiated an era of trust-busting;
(2): Clayton Anti-Trust Act of 1914, passed as an amendment to the Sherman Act, which dealt with local price discrimination, interlocking directorates, holding company activities and restraint of trade; and:
(3): Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914, which created the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), with the power to conduct investigations and the power to issue orders preventing unfair practices in interstate commerce. Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Ed., Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, 2006, s.v. ‘Antitrust Laws’.

•Bailout Bill:
See Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA).

• Bank Holding Company Act of 1956:
This act brought, for the first time, holding companies under the banking regulations, and provided that the holding company was subject to the same regulation and examinations as member banks. A Holding Company is a company that exercises control over another via voting shares. Organisation as a holding company allows a banking firm to engage in other non-deposit taking activities, such as discount brokerage operations, securities underwriting, and general public or industrial leasing.
Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA 13th February 2002; Munn, ‘Encyclopedia of Banking and Finance’, page 84; Fitch, Dictionary of Banking Terms, page 225. See: Financial Holding Company.

• Bank Holding Company Act Amendments of 1970:
This legislation expanded the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 by legislating for a new Holding Company that controls only one bank, and limiting the permissible activities of these entities to those ‘closely related to banking’. The effect of these amendments was to permit one-bank holding companies, such as Bank of New York Company, Inc., to become conglomerates with subsidiaries in non-banking fields without regulation. Sources: Mr Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, op. cit., thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, on 13th February 2002; Munn, ‘Encyclopedia of Banking and Finance’, page 87; Thomas A. Eder, Thompson Desktop Financial Directory, Volume 3, Skokie: Thompson Financial Publishing, Inc., 1993, page 252. See: Financial Holding Company.

• Banking Act of 1935:
This legislation implemented changes to the Federal Reserve Board, prohibiting any banker from serving on the Board of Directors, or being an officer or employee, of more than two institutions. Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, 13th February 2002; Munn, ‘Encyclopedia of Banking and Finance’, page 89. See: Financial Holding Company.

• Bank Secrecy Act of 1970:
This legislation, the formal title of which is the Currency and Foreign Transactions Reporting Act of 1970, extended to the Secretary of the US Treasury great flexibility in respect of official definitions of ‘monetary instruments’, which could now all of a sudden include ‘coins and currency of a foreign country, travelers’ checks, bearer negotiable instruments, bearer investment securities, stock on which title is passed on delivery’. The ostensible intention of this law was to deter criminal activity in order to assist criminal investigations by requiring all financial institutions to report large cash transactions and the transportation of such instruments initially exceeding $5,000, (now, amounts that in excess of $10,000). Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, 13th February 2002; See also Munn, ‘Encyclopedia of Banking and Finance’, p.109; John Madinger, Sydney A. Zalopany, ‘Money Laundering: A Guide for Criminal Investigators’, New York, CRC Press, LLC, 1999, page 43.

• Basel-II:
The Bank for International Settlements (BIS), located in Basel, Switzerland, has established and provides the Secretariat for the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, which consists of senior representatives of bank supervisory authorities and central banks from Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States. Basel-II is the comprehensive updated and agreed version of ‘International Convergence of Capital Management and Capital Standards’ revising the 1988, 1996 and 2005 texts to secure an international standard on revisions to supervisory regulations governing the capital adequacy of internationally active banks. Source. and for further information: Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, ‘International Convergence of Capital Measurement and Capital Standards’, Basel, Press & Communications, 2004, available at: http://www.bis.org (Internet).

• Bucket Shop:
An illegal brokerage firm which accepts orders from customers but does not execute them right away, as Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) regulations require. Bucket shop brokers confirm the price that the customer asked for, but in fact make the trade at a time considered to be advantageous to the broker, whose profit is the difference between the two prices. Sometimes bucket shops neglect to fill the customer’s order and just pocket the money. Main source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Bucket Shop’.

• Clayton Anti-Trust Act of 1914:
This law was passed in order to increase competition in business, by restricting the corporate activity of acquiring other competing corporations or the practice of interlocking directorships. Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, 13th February 2002; additionally: Jack C Plano and Milton Greenberg, ‘The American Political Dictionary’, 4th Edition, Hinsdale, The Dryden Press, 1976, page 328. See: Anti-Trust Laws.

• Clear:
(a): In banking: Collection of funds on which a cheque (check) is drawn, and payment of these funds to the holder of the check.
(b): In the securities sector: Comparison of the details of a transaction between brokers prior to settlement; final exchange of securities for cash on delivery. Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Clear’.

• Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CTFC):
An independent agency created by Congress in 1974 which is responsible for regulating the US commodity futures and options markets. The CFTC is responsible for ensuring the integrity of the commodity futures and options markets everywhere, and for protecting market participants against manipulation, abusive trade practices, and fraudulent operations. Primary source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘CFTC’.

• Commodity Futures Contract:
A Futures Contract that is tied to the price movements of a particular commodity. This arrangement enables contract buyers to purchase a specific amount of a listed commodity at a specified price on a particular date in the future. The price of the contract in question is determined using the ‘open outcry’ system on the floor of a US commodity exchange such as the Chicago Board of Trade or the Commodity Exchange in New York. Commodity Futures Contracts are typically based upon (a) meats (cattle and pork bellies); (b) grains (corn, oats, soybeans and wheat); (c) key metals (gold, silver and platinum); and energy products (heating oil, natural gas, and crude oil). Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Commodity Futures Contract’.

• Commercial Bank:
A State or National Bank owned by stockholders that accepts demand deposits, makes commercial and industrial loans, and performs other banking services for the public. The phrase Full Service Bank covers banks that, as is the case with many commercial banks, supply trust services, foreign exchange, trade financing and international banking services. Source: Thomas P. Fitch, ‘Dictionary of Banking Terms’, 3rd Ed., Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 1997, c.v. ‘Comm. Bank’.

• Compliance Department:
A department typically established by brokers and all US organised stock exchanges to oversee market activity and make sure that trading and other activities comply (in the United States) with Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and specific Exchange regulations. A company that does not adhere to the rules can be delisted. And a trader or brokerage firm that violates the rules can be barred from trading. Main source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Compliance Department’.

• Compliance Examination:
Periodic bank examination by a Federal regulatory agency to ensure compliance with consumer protection regulations, such as the Community Reinvestment Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and the Truth in Lending Act. Financial institutions are required by law to issue reports at regular intervals – for example, an annual statement of their mortgage lending in the lender’s market area. Compliance examinations are intended to uncover any hidden violations of consumer protection regulations so that remedial action can be taken. Source: Thomas P. Fitch, ‘Dictionary of Banking Terms’, 3rd Ed., Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 1997, c.v. ‘Compliance Examination’.

•Consumer Credit Protection Act of 1968: See: Truth in Lending Act.

• Criminalism: A new word invented by the Editor of this service, meaning the perpetration and exploitation of organised criminal operations in the interests of political strategy and/or one or more secret agendas; noun, ‘criminalist’, an operative or other cadre who engages in criminalist activities and assumes that he is protected and can therefore continue such activities beyond and above the reach of the Rule of Law. The Editor first used this word in the context of Soviet criminal operations, as exposed in Soviet Analyst, and has since extended it to cover the American variant.

• Currency and Foreign Transactions Reporting Act of 1970: See: Bank Secrecy Act.

• Debenture:
A certificate or bond acknowledging a debt on which fixed interest is being paid. Source: Oxford Senior Dictionary, Oxford University Press, 1984.

• Depository Institutional Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980:
This law gave the Federal Reserve Board tighter control over monetary policy. It also required the Fed to assign examiners to examine foreign operations of State member banks, and prohibited the Fed from rejecting any application from a one-bank holding company on the basis of a stock loan, unless that applicant’s financial arrangements were deemed to be unsatisfactory. The applications were to be judged on a case-by-case basis. The Act further proclaimed that collateral was no longer required to support Federal Reserve notes held in the vaults of the Federal Reserve banks, and that the kinds of eligible collateral for Federal Reserve notes were expanded to include those of foreign governments and/or agency or any other ‘asset’ purchasable by Federal Reserve Banks. Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, 13th February 2002; Munn, ‘Encyclopedia of Banking and Finance’, pages 252 and 253.

• Derivative Instrument (Derivative):
A contract the value of which is determined from publicly traded securities, interest rates, currency exchange rates, or market indices. Derivative Contracts are often ostensibly used for the purpose of ‘protecting’ assets against changes in value. Types of derivatives include the following:

(1): Over-the-counter derivative ‘products’, such as currency swaps and interest rate swaps, which are privately negotiated bilateral agreements, transacted OFF the organised US exchanges. In the currency markets, forward delivery contracts allow traders to lock in current prices when buying and selling baskets of currencies for future delivery.

(2): Derivative securities: Bond-like securities created when pools of loans and mortgages are packaged and sold to investors. In the hands of knowledgeable users, derivative contracts have many applications in the floating interest environment, such as managing currency and interest rate risk, or locking financing costs in by swapping floating rate debt for fixed-rate debt.

Derivatives gained public notoriety in the 1990s when a number of corporations and municipalities embarked upon the use of derivatives for speculative purposes (known as ‘taking a view on the market’), and suffered large losses when interest rates moved against them. Source: Thomas P. Fitch, ‘Dictionary of Banking Terms’, 3rd Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 1997, c.v. ‘Derivative’.

• Disclosure:
Release by listed companies of all information, both positive and negative, that might bear on an investment decision, as required by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the stock exchanges. Source: Thomas P. Fitch, ‘Dictionary of Banking Terms’, 3rd Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 1997, c.v. ‘Compliance Examination’.

• Edge Act:
Passed in December 1919, the Edge Act, under the heading ‘Banking Corporations Authorized to Do Foreign Banking Business’, permitted the establishment of foreign banking corporations that aided in the financing of foreign trade. This allowed US banks to establish branches in foreign countries to accommodate American corporations engaged in foreign trade transactions. Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, his thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science (M.S.), The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, 13th February 2002; Munn, ‘Encyclopedia of Banking and Finance’, page 289.

• Equal Credit Opportunity Act of 1974:
Monitored by the Federal Trade Commission (FTA), this legislation seeks to ensure that all US consumers are given an equal chance to obtain credit. The Act prohibits discrimination in the granting of credit on the basis of race, colour, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age, receipt of income from any public assistance scheme, and good faith exercise of any rights under consumer protection legislation. The US Department of Justice may file a lawsuit under the Act where a pattern or practice of discrimination appears to exist. For further information, see: http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/housing/housing_ecoa.htm (Internet).

• Emergency Banking Relief Act:
Passed on 9th March 1933, this Act was triggered following the national liquidity crisis that followed the stock market crash of 29th October 1929 and the extended ‘bank holiday’ of the 4th-12th March 1933. The bank holiday closed all banks nation-wide for one week by order of President Franklin D Roosevelt, to control the wave of banking failures and to restore confidence in the United States’ battered banking system. This legislation permitted banks to issue new stock, with the new stock exempt from subjecting the holder to be liable for the bank’s previously issued stock. The Act also authorised the issuance of US Federal Reserve Bank notes that were redeemable in lawful money in the United States, as 100% obligations of the Federal Government. Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, Administration of Justice Department, at Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, 13th February 2002; Moore, ‘The Federal Reserve System’, pages 81-82; Fitch, ‘Dictionary of Banking Terms’, pages 46 and 83.

• Enronisation: A new word coined by the Editor of this service, meaning ‘hollowing out’. Verb: ‘to enronise’; noun: ‘enronist’, a financial criminal who ‘hollows out’ a targeted entity. The essence of the destruction of Enron was that executives and directors formed private partnerships and stole or diverted financial assets or proceeds from the corporation into offshore bank accounts of the partnerships. These diverted monies were then systematically leveraged and hypothecated into high-yield investment and other programs which wound up being far more profitable than Enron itself. Such illegitimate financial arrangements proliferated, so that the original enterprise, Enron, was ‘hollowed out’, while the illicit partnerships prospered, with 100% of the proceeds being held undeclared and untaxed offshore. ‘Enronisation’ strategies are applied not only to companies, but also to whole countries (e.g., Ireland, Zimbabwe, Iceland, probably also Spain (forthcoming)).

• Federal Reserve Act of 1913:
The purpose of this legislation, according to the precise language of the Act, was ‘to provide for the establishment of US Federal Reserve Banks, to furnish an elastic currency, to afford means of rediscounting commercial paper, to establish a more effective supervision of banking in the United States and for other purposes’. The Act established two basic structures:
(1): A central body known as the Federal Reserve Board; and:
(2): Not more than 12 Reserve banks located throughout the country. The Federal Reserve Board is comprised of seven members appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the US Senate for 14-year terms. Sources: Mr Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, his thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, on 13th February 2002 Carl H. Moore, The Federal Reserve System, Jefferson: McFarland & Company, Inc., 1990, page 7; Fitch, Dictionary of Banking Terms, page 46.

• Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914:
This legislation established the Federal Trade Commission as the ‘watchdog of competition’, and as a comprehensive regulatory authority empowered to protect the consumer against ‘unfair methods of competition’. Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, the thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science (M.S.), for The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, 13th February 2002; See also: Munn, ‘Encyclopedia of Banking and Finance’, page 383. See: Anti-Trust Laws.

• Financial Future:
A Futures Contract based upon (relating to) a financial instrument. Such contracts usually move under the influence of interest rates: as interest rates rise, contracts fall in value; as rates decline, contracts gain in value. Examples include: Treasury Bills, Treasury Notes, GNMA Pass-Throughs, foreign currencies, and Certificates of Deposit (CDs). Main source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Ed., Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Financial Future’.

• Financial Guarantee:
A non-cancellable indemnity bond guaranteeing the timely payment of principal and interest due on securities by the maturity date. If the issuer defaults, the insurer will pay out a fixed sum of money to holders of the securities. Financial guarantees are further written by banks which are allowed to operate in the insurance business by the Garn-St Germain Act of 1982, which prohibited banks from entering the insurance business. Insurance companies selling bond insurance must be monoline underwriters, a status which precludes their direct ownership by property and casualty insurance corporations. Source: Thomas P. Fitch, ‘Dictionary of Banking Terms’, 3rd Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 1997, c.v. ‘Financial Guarantee’

• Financial Holding Company: The Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 prohibited any affiliations between banks and insurance companies (referred to as ‘firewall restrictions’). A Bank Holding Company qualifies as a Financial Holding Company if:
(1): Its banking subsidiaries are ‘well capitalised’ and ‘well managed’; and:
(2): It files with the Federal Reserve Board a certification to such effect and a declaration that it elects to become a Financial Holding Company.

Securities firms and insurance companies must undergo a two-stage process: first, they must qualify as Bank Holding companies under the 1956 Act; and secondly they must then qualify as Financial Holding Companies. Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Financial Holding Company’.

• Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA): FINRA was brought into existence in July 2007 through consolidation of the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) and NYSE Member Regulation. It is the largest US non-governmental regulator and covers all securities firms doing business in the United States. FINRA oversees nearly 5,000 brokerage firms, about 172,000 branch offices and more than 676,000 registered securities representatives. Source: Financial Regulatory Authority, corporate information ‘About FINRA’: copyright 2008 FINRA; this document is available from: http://www.finra.org (Internet).

• Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA):
Enacted on 9th August 1989, this legislation addressed the crisis affecting the Savings and Loan Associations (‘thrifts’) after the sector had been ‘enronised’ by the criminalist kleptocracy headed by George H. W. Bush Sr. Also known as the Bailout Bill, this legislation revamped the regulatory, insurance and financing structures, establishing the Office of Thrift Supervision. It created:

(1): The Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) which, operating under the management of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), was charged with closing or merging institutions which had become insolvent and would be becoming insolvent in the future;

(2): The Resolution Funding Corporation (a.k.a. REFCORP), which was charged with borrowing from private capital markets to fund the RTC’s operations to manage the remaining assets and liabilities that had been taken over/assumed by the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation (FSLIC), a Government-Sponsored Enterprise (GSE), prior to 1989;

(3): The Savings Association Insurance Fund (SAIF), which was to replace the FSLIC as the insurer of ‘thrift’ deposits and would henceforth be administered by the FDIC separately from its bank deposit insurance programme, which then became the Bank Insurance Fund (BIF); and:

(4): The Federal Housing Finance Board (FHFB), which was charged with overseeing the Federal Home Loan Banks.

• The Resolution Trust Corporation was authorised to accept additional insolvent institutions up to June 1995, after which date responsibilities for the handling of newly failed institutions was shifted to SAIF. This typically convoluted mishmash of arrangements successfully (up to a point) masked and obfuscated the reality, which was that the Savings and Loans Associations (S & Ls) had been systematically scammed and ‘enronised’ by the organised kleptocracy, this being the model for the kleptocracy’s subsequent systematic attacks on the US financial bedrock.

• The overall strategy here was to allow the scandal to escalate to the point where Congressional action became mandatory, whereupon Congress was pressurised to establish institutions that the insiders could then exploit – in this case, to buy up vast portfolios of land and assets for cents on the US dollar, which were then used as collateral for borrowings that were in turn leveraged and hypothecated into high-yield trading programmes for the benefit of the corrupt insider community.

Source for technical information (not the commentary):
John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIERRA)’.

• Financial Institutions Regulatory Act of 1978 prohibits management interlocks by banks operating in the same Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). However it exempts the smaller banks, and permits interlocks of up to 49% of a bank’s management officers. See also entry: Interlocking Directorates. Source: Thomas P. Fitch, ‘Dictionary of Banking Terms’, 3rd Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 1997, c.v. ‘Interlocking Directorates’.

• Financial Operations Officer, of a Securities firm: The financial Operations Officer of a securities firm is equally responsible with the Registered Principal [see Principal, of a Securities firm], for the firm’s financial reports to the SEC and the NASD, for the accurate record-keeping of the firm’s Net Capital Account, and for all trades and customer accounts and correspondence, advertising, and sale literature issued by the company. The Financial Operations Officer must also pass the Series 27 (Financial and Operations Principal) as well as the Series 7 (General Securities Representative) Examinations conducted by the NASD; and must further pass written procedures and oral interview prior to assuming this position with the firm. Source: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, the thesis he submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, on 13th February 2002; NASD, ‘National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.: Manual’, April 1998, page 3171; NASD, ‘NASD Compliance Check List’.

• Financial Services Modernization Act (FSMA) of 1999, also known as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act: This Act repealed parts of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 and the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956. It permits commercial banks, merchant banks, securities firms and insurers to affiliate through the structure called the Financial Holding Company. Under the Act, Nationally (Federally) Chartered Banks are permitted to engage in most financial activities through Direct Subsidiaries. The FSMA permitted Financial Holding Companies to:
1: Lend;
2: Exchange;
3: Transfer;
4: Invest for others;
5: Safeguard money or securities (custodial services);
6: Engage in insurance activities, including insuring and acting as principal, agent, or broker for all types of insurance (including health), and providing financial advice (including the provision of financial advice to investment companies);
7: Issue or sell instruments representing interests in pools of assets that are permissible for a bank to hold indirectly;
8: Underwrite, deal in, or make a market in securities with no limitation as to revenue;
9: Engage in activities outside the United States;
10: Be seized of the following (text is verbatim here): ‘The Federal Reserve Board has determined to be usual in connection with the transaction of banking or other financial operations abroad’.
Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. under: ‘Financial Services Modernization Act’.

• FinCEN [Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] is a bureau of the US Treasury which collects and analyses information about financial transactions in order to combat money laundering, the financing of terrorism, and other financial crimes and fraudulent finance. In line with the double-mindedness which characterises the kakocracy, almost all the senior criminalist figures identified in our reports have themselves been engaged in financing terrorism on a colossal scale.

Created in 1990, FinCEN seeks to realise the potential of critical information-sharing among law enforcement agencies and its other partners in the regulatory and financial communities. While the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network’s task is to safeguard the US financial system from abuses associated with financial crime, including the financing of terrorism, money laundering and other illicit activities, it does nothing the curb the excesses of the criminalists holding high office, who assume that the privileges and power of their offices, together with their prolific use of the ‘Black Arts’ of bribery and blackmail, protect them from the consequences of their actions.

While, therefore, FinCEN’s publicity presupposes that it thinks it is doing a good job, the record inter alia of our reports suggests the reverse. FinCEN was established by order of the Treasury Secretary (Treasury Order Numbered 105-08) on 25th April 1990. In May 1994, its responsibilities were broadened to include regulatory responsibilities, and the US Treasury’s Office of Financial Enforcement (OFE) was merged with FinCEN in October 1994. On 26th September 2002, after the passage of Title III of the USA Patriot Act, Treasury Order Numbered 180-01 [1] made FinCEN an official bureau within the Department of the Treasury.

Under Section 314(a) of the USA Patriot Act of 2001, Federal law enforcement agencies, through FinCEN, are empowered to reach out to more than 45,000 points of contact at over 27,000 financial institutions to locate bank accounts and transactions by persons that may be involved in terrorist financing and/or money laundering. This cooperative partnership between the financial community and law enforcement allows disparate items of information to be identified, centralised, and rapidly evaluated. FinCEN has its headquarters in Vienna, VA. See: www.fincen.gov [Internet].

• Full Disclosure: Public information requirements established by the Securities Act of 1933, the Securities Act of 1934, and the major US stock exchanges. Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, see their ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Full Disclosure’.

• Garn-St Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982: This Federal law was enacted in 1982, and authorised banks and savings institutions to offer a new type of account, known as the Money Market Deposit Account, which is a transaction account with no interest rate ceiling, to compete more effectively with money market mutual funds. The legislation also gave the Savings and Loan Associations the authority to extend commercial loans; and it gave Federal regulatory agencies the authority to approve, for the first time, interstate acquisitions of failed institutions and also savings institutions. Thus, the Act effectively created the environment for the subsequent enronisation of the Savings and Loan Associations, providing inter alia that:

(1): Savings and Loan Associations were authorised to extend commercial, corporate, business or agricultural loans up to 10% of assets after 1st January 1984;

(2): The deposit interest differential, allowing Savings and Loans and Savings Banks to offer rates on interest-bearing deposit accounts that were 0.25 of 1% higher than commercial banks, was lifted, as of January 1984;

(3): The Act authorised a new capital assistance program, the Net Worth Certificate Program, under which the US Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation would be able to purchase novel capital instruments called Net Worth Certificates from savings institutions with net worth-to-assets ratios of under 3%, and would subsequently redeem the certificates as they regained financial health;

(4): The Act permitted Savings and Loan Associations to offer checking accounts (demand deposit accounts) to individuals and business checking accounts to customers who had other accounts;

(5): Savings and Loans were authorised to increase their consumer lending from 20% to 30% of assets, and to expand their dealer lending and floor-plan loan financing;

(6): The Act raised the ceiling on direct investments by savings institutions in nonresidential real estate from 20% to 40% of assets, and also allowed investment of 10% of assets in education loans for any educational purpose, and up to 100% of assets in state and municipal bonds;

(7): The Act pre-empted State restrictions on enforcement by lenders of due-on-sale clauses in most mortgages for a three-year period ending on 15th October 1985, and further authorised State chartered lenders to offer the same kind of alternative mortgage deals that nationally chartered financial institutions were allowed to offer (opening the door to what became the ‘sub-prime’ crisis;

(8): The Act authorised the Comptroller of the Currency to charter Bankers’ Banks, or depository institutions owned by other banks;

(9): It made State chartered industrial banks eligible for Federal deposit insurance; and:

(10): It raised the legal lending limit for National Banks from 10% to 15% of their capital and surplus.

Source: Thomas P. Fitch, ‘Dictionary of Banking Terms’, 3rd Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 1997, c.v. ‘Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act’. See also: Financial Guarantee; Savings and Loan Deregulation.

• Glass-Steagall Act of 1933:
Legislation passed by Congress which:

(1): Authorised deposit insurance;

(2): Prohibited commercial banks from owning full-service brokerages (Securities Houses of Broker/Dealers);

(3): Prohibited banks from undertaking investment banking activities, for instance underwriting corporate securities or municipal revenue bonds;

(4): Was framed to insulate bank depositors from the risk involved when a bank deals in securities, in order to prevent banks from collapsing.

The Glass-Steagall Act was disabled by the Financial Services Modernization Act (a.k.a. the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, a.k.a. the Financial Services Modernisation Act). Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Glass-Steagall Act’.

• Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999:
See: Financial Services Modernization Act; Glass-Steagall Act of 1933.

• Guarantee: This entails the acceptance of responsibility for payment of a debt or for performance of some obligation if the person (entity) primarily liable fails to perform. The guarantor acquires a Contingent liability – namely, a potential liability that is not going to be recognised in accounts until the outcome becomes probable in the opinion of the company’s accountant. Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Guarantee’.

• Guaranteed Bond: A Bond that is characterised by the fact that the principal and interest are guaranteed by a firm other than the issuer. Both guaranteed stock and guaranteed bonds become, in effect, debenture (unsecured) bonds of the guarantor. Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, see: ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Guaranteed Bond’.

• High-Yield Investment Program:
A sophisticated scam perpetrated in many instances by corrupt elements of US intelligence and associates, masterminded inter alia by the arch-criminalist George H. W. Bush Sr. and his corrupt co-conspirator, Dr Alan Greenspan, the former Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board. Due to overuse of this term by the corrupt operators, it has become more or less synonymous with the generic term ‘fraudulent finance’, and with Ponzi and Pyramid Schemes (known as ‘pyramid-selling schemes’ in Britain). Experts are divided as to whether most High-Yield Investment Programs are Ponzi schemes, or not. Our own investigations suggest that colossal sums of stolen and duplicated funds (as explained in the Wantagate reports) were also used in these schemes, with stolen money being employed as purported back-up for promised and actual initial payouts. However these were never intended to occur beyond the first and perhaps the second layers, as the fraudulent finance techniques were used to entice retail investors into parting permanently with their funds, often after signing illegal Non-Disclosure Agreements.

High-yield investment programs were/are able to collect large amounts of money for the criminalist operators because initial payoffs to first and second round participants (financed from the stolen money in the case of the giga-scams presided over inter alia by the aforementioned master crooks) gave the scams momentum by spreading news of the sizeable initial payments by word of mouth – a situation that prevails as long as new participants can be found and/or old participants are foolish enough to leave their money in the schemes in the hope of gaining high rolled-up interest on their initial investments. Participants are usually attracted by some form of an appeal to emotion or faith that the program will help them to achieve rapid financial freedom. High-Yield Investment Programs may also mirror pyramid-selling schemes by offering current investors incentive commissions, for instance, 9% of investment by the participant on top of promised accruals, to recruit new investors.

Notorious documented High-Yield Investment Programs include:
(1): OSGold, founded as an e-gold ‘imitation’ in 2001 by David Reed, It folded in 2002. According to a lawsuit filed in US District Court in 2005, operators of OSGold may have made off with $230 million.

(2): The second largest documented High-Yield Investment Program was PIPS (People In Profit System), or Pure Investors. Started by Bryan Marsden in 2004, this scheme spanned more than 20 countries. PIPS was investigated by Bank Negara Malaysia in 2005, resulting in Marsden and his wife being charged in a Malaysian Court with some 97 counts of money laundering more than 77 Malaysian ringgit, equivalent to $20 million [New Straits Times, 11th October 2006]. Yet even after these charges were brought, many of Marsden’s followers continued to support him and to believe that they would be seeing their money in future. A similar rationalisation and denial syndrome can be observed in many other High-Yield Investment Program contexts.

(3): Indicted operators or schemes under investigation:
12DailyPro Autosurf (United States: Securities and Exchange Commission); Ginsystem, Inc. (Singapore: Commercial Affairs Department of Singapore); IT4US (United States); PlexPlay (Norway: HegnarOnline, in Norwegian); Solidinvestment (United States).

The foregoing provides merely a preliminary outline of the background to these scams, concerning which a considerable literature now exists. Promoting or perpetuating Ponzi schemes is a criminal offence punishable by jail terms or fines in most countries. The fact that the High-Yield Investment Program monitoring websites publicise disclaimers to the effect that the sites ‘do not promote the programs advertised’ on their websites, does not absolve the operators from criminal liability.

A disturbing feature of this environment is that a large number of High-Yield Investment Program participants persist in participating in further schemes long after they have already lost money in schemes that have either folded, or in respect of which the operator has disappeared. The fact that most of the publicised schemes are openly labelled scams on the relevant Internet monitor boards, even though their operators are themselves criminally liable, suggests that many participants are well aware of the risks they are running, know that the schemes are fraudulent, but choose to put money in them anyway, like addicted gamblers.

Former officials and members of the US armed forces may have been taken in by indications that the operators were officially connected or even that the scams in which they have participated were legitimate because of such alleged connections, including intelligence backgrounds.

The perpetrators play on the understandable anger felt by those who have been scammed, even though they were originally enticed by the US perpetrators into becoming prospectively felonious participants themselves, a condition which leads psychologically to the state of denial that in turn supposedly provides the perpetrators with the protection that they require.

However the operators, sitting on their stolen funds, may well fear the ultimate outcome, should manipulation of the expectations of the scammed investors cease to remain perversely ‘credible’, or those manipulative counterintelligence Psy-Ops initiatives are closed down.

• Hypothecation:
Originally a pledge of property as collateral for indebtedness without transfer of possession to the party extending the loan. This arrangement is common in the case of mortgages. The borrower retains legal ownership of the property but provides the lender with a lien over the property until the debt is paid off. Rehypothecation occurs when a broker pledges hypothecated client-owned securities in a margin account to secure a bank loan.

The fraudulent finance buried inside the ‘sub-prime’ mortgage nexus of scandals was explained in our report dated 26th December 2007 [www.worldreports.org: Archive]. As described in that report, the ‘homeowner’ has been scammed, either he or she has been coerced into signing several top copies of the same document, enabling the lending bank to claim ownership even though the bank has sold the mortgage on the basis of another top copy, for instance, to one of the co-conspiring Government-Sponsored Enterprises; or because the bank has alienated its ownership of the loan to the GSE in question, or has packaged the mortgage with other loans, as well as with worthless securities underpinned by no real asset, and has sold such packages on to parties (usually abroad) which have not performed due diligence.

In our report of 26th December 2007, we advised ALL US ‘homeowners’ facing foreclosure to let the Court know that the underlying contract has been requested from the bank. In most instances, the bank will be unable to supply it, because it has sold on the mortgage to the GSE, having therefore already passed on the risk. People facing foreclosure who ask for the contract can usually expect to be pleasantly surprised at the outcome of their cases.

• Internal Revenue Service (IRS):
The IRS is part of the US Treasury Department, and was officially created by Act of Congress on 1st July 1962. The IRS is responsible for administering and enforcing the Internal Revenue Code (IRC), as established under US Congressional authority, passed in 1913, to levy taxes on the income of individuals and corporations.

In 1939, the IRC was codified from the separate Internal Revenue laws. The IRS Code was further overhauled in 1954, with substantive new provisions being added concerning depreciation, the double taxation of dividends, research and experimental expenditures, carryback on operating losses, tax on ‘unreasonable’ accumulations of surplus, preferred stock bail-outs, and collapsible corporations and partnerships.

Of the enormous changes to the IRC implemented since 1954, the most important for the context we are dealing with here was the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act (TEFRA) of 1982 which, inter alia, required US taxpayers to report all sources of income, wherever it was earned anywhere in the world. It follows that all receipts received by American taxpayers since the passage of this Act which have not been reported to the Internal Revenue Service are taxable, which means that all US taxpayer holdings in offshore accounts that have not been declared for tax are liable for tax and penalties. Main source: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, for The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, 13th February 2002; see also: Munn, ‘Encyclopedia of Banking and Finance’, page 589.

• Interlocking Directorates:
These reference commercial banks or savings institutions which have individuals on their Boards of Directors who further serve on the Board or Boards of one or more unaffiliated competitor(s) operating in the same marketplace. The US Financial Institutions Regulatory Act of 1978 prohibits management interlocks by banks operating in the same Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). But it exempts smaller banks, and also permits interlocks of up to 49% of a bank’s management officers. Source: Thomas P. Fitch, ‘Dictionary of Banking Terms’, 3rd Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 1997, c.v. ‘Interlocking Directorates’.

• International Banking Act of 1978:
This legislation essentially places American branches and agencies of foreign banks under the supervision of US bank regulators. The provisions included: authorising the Comptroller of the Currency to license and supervise a foreign bank; authorising Federal bank agencies to examine US offices of any foreign bank; subjecting any foreign bank branch or holding company to the Bank Holding Company Act, just like any US bank holding company; and imposing reserve requirements and Federal deposit insurance coverage for foreign banks to the same extent as the US member banks. Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, for The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, 13th February 2002; see: Munn, ‘Encyclopedia of Banking and Finance’, page 563.

• International Banking Act of 1987:
Created a Federal regulatory structure similar to the Federal Reserve to examine the assets and liabilities of foreign banks on-site, and to ensure similar licensing and regulation of non-banking activities of foreign banks. It also required the Federal Reserve to maintain the same competitive equity requirements for foreign banks as for US member banks. Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, 13th February 2002; Munn, ‘Encyclopedia of Banking and Finance’, page 563.

• Investment Banking:
The sale and distribution of a new offering of securities, carried out by a financial intermediary (an investment banker), who purchases securities from the issuer as principal, and assumes the risk of distributing securities to investors. Source: Thomas P. Fitch, ‘Dictionary of Banking Terms’, the 3rd Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 1997, c.v. ‘Investment Banking’.

• Investment Company Act of 1940:
This Act requires that all companies which offer securities or investment advice to the public must register with the Securities and Exchange Commission. For instance, any advisory corporation that offers investment advice (not straight reporting, but advice) must register with the SEC. For those who may be interested, this explains why this service does not offer advice and will not respond to the frequent requests for financial investment advice that we routinely receive. Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, for The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, 13th February 2002; Munn, ‘Encyclopedia of Banking and Finance’, page 589.

• Kakocracy: Rule by the worst elements of society exclusively in their own interests and with cynical and permanent disregard for the interests of anyone else.

• Kleptocracy: The ascendancy of a rapacious, thieving class of co-conspiratorial bandits protected by public office that is bent on maximising the open-ended potential of their office and power for personal enrichment and for the furtherance of clandestine agendas divorced from the interests of the people and the constituencies they are supposed to serve. This term is used in these reports even though kleptomania is strictly defined in the Oxford Senior Dictionary as ‘an uncontrollable tendency to steal things, with no desire to use or profit by them’.

The definition is interesting, because it reveals an element of madness that is clearly inherent in the behaviour of the criminalist snakes identified in these reports. This madness can be observed in the rapacious behaviour, for instance, of the arch-criminalist DVD godfather, George Bush Sr., whose avarice for other people’s money notoriously knows no bounds, despite his age, indicating that he chooses to remain unaware of his own mortality: a characteristic of greed which can only be described as symptomatic of mental derangement.

• Leverage, Financial and Investment:

(1): Financial Leverage: Debt in relation to equity in a firm’s capital structure (such as long-term debt, preferred stock, and shareholders’ equity. Financial leverage is measured by the debt-to-equity ratio: the more long-term debt there is, the greater the financial leverage.

(2): Investment leverage: A means of enhancing return or value without increasing investment: for instance, by buying securities on margin with borrowed money. Extra leverage may be achievable if the leveraged security is convertible into common stock.

(3): Note: Option contracts provide leverage, with NO borrowings, offering the prospect of high return for little or no investment.

Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Leverage’.

• Maloney Act of 1938: An amendment to the Securities Act of 1933 which created the US National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD). The legislation promoted the organisation of member securities dealers as a Self-Regulating Organizations (SRO) under the supervision of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to institutionalise a code of ethics in the securities industry and its enforcement nationwide. NASD members are known as Broker/Dealers, since they represent both clients that buy and/or sell securities, and themselves, as a principal, when they are engaged in underwriting and/or selling a stock or bond issue directly to the public. The NASD is the only firm operating under the Maloney Act. See: NASD: National Association of Securities Dealers. Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, 13th February 2002; NASD, ‘National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.: Manual, April 1998, page 3171.

• Margin Accounts: See Mark to [The] Market and: Margin Requirements

• Margin Requirements:
The minimum amount that a client must deposit in the form of cash or eligible securities in a Margin Account, as is spelled out under Regulation T of the Federal Reserve Board. Regulation T requires a minimum of $2,000 or 50% of the purchase price of eligible securities bought on margin or 50% of the proceeds of short sales. Also referred to as the Initial Margin. Primary source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Margin Requirement’.

• Margin Security:
This is a security that may be bought or sold in a Margin Account. Regulation T of the Federal Reserve Board defines margin securities as:

(1): Any registered security (a listed security or a security having unlisted trading privileges);

(2): Any OTC margin stock or OTC margin bond, which are defined as any unlisted security that the Federal Reserve Board (FRB) periodically identifies as having the investor interest, marketability, disclosure and solid financial position of a listed security;

(3): Any OTC security designated as qualified for trading in the National Market System under a plan approved by the Securities and Exchange Commission;

(4): Any mutual fund or unit investment trust registered under the Investment company Act of 1940. Other securities that are not exempt securities must be transacted in cash. Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Margin Security’.

• Mark to [The] Market:
Adjustment of the valuation of a security or portfolio to reflect current (prevailing) market values. For instance, Margin Accounts are marked to market in order to ensure compliance with financial maintenance requirements. (In UK parlance, the definite article is dropped). Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Mark To The Market’.

• Money laundering:
Passing illegally acquired funds or taxable funds on which no tax has been paid inter alia with the intent to evade tax and to hide the funds from relevant national authorities. American legislation addressing money-laundering includes:

(1): The Bank Secrecy Act of 1970;
(2): The Money Laundering Control Act of 1986;
(3): The anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988;
(4): The Annunzio-Wylie Money Laundering Act of 1992;
(5): The Money Laundering Suppression Act of 1944; and:
(6): The Terrorism Prevention Act of 1996.

The Money Laundering Control Act of 1986 made money laundering a Federal crime corresponding to the previously passed Organized Crime Control Act of 1970. See separate entries in Glossary.
Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, 13th February 2002; Munn, Encyclopedia of Banking & Finance, page 109; also: John Madinger and Sydney A. Zalopany, ‘Money Laundering: A Guide for Criminal Investigators’, New York, CEC Press, LLC, 1999, page 43; Howard Abadinsky, ‘Organized Crime’, 6th Edition, Belmont: Wadsworth/Thompson Learning, Inc., 2000, page 411; FINCEN, ‘The Global Fight Against Money Laundering’, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FINCEN, 1999, available from: http:// www.occ.treas.gov/launder (Internet).

• Money Laundering Control Act of 1986:
This legislation made money laundering a Federal crime corresponding to the previously passed Organized Crime Control Act of 1970. See: Money laundering.

• Money Laundering Suppression Act of 1994: Legislation which required that ‘any person who owns or controls a money services business’ must register with the Secretary of the Treasury. Source: FINCEN, ‘The Global Fight Against Money Laundering’, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FINCEN, 1999, available from: http:// www.occ.treas.gov/launder (Internet).

• Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MRSB): See Self-Regulatory Organization (SRO), below.

• NASD: National Association of Securities Dealers:
A non-profit organisation that was formed under the joint sponsorship of the Investment Bankers’ Conference and the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in order to comply with the requirements of the Maloney Act. NASD Members include virtually all investment banking houses and firms dealing in the Over-the-Counter Market.

Operating under the supervision of the SEC, the basic purposes of the NASD are to:
(1): Standardise practices in the field;
(2): Establish high moral and ethical standards in the securities trading business;
(3): Provide a representative body to consult with the Government and investors on matters of common interest;
(4): Establish and enforce fair and equitable rules of securities trading;
(5): Establish a disciplinary body capable of enforcing the above provisions.

The NASD requires members to maintain ‘quick assets’ in excess of current liabilities at all times.

Within the NASD, a special Investment Companies Department concerns itself with the problems of investment companies and has the responsibility of reviewing companies’ sales literature in that segment of the securities industry.

Michael C. Cottrell, M.S., has described the NASD’s contemporary responsibilities as including the following (to be read in conjunction of the foregoing information):

(1): Nationwide inspections of member firms;
(2): Provision of centralised computerised surveillance of the trading of NASD Automated Quotations, of its sister company NASDAQ;
(3): Enforcement of Securities and Exchange Commission rules and regulations, as well as of its own rules for members;
(4): To review underwriting arrangements for securities offered to the public;
(5): To perform and monitor qualification examinations of personnel of members; and:
(6): To coordinate and cooperate with the SEC, the States and with other Federal agencies.

The responsibilities of the SEC do NOT include trading on own account [see text], a gross abuse of which it has been and continues to be accused. This abuse is inconsistent with its responsibilities as a regulator and is considered by experts to be a scandalous development. See also: Financial Industry Regulator Authority (FINRA). Sources: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘NASD’; Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, 13th February 2002; Munn, ‘Encyclopedia of Banking & Finance’, page 696.

• National Market System: See: Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

• Non-Disclosure agreement:
An illegal document which, if signed by a participant to a transaction, precludes any recourse to official regulators for protection after the participant has predictably been scammed, and likewise precludes any legal recourse.

• Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC):
This is the chief regulator of US National Banks. The Comptroller of the Currency is appointed by the President of the United States for a five-year term, with Senate confirmation. The OCC, the supervisory agency covering nationally chartered banks, is the oldest US Federal regulator of financial institutions. The Comptroller of the Currency also serves as one of the three Directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Source: Thomas P. Fitch, ‘Dictionary of Banking Terms’, 3rd Ed., Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, 1997, c.v. ‘Comptroller of the Currency’.

• Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS):
This US Federal agency was established under the Financial Institutions Reform, recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 to examine and supervise Savings and Loan Associations (‘thrifts’) and Federal Savings Banks. It replaced the Federal Home Loan Bank Board as the primary regulator of State chartered and Federally chartered savings institutions. It is a bureau within the US Treasury Department. The Director and Chief Operating Officer (CEO) of OTS is appointed by the President of the United States with Senate confirmation, and is also one of five directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). The fact that the OTS is structured within the US Department of the Treasury parallels the position with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. Source: Thomas P. Fitch, ‘Dictionary of Banking Terms’, 3rd Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 1997, c.v. ‘Office of Thrift Supervision’.

• ‘Open outcry’:
A non-electronic method of communication between professionals on a stock or futures exchange involving shouting and the use of hand signals to transfer information primarily about buy and sell orders. The component of the trading floor where this takes place is often called the pit. The best-known ‘open outcry’ markets in the United States remain the New York Mercantile Exchange, the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, the Chicago Board of Trade, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, and the Minneapolis Grain Exchange. In the United Kingdom, the London Metal Exchange (LME) still makes use of the ‘open outcry’ method. Many traders prefer the ‘open outcry’ system on the basis that physical contact in the pit allows traders to speculate as to the motives or intentions of buyer/seller, so that positions can be adjusted accordingly.

• Organized Crime Control Act of 1970:
See Money Laundering Control Act of 1986; and Money laundering.

• Over-the-Counter:
(1): Of a security: A security that is not listed and traded on an organised exchange;
(2): Of a market: A market in which securities transactions are conducted through a telephone and computer network connecting dealers in stocks and bonds, rather than, as classically, on the floor of an exchange. Over-the-counter stocks are traditionally those of smaller companies that do not meet the listing requirements of the New York Stock Exchange or the American Stock Exchange.

In recent years, however, many companies that qualify for listing have chosen to remain with Over-the-Counter trading, because they consider that the system of multiple trading by many dealers is preferable to the centralised trading approach of the New York Stock Exchange, where all trading in a stock has to go through the Exchange specialist in that stock. The rules for Over-the-Counter stock trading are written and enforced largely by the US National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD), which is self-regulating (see NASD).

Prices of Over-the-Counter stocks are published in daily newspapers, with the National Market System stocks listed separately from the rest of the Over-the-Counter market. Over-the-Counter markets incorporate markets in both Government and municipal bonds. Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Over-the-Counter (OTC)’.

• Pass-Throughs:
Pass-Through Securities: Pools of fixed-income securities that are backed by a package of assets. A servicing intermediary collects monthly payments from issuers and, after deducting a fee, remits or passes them through to the holders of the pass-through security. This device is also known as a ‘pass-through certificate’ or a ‘pay-through security’. The most common type of pass-through is a mortgage-backed certificate, whereby ‘homeowners’’ payments pass from the original lending bank through a Government agency or investment bank to the investors (per the supposed model).

• Ponzi Scheme:
A scam designed to entrap the unwary investor, as described in the following analyses published on this website [see Archive) and in International Currency Review:
(1): ‘Treasongate Update: Omega ‘Ponzi Game’ scams, 13th January 2007;
(2): ‘Treasongate Background: Intel Ponzi Scams’, 22nd January 2007.

So-called ‘lending programs’, a.k.a. High-Yield Investment Programs operating along Ponzi or Pyramid Scheme lines promoted clandestinely inter alia by corrupt elements of the criminalist US intelligence community (including the CIA’s OMEGA OPS scams) will comply with none of these stringent regulations and requirements, and are accordingly, by definition, ALL ILLEGAL IN THE UNITED STATES. This may well be the basis upon which non-payment of these accounts has been predicated. The question therefore arises: why have these illegal schemes been so widespread, having given rise to a colossal constituency of the American ‘broken hearted’, who have been scammed in one way or another but who have been clinging to the hope, like Rip van Winkel, that they, their family trusts or their restless associations of ‘the scammed’, will finally be paid out one sunny day far out into the future?

The generic answer to this question is that the cynical, criminalised fraudster élite, headed by the crooks controlling and inside the intelligence community, have taken precautions to instal their own corrupt operatives within and in control of certain enforcement institutions, including the SEC.

Enron and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) have been used to proliferate and perpetuate these illegal securities scams: indeed, it is from operations such as the CIA’s nefarious Enron scamming system, that the derivatives overhang and crisis have mainly arisen.

As a consequence, blind US official (Federal and State) eyes have been turned to what has been going on, the securities regulations have not been enforced with respect to such illegal Ponzi frauds, and the old system whereby anyone involved with trading securities was blackballed for life if caught engaged in irregular activities, has been moribund since the 1970s.

When an uncorrupt SEC Commissioner tried, quite recently, to enforce the regulations, he was removed from his post on some typically trumped-up pretext or other. In other words, the wolves are and have been in charge of the chicken coops.

So key enforcers are, as matters stand, co-conspirators in the despicable, hitherto (but since the Wantagate and the subsequent exposures, no longer) proliferating intelligence community-driven Ponzi Game operations that have devastated an unknown number of American families – with the proceeds channelled through corrupt participating banks into offshore accounts. See Appendix to this report for the narrative of the original Ponzi fraud.

• Principal:
(1): The person with highest authority in a business, or a person for whom another acts as an agent.
(2): A capital sum as distinguished from the interest on it.
(3): See also: Principal, of a Securities firm.
Source: Oxford Senior Dictionary, Oxford University Press, 1984.

• Principal, of a Securities firm:
An NASD member firm is directed by a Registered Principal, who can be the sole proprietor, an officer, a partner, a manager of an office of Supervisory Jurisdiction, and/or a Director of the firm.

The Registered Principal is answerable for all actions taken on behalf of the firm, and all trades submitted by the firm, and all actions of its registered representatives, subject to the rules and regulations of the NASD, SEC and the State of registration. The Registered Principal must pass the Series 24 (General Securities Principal) and also the Series 7 (General Securities Representative) Examinations conducted by the NASD, and must pass the written procedures and oral interview before assuming this position for the firm. Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, the thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, on 13th February 2002; NASD, ‘National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.: Manual’, April 1998, page 3171; NASD, NASD Compliance Check List, Gaithersburg: NASD MediaSource, 1992.

• Principle:
A basic truth or a general law or doctrine used as a basis of reasoning or a guide to action or behaviour; a fundamental truth or doctrine, as of law; a comprehensive rule or doctrine which furnishes a basis or origin for others; a settle of action, procedure or legal determination. Also defined as: a truth so clear that it cannot be proved or contradicted unless by a proposition which is still clearer. Sources: Oxford Senior Dictionary, Oxford University Press, 1984.; Henry Campbell Black, M.A., ‘Black’s Law Dictionary’, Revised 4th Edition, St Paul, West Publishing Company, 1968, s.v., ‘Principle’.

• Prudent Man Rule:
This is the fundamental American principle that is applicable in respect of professional money management, originally asserted by Judge Samuel Putnum in 1830 as follows:

‘Those with responsibility to invest money for others should act with prudence, discretion, intelligence, and regard for the safety of capital as well as income’ [1830 Massachusetts Court decision: Harvard College v. Armory]. The Prudent Man Rule directs trustees ‘to observe how men of prudence, discretion and intelligence manage their own affairs, not in regard to speculation, but in regard to the management and disposition of their funds, considering the probable income as well as the probable safety of the capital to be invested’. Investments in risky Ponzi and Pyramid Schemes and in ‘programs’ such as those referenced, typically breach the Prudent Man Rule.

• Public Offering Price: See: ‘Underwrite’ below.

• Pyramid Scheme or scam: See: Ponzi Scheme.

• Registered Principal: See: Principal, of a Securities firm.

• Registered Representative, of a Securities firm:
This officer is licensed and authorised to purchase and/or sell stocks, bonds, options, limited partnerships, tax shelters, mutual funds, and variable annuities on behalf of a customer or the firm.

The Registered Representative must have qualified by passing the Series 7 (General Securities Representative) Examination and must be registered with the firm as an authorised representative. Additionally, all licensed representatives must have passed the NASD Series 63 (Uniform State Law) AntiFraud Examination, and must register with each State the firm intends to operate in.

Source: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA, 13th February 2002; NASD, ‘National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.: Manual’, April 1998, page 3201; NASD, ‘NASD Compliance Check List’.

• Risk:
Uncertainty as to whether an asset will earn an expected rate of return, or whether a loss may occur: Various categories of risk apply in the securities market environment:

(1): Delivery risk: The possibility that the buyer or seller of an instrument or foreign exchange may be unable to meet obligations at maturity.

(2): Liquidity risk: The possibility that a bank may have insufficient cash or short-term marketable assets to meet the needs of depositors and borrowers.

(3): Settlement risk: The possibility that the failure of a major bank, or its inability to honour payment commitments in a wire transfer network, could have a domino effect on other institutions, causing similar failures elsewhere. In the United Kingdom, this is usually referred to as ‘systemic risk’.

Source: Thomas P. Fitch, ‘Dictionary of Banking Terms’, 3rd Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 1997, s.v. ‘Risk’.

• Risk Free Asset:
A non-callable, default-free bond such as a short-term Government security. While such an asset is not risk-free in terms of inflation, it is (given that the Government can always print money) risk-free in a dollar sense. Source: Jerry M. Rosenberg, ‘The Essential Dictionary of Investing & Finance’, New York, Barnes & Noble, Inc., 2004, s.v. ‘Risk Free Asset’.

• Rule of Law, A (indefinite article):
The way this may be defined in the present context is to begin with the word ‘Rule’. A ‘Rule’ is an established standard, guide or regulation, especially a regulation set up by an official authority. It prescribes or directs action or forbearance. The term also covers a regulation made by a Court of Justice or a public office with reference to the conduct of business therein. Hence, ‘A Rule of Law’ encompasses a legal principle, or a body of legal principles, of general application, sanctioned by the recognition of authorities, and usually expressed in the form of a maxim or logical proposition. The word ‘Rule’ is used because in doubtful or unforeseen circumstances it is a guide or norm for the decision of those concerned (Toullier, tit. Prel. No. 17).

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

• Rule of Law, The (definite article): Note that the foregoing diverges from ‘The Rule of Law’. The common interpretation of The Rule of Law is that ‘the Law rules’ or is paramount: in other words that everyone in society, including the Government, operates within the ordered framework of the Law, precluding arbitrary behaviour. It is important to distinguish between the indefinite and the definite article here, because ‘Rule of Law’ has a different meaning, depending on which is used.

• Savings and Loan Deregulation:
The Garn-St Germain Act of 1982 cut Savings and Loan Associations loose from the tight girdle of ‘old-fashioned’, ‘restrictive’ Federal legislation, opening the door wide to the ransacking and enronisation of the ‘thrift’ banking sector, which in turn laid the groundwork for the subsequent giga-financial scandals that are now being exposed. President Reagan unveiled this legislation at a Rose Garden presentation and signing ceremony on 15th October 1982, before an audience of 200 people. Billed as a major piece of deregulation legislation, this law represented nothing less than the US criminal kleptocracy’s charter to ransack and pillage the middle and working classes. For 50 years, American families had relied on Savings and Loan Associations to finance their homes; but Reagan now pronounced that ‘outmoded regulations left over from the 1930s Great Depression’ had been preventing thrift institutions from competing in the complex, sophisticated financial marketplace of the free-wheeling 1980s.

When signing the bill with a flourish, Reagan pronounced: ‘All in all, I think we’ve hit the jackpot’.

But those who ‘hit the jackpot’ turned out, predictably, to be the organised criminal kleptocracy that had infiltrated official structures, could immediately mobilise criminal funds to buy their way into thrift institutions, and were embedded inside the corrupted US intelligence community. A new breed of swashbuckling Savings and Loan executive sprang up on cue, like weeds, out of the rich soil fertilised at the October 1982 Rose Garden ceremony.

Among their leaders was the notorious Neil Bush, then-Vice President George H. W. Bush’s son, who became a Director of Silverado Savings and Loan, of Denver, CO, and Andrew Cuomo, the son of New York Governor Mario Cuomo, who tried to buy Financial Security Savings of Delray Beach, Florida. The former Governor of Illinois, Dan Walker, bought First American Savings of Oak Brook, Illinois. Within 18 months of the Rose Garden signing, Edwin Gray, Chairman of the Federal Home Loan Bank Board (FHLBB) was provided with a grim, classified report and video, which revealed a swathe of abandoned, half-finished condominium units financed by Empire Savings and Loan of Mesquite, Texas: this was when the FHLBB was made aware of the fact that organised criminal cadres had immediately taken advantage of the deregulation of the Savings and Loans, and that an open-ended financial implosion was under way as a consequence. The enronisation of the US thrift industry was an ‘inside job’ from the outset. Source: ‘Inside Job: The Looting of America’s Savings and Loans’, Stephen Pizzo, Mary Fricker and Paul Muolo, McGraw-Hill Publishing Company, New York, 1989, ISBN 0-07-050230-7.

• Securities Act of 1933: This Act, which followed the 1929 crash and the Great Depression, was framed in accordance with the interstate commerce clause of the US Constitution, and requires that any offer for sale of securities using the means and instrumentalities of interstate commerce must be registered under the terms of the 1933 Act. Prior to the 1933 Act, the public regulation of securities in the United States had been governed mainly by State laws (commonly referred to as the ‘Blue Sky’ laws). With passage of the 1933 Act, the patchwork of existing State securities laws was left in place, to supplement the Federal legislation. A crucial dimension of the law is that the 1933 Act makes it illegal to commit fraud in conjunction with the offer or sale of securities.

Exemptions to the registration process under the Act are extremely tightly prescribed.

Hence, except for extremely narrowly defined offerings (for instance, to groups of no more than 35 investors), securities offered or sold to the general public in the United States must be registered by the filing of a registration statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The prospectus for the offering is generally filed in conjunction with the registration statement. The SEC itself prescribes the relevant forms on which an issuer’s securities must be registered, and these forms call, inter alia, for:

(1): A description of the issuer’s properties and business;
(2): A description of the securities to be offered for sale;
(3): Information about the management of the issuer;
(4): Information about the securities (if other than common stock); and:
(5): Financial statements certified by independent accountants.

It is illegal for an issuer to lie or to omit material facts from a registration statement or prospectus. Secondary market transactions may take place without registration. Under Rule 144A, resales of restricted securities between ‘Qualified Institutional Buyers’ (QIBs) are exempted, thus creating a secondary market in restricted securities among the largest Wall Street houses.

• Securities Acts Amendments of 1975: See: Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

• Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC): A Federal agency created under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, to administer the following legislation:
(1): The Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
(2): The Securities Act of 1933;
(3): The Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935;
(4): The Trust Indenture Act of 1939;
(5): The Investment Advisor Act of 1940; and:
(6): The Securities Acts Amendments of 1975, which ratified free market determination of brokers’ commissions and gave the SEC authority to oversee the development of a National Market System.

The SEC has five Commissioners, appointed by the President of the United States on a rotating basis for five-year terms. The statutes administered by the SEC are designed to:
(1): Promote full disclosure;
(2): Protect the investing public against malpractice in the securities markets;
(3): Require all issues of securities offered in interstate commerce or through the mails, to be registered with the SEC;
(4): Supervise all national securities exchanges and associations;
(5): Supervise investment companies, investment counselors and advisers, Over-the-Counter brokers and dealers, and virtually all other individuals and firms operating in the investment field.

Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘SEC‘.

• Securities Exchange Act of 1934: This legislation, which governs the US securities markets, was enacted on 6th June 1934. The Act:
(1): Outlawed misrepresentation and manipulation, and other abusive practices in respect of the issuance and marketing of securities.
(2): Created the Securities and Exchange Commission to enforce the Securities Acts 1933 and 1934.
The primary stipulations of the 1934 Securities Act are as follows:
(1): Registration of all securities listed on stock exchanges, and periodic disclosures by issuers of financial status and changes in condition.
(2): Regular disclosure of holdings and transactions of ‘INSIDERS’ (officers and directors of a corporation and those who control at least 10% of equity securities).
(3): Solicitation of proxies enabling shareholders to vote for or against policy proposals.
(4): Registration with the SEC of stock exchanges and brokers and dealers to ensure their adherence to SEC rules through self-regulation.
(5): Surveillance by the SEC of trading practices on stock exchanges and Over-the-Counter (OTC) markets, to minimise the possibility of insolvency among brokers and dealers.
(6): Regulation of Margin Requirements for securities purchased on credit. These requirements are set by the Federal Reserve Board.
(7): The provision of subpoena power for use by the SEC in investigations of possible violations and in enforcement actions.

Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Securities Exchange Act 1934’.

• Self-Regulatory Organization (SRO):
These are Federal organisations established to enforce fair, ethical and efficient practices in the securities and commodities futures industries. The practices are referred to as ‘industry rules’ to distinguish them from regulatory agencies such as the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) or the Federal Reserve Board. SROs include:
(1): All the national securities and commodities exchanges; and:
(2): The National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD), representing:
• All firms operating in the Over-the-Counter market; and:
• The Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB), established under the US Securities Acts Amendments of 1975 to regulate brokers, dealers and banks dealing in municipal securities. The NASD enforces the rules promulgated by the MSRB with bank regulatory agencies. Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘SRO’.

• Settlement:
(1): Of Securities: The conclusion of a securities transaction in which a broker/dealer pays for securities bought for a customer or delivers securities sold, being paid from the buyer’s broker.
(a): Regular Way Delivery and Settlement is completed on the third full business day following the date of the transaction for stocks (called the Settlement Date).
(b): Government Bonds, and Options, are settled on the next business day.
(2): Of Futures/Options: Represents the final price, established by Exchange Rule, for prices prevailing during the closing period and upon which Futures Contracts are Marked to The Market. Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Settlement’.

• Sherman AntiTrust Act:
Passed in July 1890, this legislation described in general terms, without the benefit of definitions, activities that were viewed as monopolistic and were therefore illegal. Many of the definitions had already been determined by case law involving court actions by employers combating the activities of trade unions. The Act forbade ‘every contract, combination… or conspiracy in the restraint of trade or commerce’. Sources: Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., ‘Elite Power & Capital Markets’, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, for The Administration of Justice Department, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA 13th February 2002; Jack C. Plano and Milton Greenberg, ‘The American Political Dictionary’, 4th Edition, Hinsdale, the Dryden Press, 1976, page 328.

• Story’s First Law:
‘All organisations are run for the benefit of those running the organisation’.

• Story’s Second Law:
‘The interests of the supplier and the consumer diverge’.

• Story’s Third Law: ‘Sooner or later, all operations and covers are blown’.

• Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 (TEFRA):
Federal legislation which reversed some earlier tax reductions, established a 10% withholding tax applicable to dividends, repealed accelerated appreciation deductions and provided that American taxpayers must report all sources of income, wherever it was earned anywhere in the world.

It follows that all receipts received by US taxpayers since the passage of this Act which have not been reported to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) are taxable, which means that all US taxpayer holdings in offshore accounts that have not been declared for tax are liable for US tax and also for penalties. It also means that ‘program’ participants expecting their funds eventually to be paid into offshore accounts may not only be in denial about the fact that they have been scammed, but may have also allowed themselves to become co-conspirators in tax evasion with the perpetrators of the scams themselves. It is standard criminalist practice to procure that targeted victims are enticed into compromising themselves by the perpetrators.

• Terrorism Prevention Act of 1996:
This legislation added terrorism-related crimes as predicates for money-laundering. Madinger and Sydney A. Zalopany, ‘Money Laundering: A Guide for Criminal Investigators’, New York: CRC Press, LLC, 1999, page 43.

• Transparency:
(1): In Financial Reporting: Ease of understanding, made possible by FULL, CLEAR and TIMELY disclosure of relevant information.
(2): In Securities Transactions, price transparency means access to information concerning the depth of the market that would enable detection of fraud or manipulation. Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Transparency’.

• Trust Indenture Act of 1939:
This legislation supplemented the Securities Act of 1933, requiring the appointment of a suitably independent and qualified trustee to act for the benefit of the holders of securities. The legislation specified certain substantive provisions for such a trust indenture that must be entered into by the issuer and the trustee. The law is administered by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

• Truth in Lending Act:
Federal legislation which established disclosure rules that lenders must observe in dealings with borrowers. The Act stipulates that consumers must be told annual percentage rates, potential total cost, and any special loan terms. Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Consumer Protection Act of 1968’.

• Truth in Lending Act (TILA) of 1968:
This legislation is designed to protect consumers involved in all kinds of credit transactions, including (and especially) mortgages. It is contained in Title 1 of the Consumer Credit Protection Act as amended. The purpose of the legislation is to promote the informed use of consumer credit by requiring disclosures about its terms, and gives consumers the right to cancel certain credit transactions that may involve a lien on the consumer’s principal home. It regulates certain credit card practices, and provides a mechanism for the fair and timely resolution of credit disputes. The law requires the uniform and standardised disclosure of costs and charges so that consumers can shop around (thereby promoting competition). The legislation further prohibits certain practices associated with credit secured on a consumer’s principal dwelling. The lender must disclose to the borrower the annual percentage rate charged (APR), which must reflect the cost of the credit to the consumer. The legislation proved ineffective in curbing the abuses which were highlighted as a consequence of the corruption exposures, because many mortgage lenders failed to comply with the Act’s disclosure provisions, and were not prosecuted or penalised accordingly.

• Underwrite:
To assume the risk of buying a NEW ISSUE of securities from an issuing corporation or Government entity and reselling the securities to the public, either directly or through dealers. The underwriter makes a profit on the difference between the price paid to the issuer and the Public Offering Price, called the Underwriting Spread. Source: John Downes and Jordan Elliot Goodman, ‘Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms’, 7th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2006, s.v. ‘Underwrite’.

• Underwriting Spread: See ‘Underwrite’ above.

• Vault Cash Act of 1959:
This legislation modified the reserve requirements of Federal Reserve member banks to allow the banks to count their vault cash, in excess of specified percentages of their deposits, as part of their required reserves. This was one of innumerable retrograde modifications since the Second World War which have facilitated covert financial operations, to the detriment of global financial stability and integrity. Source: Munn, ‘Encyclopedia of Banking & Finance’, page 589.

APPENDIX:

THE ORIGINAL PONZI SCHEME EXPLAINED:

Charles Ponzi, an immigrant from Italy to Boston, MA, made millions of dollars for a brief period, by exploiting his shrewd observation that while national currencies were fluctuating wildly in 1920, just after the end of the First World War, the Universal Postal Union (UPU) issued coupons which were always worth a given amount of postage stamps.

In those days, European refugees were flocking to the United States, Canada and Brazil; and often, their only contact with their families and friends back home was an occasional letter, enclosing a few dollars. The Universal Postal Union arranged to move the millions of postwar letters, business documents and messages across national borders by issuing Postal Reply Coupons.

You bought a Postal Reply Coupon in your country of residence, and enclosed it with your letter. Your mother, once she had received the letter, exchanged the Postal Reply Coupon for stamps at her local post office.

Charles Ponzi told friends in Boston: ‘Everybody’s heard of the Postal Union. They print coupons like these I’m holding here: Postal Reply Coupons. You can send a letter home, or anywhere in the world, with these coupons. And you can trade this coupon for a stamp in any country. I send my mother coupons with every letter that I write home’.

‘Now, in cooperation with certain large businesses in our city, I am making a fortune on the Postal Reply Coupon. Stocks are too risky. Forget it. And bonds, what are they paying these days? Maybe six percent? Savings accounts at Tremont Trust, they’ll give you four and a half cents on the dollar. Give them $100 and they’ll give you back $104.50. I can beat that into the ground’, Ponzi insisted, beating his cane against the floor. ‘My investors get 50 cents on the dollar. Place a hundred dollars with my Securities Exchange Company, and you take out $150. Put that $150 in, you’ll get back $225. That’s right, in six months, you can more than double your money’.

How could he pay 50%, when banks couldn’t even manage to pay 5%? ‘Exchange rates’, Mr Ponzi explained. ‘Every morning I go down and check to see how the lira is doing against the US dollar. Usually you get five lire for a dollar. This morning I checked, and with the war just ended, it takes 20 lire to the dollar’. While currency rates were bouncing around like popcorn, Mr Ponzi explained, the Postal Reply Coupon always bought one stamp. Here’s what I do’.

‘I send my cousin in Parma, Italy, $1.0. He exchanges the dollar for lire. With the 20 lire ( or 2,000 centesimi), he can buy 66 Postal Reply Coupons (worth 30 centesimi each, the cost of a letter-sized stamp in Italy). Back in the United States, each of the coupons buys one stamp, at face value five cents. I redeem all 66 coupons for $3.30 worth of stamps. The magic happens in the exchange rate. In America, my dollar buys 20 Postal Coupons. But if I exchange the dollar for Italian lire, and buy the coupons in Italy, then return and buy the stamps in America, I get $3.30 worth of stamps for that same $1.0. My profit margin is 230%’.

‘Yeah, but $3.30 worth of stamps is still stamps’, complained an attentive listener.

‘I know’, said Ponzi. ‘So I sell the stamps at a 10% discount through my contacts with the larger firms downtown in our city. Deducting the discount, I’ve got $3.0 cash now, from the $1.0 that I started out with. Now, let’s say, I got that dollar from you. I will pay you back your dollar, plus 50 cents of interest. Since I just sold $3.0 worth of stamps, I have a dollar and 50 cents for myself. I’m going to spend a third of that on my offices and processing overheads, and a third on commissions and bonuses to my sales people; and then, ladies and gentlemen, I’m going to pocket the other third and take my wife for a stroll’.

THE ORIGINAL FALSE PROSPECTUS IS SOON ABANDONED, AND REPLACED BY… ZILCH
This was the essence of the original Ponzi scheme. Note that in this description, Ponzi starts out by exploiting the fluctuations of exchange rates, and the lack of arbitrage; and note that, by the end of the explanation, he is simply NOW offering 50% interest, which he pays out to claimants out of the additional funds he has received from other investors who are likewise anticipating a 50% return on their investments, within a short space of time.

The germ of the idea was derived from the foreign exchange market; but once Ponzi has realised that people will pour their money his way if they are promised a 50% return, he can abandon his elaborate explanation (his ‘prospectus’) of the exploitation of exchange rate fluctuations and the tedious task of shipping, receiving, handling and exchanging Postal Reply Coupons, which gave him the ‘easy money’ idea in the first place.

In other words, his sales pitch is no more than a now redundant, expendable illustration – a false prospectus which disguises the fact that he is really promoting a pyramid selling operation. For he has realised that all his investors care about is receiving 50% on their money. How this is to be achieved does not normally concern them.

ALL THEY WANT IS A HUGE RETURN ON THEIR MONEY.

By December 1920, Charles Ponzi was matching old money with ever larger amounts of new money. In May 1921 alone, almost $500,000 of new money poured into the Securities Exchange Company – as 1,500 or more new customers, lured by the 50% yield offered through advertisements, sought their share of the huge profits they thought would be forthcoming at minimal risk. The office now bulged with fat stacks of dollar bills.

THE FLOOR STARTS TO GIVE WAY BENEATH HIM
But problems started to arise when Joseph Daniels filed a lawsuit alleging that he had helped to found the Securities Exchange Company (SEC) with a loan of $230 worth of furniture plus $200 in cash. Daniels had indeed provided the beaten-up desks that had been offloaded in the dusty office, and had let Mr Ponzi have $200 to spark interest in the Postal Coupons. It wasn’t just a loan, Daniels maintained, now that Ponzi was drowning in cash. ‘We were partners. I put up capital and property’. On 2nd July, Mr Ponzi was handed a demand for $1.0 million.

The Boston Post telephoned, and Mr Ponzi told the reporter that he had indeed bought furniture from Mr Daniels, but that he had never received any money for investment from him.

But when the newly installed banking commissioner for Massachusetts, Joseph Allen, read the newspaper, he wondered: ‘Where did Ponzi come from? Who are his associates? How is he managing to double people’s money?’

Allen asked Ponzi to pop round to his office, for an interview. The Securities Exchange Company did not describe itself as a bank, nor did it offer any banking services.

Therefore, in the absence of a complaint – and none had yet arrived – the Commissioner had no jurisdiction to examine Charles Ponzi’s business. At the interview, Ponzi explained the curiosities surrounding Postal Coupons, pointed out that money chased money, collected his black hat and coat, doffed his hat, and bid Mr Allen goodbye.

But Richard Grozier, city editor at The Boston Post, had always thought that Charles Ponzi’s scheme was fraudulent; and to initiate what he fancied would be the inevitable coming débacle, he elicited a comment from one of Boston’s leading citizens, Clarence Barron, the owner of Dow Jones & Co and The Wall Street Journal.

At the end of July 1920, The Boston Post carried a front page story entitled: ‘Clarence Barron questions the motive behind Ponzi’s scheme’.

Theoretically, Barron admitted, you could indeed turn a profit on the UPU coupons. But that was the only truth buried within the operation. You could never earn more than a few thousand dollars, not just because of the trouble involved in offloading the stamps and tracking the various conversions driving the process, but because there simply were not enough coupons available.

France, Romania and Spain had just abandoned the scheme, a few months earlier. A cursory check with the UPU showed that they only had a few hundred thousand dollars’ worth of coupons left in circulation – nowhere near the $10 million or $15 million Mr Ponzi claimed to be trading. So where was Ponzi getting his coupons from? Furthermore, the US Postal Service had announced, on 2nd July 1920, that Postal Reply Coupons would no longer be redeemable in lots larger than ten. So how was Ponzi converting his coupons into stamps?

Finally, Barron asked, if Ponzi is doubling everyone else’s money, why does he keep his own funds in regional banks? The Boston Post knew that Ponzi kept millions of dollars on deposit at seven or eight New England banks, and that the accounts were ballooning. How could a man who was paying 100% interest every 90 days, put up with drawing just 4% on his holdings? Barron concluded:

‘Right under the eyes of our Government, Mr Ponzi has been paying out US money to one line, with deposits taken from a succeeding line’ (another bank).

All of a sudden, all the doors which had flown back on their hinges at the sight of Mr Ponzi, were slamming tight shut. The Massachusetts District Attorney ordered Ponzi to cease and desist. His customers demanded their money back, and Ponzi was eventually jailed for Federal mail fraud, then deported. He wound up destitute in a poor house in South America (1).

Reference:
(1). ‘How Charles Ponzi pulled it off: Making a fine art out of a pyramid fraud’, International Currency Review, Volume 27, Number 3, December 2001, pages 51-52.

ANNEXE:

REITERATION OF THE STATUTES, SECURITIES REGULATIONS AND LEGAL PRINCIPLES OF WHICH THE CRIMINALISTS, THEIR ASSOCIATES AND RELEVANT BANKSTERS ARE IN BREACH:

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:

THEFT BY DECEPTION:

• “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:

• ‘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’.

U.S. SECURITIES REGULATIONS OF WHICH KEY INSTITUTIONS HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO BE IN BREACH:

• 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.

U.S. LAWS ROUTINELY BREACHED BY THE CRIMINAL OPERATIVES AND BANKSTERS:

• 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 cannot enter into email or other 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.