WORST FINANCIAL TERRORISM SABOTAGE IN HISTORY

story2

U.S. CADRES TOO COWARDLY, WEAK AND FECKLESS TO ARREST BUSH SR. FOR FINANCIAL TERRORISM AND OPEN-ENDED WANTON MAFIOSO SABOTAGE

Saturday 10 July 2010 00:01

NEW INFORMATION:

BELOW:
CIA/MI6.OBAMA/BUSH SR./CHENEY ORDERED CHISTOPHER STORY’S ASSASSINATION
AND ARE SUPRISED AND TERRIFIED THAT HE IS NOT DEAD

OBAMA AND BUSH ‘SPOKEN TO’ BY MEN WITH GUNS

• When ‘President’ Barack Hussein Obama touched down on the White House Lawn at 5:30pm on 9th July, he was ‘spoken to’. Enquiries by this service confirm that those doing the ‘speaking’ were not Secret Service operatives. On the contrary they were men with guns.

• Within the past 24-30 hours, private citizen George Godfather H. W. Bush Sr. has likewise been ‘spoken to’ twice. The people doing the ‘speaking’ were men with guns.

• The Chinese have had enough and are ready to take drastic lethal measures.

• Private citizens George H. W. Bush Sr. and Neil Bush think they are immortal and can take the loot they are blocking to the grave.

• Obama, who answers to the private citizen George H. W. Bush Sr., is saying he’s a ‘national citizen’. In order to be President of the United States, under the Constitution and the Soldiers and Sailors Act, you have to be a NATURAL citizen born in the United States or born in a US military family serving abroad.

CIA/CHENEY/MI6/OBAMA/BUSH SR. HAVE ATTEMPTED
TO ASSASSINATE CHRISTOPHER STORY
A detailed report on this assassination attempt and the horrible illness inflicted on the Editor as a consequence will be published as soon as feasible.

•We now have proof that the CIA/MI6/Obama/Bush/Cheney issued an assassination order against this Editor. We have proof that they are suprised that the Editor is not dead.

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

• THE WHOLE WORLD AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL KNOWS IN DETAIL ABOUT THIS U.S. CORRUPTION AND CRIMINAL FINANCIAL TERRORISM CRISIS, NOT LEAST FROM THIS WEBSITE. THEY RIGHTLY REGARD THE UNITED STATES AS AN ARROGANT, RUTHLESS PARIAH STATE THAT IMAGINES IT CAN DO WHAT IT PLEASES AS IT DESTROYS ITSELF

• LIENHOLDERS HAVE SEIZED CONTROL OF BANK OF AMERICA, CHARLOTTE, NC., AND OF DEUTSCHE BANK, FRANKFURT AND HAVE CLEANED OUT THE SABOTEURS: SEE BELOW

• HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN SIGNED THE NECESSARY PAYOUT DOCUMENTS, AS EXPECTED, DURING HER VISIT TO NEW YORK. SHE WAS DOUBLE-CROSSED BY BUSH SR.

• SEE KEY POINTS BELOW AND CONFIRMATION IN ATTORNEY-AT-LAW A. CLIFTON HODGES’ LETTER TO THE BRITISH CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER, GEORGE OSBORNE, DATED 8TH JULY 2010. THIS LETTER CONFIRMS ALL OF THE KEY POINTS OUTLINED BELOW.

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

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.

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

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

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

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

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

EMAIL POLICY: All anonymous emails from parties who are too wet and scared to provide their full coordinates as required by our ‘Contact Us’ facility are trashed unread. All uncouth, New Age, rude, discourteous, blasphemous, satanic, goss, filthy and otherwise objectionable emails, including ignorant rants promoting ‘Black’ revisionist claptrap about e.g. the British Monarchy ‘owning’ America and other old Nazi ‘Black’ propaganda emanating from the CIA’s massive lie and disinformation apparat, are trashed. For many years this website has carried a statement at the foot of the reports stating in crystal clear English that we will NOT enter into correspondence concerning the current and earlier reports posted on this website.

• We use simple, plain English so that people can understand what we say.

• We correspond with known and trusted correspondents only. Stray questions about of the blue on matters connected with the Settlements are not answered.

As you can see from the above, we have closed down all our communications because of interminable and intolerable harassment from the United States. We have also added a large number of parties to our ‘Black List’ so that their incessant emails bounce.

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••*

NEW REPORT STARTS HERE:

• KEY POINTS:

• The Lienholders exercised a foreclosure and management takeover on Friday 2nd and Saturday 3rd July 2010 of Deutsche Bank, Frankfurt, Germany and of Bank of America, Charlotte, NC. They took this action due to ongoing sabotage by the US official keptocracy.

• They immediately removed people in both banks working for the saboteurs and opponents of the necessary resolutions and cleared derivatives (toxic debt) off the balance sheets.

• This took Deutsche Bank out of the control of Bush Sr.’s agent [see earlier reports: Archive], Chancellor Angela Merkel, and the saboteurs in Germany.

• Likewise they took the CIA’s compromised Bank of America out of the control of the corrupt bankers and CIA saboteurs in the United States.

• Her Majesty The Queen signed the necessary authorities for the Refunding Programme, the Loan Facility and other necessary papers during her visit to New York, as expected.

• As a result of the above the necessary funds were available for distribution
on Tuesday 6th July 2010.

• As usual, George Bush Sr. interfered, as a consequence of which the Chinese parties had a ‘talk’ with the corrupt, demonic Godfather Bush Sr.

• By 7th July (Wednesday) a full meeting of Compliance Officers had taken place and the parties were again said to be prepared to initiate the transfers.

• Whereupon the corrupt Leon Panetta, Director of Central Intelligence (CIA), pathetically following ‘instructions’ issued by a private citizen named George H. W. Bush and issued to his poodle in the White House, the gutless Barack Hussein Obama, issued instructions to banking authorities the ‘placate but do not pay’ (accounting for the immediate lies summarised below), thus ‘preventing’ the feckless and terrified banking authorities from making any transfers.

• Bush Sr.’s poodle, Barack Hussein Obama, is too weak and lacking in backbone to grasp that Bush Sr.’s threats [see below] are BLUFF. He lacks the spine to stand up to this crook and face him down, which is the only way to deal with these possessed ‘Black’ US Nazi operatives, as we have amply demonstrated on this website

• On 7th July, the Chinese authorities then had another talk’ with Bush Sr., as a consequence of which the payout procedures were put back in place on that date, to start up at 3:00pm EDT..

• Having thus lied as usual to the Chinese parties, private citizen Bush Sr. contacted Barack Hussein Obama and INSTRUCTED HIM not to allow the release of the funds.

• In that telephone call to the White House, Bush Sr. also threatened that if Obama authorised release of the funds, Bush Sr. would go to the Supreme Court and have Obama’s Presidency terminated’ [see earlier reports, notably the Biden comment on this score].

• As a consequence, the terrified and gutless Obama obeyed the private citizen George H. W. Bush and the agreed-upon payout of the Settlement funds has not taken place.

• Michael C. Cottrell, BA, M.S., was duly advised on Tuesday 6th July that the preliminary payment due to him would be satisfied on that date and that the Loan Facility would be in place on Thursday 8th July 2010.

• On Friday 9th July ‘the word went out’ that Mr Cottrell was not to be paid, the opposite of what had been categorically stated earlier.

• The payments agreed to and set out in the Basel List have not been affected as a direct consequence of this sabotage.

• Given the above, Gold Badges, US Law Enforcement, the corrupted US military under the former CIA Director Robert Gates, et al., are all in continuing dereliction of their duty in failing to arrest and lock up the Financial Terrorist George H. W. Bush Sr., either because they, like Joseph Biden, are all blackmailed and compromised, or because they fear that Mr Bush Sr.’s thuggists will murder them, and because they lack the intelligence to understand that Bush Sr.’s behaviour amounts to nothing more than the familiar childish, weak Psy-Ops BLUFF and bullying overfamiliar to students of the Mafiosi Godfathers, of which this criminal is the most ruthless and dangerous operative alive today.

• US law enforcement, Gold badges, feckless CIA operatives, cloth-eared, arrogant and corrupt US military cadres have accordingly dragged the reputation of the United States below sewer level in the eyes of all in the know at highest levels worldwide, with their gutless behaviour.

• Everyone who is anyone in positions of relevant importance worldwide is fully aware of this scandalous state of affairs, not least from this website, which has enormous clout ‘where it matters’. They had better exercise their powers to put an end to what is undoubtedly the biggest financial terrorism and corruption crisis in world history.

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

LETTER FROM ATTORNEY-AT-LAW A. CLIFTON HODGES TO GEORGE OSBORNE,
BRITISH CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: 8TH JULY 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

July 8th, 2010

MOST URGENT

Sent Via E-Mail and Facsimile
The Right Honorable George Osborne, MP
Chancellor of the Exchequer
HM Treasury
Horse Guards Road
London SW1A 2HQ
Fax No. 020 7270 4580

Re: U.S. Dollar Refunding Project

Dear Honorable George Osborne:

I write to you once more in furtherance of matters raised in my prior correspondence of June 25, 2010; I understand that you have received instructions regarding my approach, and the various points raised in my earlier messages. Your assistance is most urgently required in addressing these matters, and the apparent disavowal of earlier agreements made and reaffirmed at previous G-8 meetings concerning the U.S. Dollar Refunding Project. I write 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.

The events of the past week are difficult to understand, and impossible to tolerate. I am advised and understand that the Lienholders executed a foreclosure and management takeover Fri-Sat 2-3 July of Deutsche Bank in Frankfurt, Germany, and of Bank of America in Charlotte, NC.

They “cleaned out” both banks of people working for the opponents and cleared toxic debt [including derivatives] off the bank balance sheets. Accordingly, they took DB out of the control of Angela Merkel and opponents in Germany, and they took BOA out of all possible control by the opponents in this country. As a result of these actions, it was expected that the World Global Settlement funds could be distributed this week.

These funds were available for distribution on Tuesday, July 6. Because George Bush Sr. was initiating interference, the Chinese authorities then had a “talk” with Bush Sr. By Wednesday afternoon a full Compliance Officer meeting had been conducted, and the appropriate parties were again prepared to initiate the transfers when Mr. Leon Panetta, pursuant to instructions from President Obama and George Bush Sr. issued instructions to the banking authorities to “placate but do not pay”; this prevented the authorities from making any such transfers. I am advised that the Chinese authorities then had another “talk” with Bush Sr., and all was ready again on today, July 7, and set to commence @ 3:00 PM EDT.

At approximately 3:00 PM EDT, I am told by several sources, George Bush Sr. apparently contacted President Obama and instructed him not to allow release of the funds. Bush Sr. then advised the President that if the funds were released, Bush would “go to the Supreme Court and have Obama’s Presidency terminated”. In accord with these instructions, the payout of the World Global Settlement funds has not proceeded.

THE PAYMENTS PREVIOUSLY AGREED TO AND SET FORTH ON THE BASEL LIST HAVE NOT BEEN MADE AS A DIRECT RESULT OF THESE CONTINUED DELAYS. Direct intervention through your good offices on behalf of the Royal Monarchal Power, is absolutely required to bring this matter to conclusion. To secure release of these Settlement funds, it is imperative that your power as one of the U.S. Treasury Lienholders, be exercised with such force as may be required to effect completion.

I respectfully plead that you utilize the inherent Royal Monarchal Power at the earliest possible moment to ensure completion of this funding. Thank you in advance for your assistance; please contact me directly if I can provide any additional information or help.

Sincerely,

HODGES AND ASSOCIATES
A. CLIFTON HODGES

ACH/gm

Cc: Lindell H. Bonney, Sr.
Colonel Dana Wilcox
Michael C. Cottrell, BA, MS
President Barack Obama
Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II
Interpol, USNCB

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

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 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 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 annual fee. This is done on-line in the usual way [direct with supplier].

Save

Advertisements

DEFINITIVE ILLEGALITY OF SECURITISATION IS RECONFIRMED

cropped-chrisstory

IT IS ILLEGAL TO ASSIGN AN ASSET WITHOUT THE ASSET-OWNERS’S PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION. ALL ENGAGED IN THIS RACKETEERING KNOW IT.

Sunday 18 April 2010 00:01

• ANY CONTRACT ENTERED INTO FOR AN ILLEGAL PURPOSE IS NULL AND VOID

• THE TEXT OF THE S.E.C.’S COMPLAINT AGAINST GOLDMAN SACHS & CO. FILED ON 16TH APRIL 2010 IS AVAILABLE IN THE REPORT ALSO DATED 18TH APRIL. TO ACCESS THE S.E.C. COMPLAINT, PLEASE PRESS ‘BACK TO ARCHIVE’ OR THE ARCHIVE BUTTON [HOME PAGE]. THE REPORT CONTAINS A BRIEF COMMENTARY IN NOTE FORM, THE S.E.C.’S RELATED PRESS RELEASE, AND THE COMPLAINT TEXT. THIS CASE SPECIFICALLY ILLUSTRATES MANY OF THE ISSUES EXPOSED IN THE PRESENT REPORT, WITH DEVASTATING EFFECT AND IMPACT.

• Securitisation is ABSOLUTELY ILLEGAL, and all those talking heads from the City of London and Wall Street who have been treating, for example, the Goldman Sachs scandal (that we warned you about years ago) as just ‘the inevitable fall-out after a period of financial crisis’, rather than the corrupt cause of the crisis, are KNOWINGLY MISLEADING THE GENERAL PUBLIC EXACTLY LIKE GOLDMAN SACHS, CITIBANK, BANK OF AMERICA, WACHOVIA, WELLS FARGO and the other US and foreign financial enterprises engaged in this racketeering. Which the IMF CONDONES.

And before you start shouting at the screen, if you’re reading this from Wall Street or the City of London, or from within the IMF and the World Bank, why don’t you pay attention to the fact that the Notes and References, as originally published in our journal Economic Intelligence Review, run to FIVE AND A HALF PAGES. SECURITISATION IS ABSOLUTELY ILLEGAL: AND THEY KNOW IT.

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.

• 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.

• 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 extended Ad. for the INTERNET SECURITY SOLUTION.

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 from this website.

• 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 ANNOUNCED, OUR LANDLINES REMAIN CLOSED BECAUSE OF UNLAWFUL HARASSMENT. WE CAN BE CONTACTED VIA EMAIL OR THE WEBSITE ‘CONTACT US’ FACILITY.

NEW REPORT STARTS HERE:

EDITOR’S INTRODUCTION:
That Asset-Backed Securitisation [ABS] is fraudulent has been amply demonstrated by our website reports, in this service and in successive issues of International Currency Review. In the following uncompromising analysis, Mr Michael Nwogugu CPA, who is based in Maryland, demonstrates with pinpoint technical proficiency how accurate this assessment has been – inspired for our part inter alia by the US securities and technical expertise of Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S.

The author has looked at securitisation from every legal angle, and finds securitisation under US law to be absolutely illegal, with no redeeming features whatsoever.

Given this state of affairs, it would damage the integrity of the English language to observe that it is astonishing that, far from paying attention to this glaring state of affairs, US investment banks, intermediaries, organised criminal syndicates, Intelligence Power cadres, officials in high places, and their counterparties abroad, further encouraged inter alia by the railroading behaviour of the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation (DTCC), have been proceeding to gear up for ‘business as usual’ securitisation operations as though there had been no discontinuity.

In addition to being ILLEGAL UNDER U.S. LAW, securitisation is ILLEGAL UNDER COMMON LAW. If the prior written permission of the mortgagor (or other type of asset-holder) has not been obtained in writing, and in such a manner that the party IS FULLY AWARE THAT THEY HAVE GRANTED SUCH PERMISSION, the transfer and all subsequent transactions are ILLEGAL.

• Moreover, the legal axiom that ‘the money you make from exploitaing and abusing my money is my money’ likewise applies. PLUS:

• ANY CONTRACT ENTERED INTO FOR AN ILLEGAL PURPOSE IS NULL AND VOID.

Self-evidently, this study focuses on the US legal position. But the same basic principles apply in all Common Law Countries. So far, the talking heads in the so-called ‘Mainstream’ Media’ have chosen to ignore the fact that securitisation is ILLEGAL. Reality will soon be catching up with them, just as it is at last catching up with the likes of Goldman Sachs and other ‘protected’ enterprises.

REPRODUCED FROM:
ECONOMIC INTELLIGENCE REVIEW, VOLUME 12, NUMBERS 7 & 8, FIRST QUARTER 2010: pages 4-21. World Reports Limited, 108 Horseferry Road, Westminster, London SW1P 2EF, UK.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY [REPRODUCED FROM OUR REPORT DATED 10TH MARCH 2010]:

WHY SECURITISATION IS ILLEGAL UNDER U.S. AND COMMON LAW
Securitisation is illegal under US legislation – primarily because it is fraudulent and causes specific violations of R.I.C.O., usury, Antitrust and bankruptcy laws. And it flies in the face of public policy in numerous ways, as was expounded in extensive detail in this analysis published in our journal Economic Intelligence Review 2009Q1 with several pages of book, article and case references.

To begin with, securitisation violates US State usury legislation. Secondly, all ‘true-sale’, ‘disguised loan’ as well as ‘assignment’ securitisations are essentially tax evasion schemes, and the penalties for tax evasion in the United States are excessively severe.

Thirdly, in all ‘true-sale’, ‘disguised loan’ and ‘assignment’ securitisations, the conflict of interest inherent in the sponsor also serving as the servicer constitutes fraud and conversion. In the fourth place, in all ‘true-sale’, ‘disguised loan’ and ‘assignment’ securitisations where the Special Purpose Vehicle [SPV] is a trust, the declaration of trust is void, as it exists for an illegal purpose.

In the fifth place, off-balance sheet treatment of asset-backed securities (both for ‘true-sale’ and for assignment transactions) constitutes fraud.

Sixth, all ‘true-sale’, ‘disguised loan’ and ‘assignment’ securitisations involve blatant fraudulent conveyances. In the seventh place, securitisation usurps United States bankruptcy laws and is accordingly illegal, as well as being also demonstrably contrary to public policy.

SECURITISATION ENTAILS GROSS VIOLATIONS OF R.I.C.O. STATUTES
In ‘true-sale’, ‘disguised loan’ and ‘assignment’ securitisations, there are fraudulent transactions which serve as ‘predicate acts’ under US Federal R.I.C.O. statutes.

The specific R.I.C.O. sections are: Section 1341 (mail fraud); Section 1343 (wire fraud); Section 1344 (financial institution fraud); Section 1957 (engaging in monetary transactions improperly derived from specified unlawful activity) [‘the money you make from the illegal exploitation of my money, is my money’]; and Section 1952 (racketeering).

Furthermore, securitisation constitutes violations of American antitrust statutes through market integration, syndicate collusion, price formation, vertical foreclosure, tying, price-fixing, predatory pricing, and the rigging of allocations.

Securitisation also involves void contracts, given the lack of consideration, illusory promises, the absence of any actual bargain, the absence of mutuality – and finally illegal subject matter and the contravention of public policy.

Securitisation is riddled with Fraudulent Transfer, Fraud in the Inducement, Fraud in Fact by Deceit, Theft by Deception (Fraudulent Concealment) and Fraudulent Conveyance: see the US securities regulations routinely breached in such activity, listed at the foot of this report and of most of these reports for THE PAST THREE++ YEARS, and other laws also routinely flouted in this context.

NOTWITHSTANDING THAT IT’S ILLEGAL, U.S. AUTHORITIES
CONTINUE TO PROMOTE AND ENCOURAGE SECURITISATION
Yet notwithstanding such crystal-clear indications that securitisation is 100% ILLEGAL under US Law, as well as under Common Law generally (so that these findings are largely applicable in all Common Law countries), US authorities from the highest level downwards, financial institutions, intermediaries, Intelligence Power operatives and others are gearing up for what they doubtless hope will be intensified racketeering and trading activity with (corrupt) foreign counterparties.

This behaviour is being fine-tuned ‘as we speak’, despite the reality that the securitisation activity being planned and implemented violates innumerable US statutes in the manner we summarise above, and notwithstanding that such activity is contrary to public policy. TAnd the International Monetary Fund knows all this perfectly well, yet sits idly by, accommodating this racketeering.

Indeed, it’s as though the Rule of Law did not exist. From the highest level of the US Treasury, the White House, the US State Department and the Central Intelligence Agency and its subsidiaries such as the lethal Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI), the mindset, intention and perverse primary objective has all along been to resume Fraudulent Finance based on securitisation, as quickly and as seamlessly as possible. The IMF and World Bank are parties to thus aberrant behaviour.

SUMMARY FORENSIC ANALYSIS PROVING THE ILLEGALITY OF SECURITISATION
From whichever angle securitisation is considered, it is ILLEGAL. For example, the contracts are themselves VOID. This is because the process of securitisation involves several contracts that are either signed simultaneously, or within a short timeframe – many of which are rendered void inter alia because there is no consideration in contracts used in effecting the securitisations.

Many such contracts involve unilateral executory undertakings containing illusory promises. A unilateral executory promise is not a consideration. Such promises typically include a promise made by the Special Purpose Vehicle to pay out periodic interest, whether contingent or non-contingent on whether the collateral pays cash interest.

Collateral-substitution agreements contain a promise whereby the sponsor agrees to substitute impaired collateral. An assignment agreement of future (not yet existing) collateral may well be deemed a unilateral executory promise by the sponsor.

Illusory promises are not valid consideration for a contract. Such promises may be found in the Subscription/Purchase Agreement, whereby an existing asset is being exchanged for a future asset that does not exist as of the date of the subscription/purchase agreement. To make matters worse, none of the agreements typically signed by the investor as part of his/her purchase of the Special Purpose Vehicle’s Asset-Backed Securities expressly incorporates the (typically illusory) promises embodied in the offering prospectus.

OR: The Special Purpose Vehicle’s promise to pay interest and/or dividends on Asset-Backed Securities ‘Interest-Onlys’, Preferreds and ‘Pincipal-Onlys’ are essentially illusory promises because the underlying collateral may not produce any cash flows at all: so there won’t be any interest/dividend payments.

Moreover the lack of mutuality characterising such contracts renders them null and void, by definition. In any such contract, each party must have firm control of the subject matter of the contract and the underlying assets (consideration), and there MUST be a direct contractual relationship between the parties concerned.

But this is not the case, especially as the Special Purpose Vehicle’s corporate documents (trust indentures or bylaws or articles of incorporation) may typically limit the right of each Asset-Backed Security investor; while there is typically no mutuality at all between the Special Purpose Vehicle and the sponsor/originator, because both entities are essentially the same, and are controlled by the sponsor before and after the securitisation takes place.

SECURITISATION: A COVER FOR TAX EVASION
In addition to their multiple violations of American State usury laws, all ‘true-sale’, ‘disguised loan’ and ‘assignment securitisations’ are essentially tax evasion arrangements. In the United States, the applicable tax evasion statute is the US Internal Revenue Code Section 7201 7 which reads: “Any person who willfully attempts in any manner to evade or defeat any tax imposed by this title or the payment thereof shall, in addition to other penalties provided by law, be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not more than $100,000 ($500,000 in the case of a corporation), or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both, together with the costs of prosecution”.

Under this statute and related case law, prosecutors
must prove three elements beyond any reasonable doubt:

(1): The actus reus (the guilty conduct) – which consists of an affirmative act (not merely an omission or failure to act) that constitutes evasion or an attempt to evade either: (a) the assessment of a tax or (b) the payment of a tax.

(2): The mens rea or “mental” element of willfulness – the specific intent to violate an actually known legal duty. In the case of ‘true sale’ transactions, the tax evasion occurs because:

(a): The sponsor determines the price at which the collateral is transferred to the SPV, and hence, can arbitrarily lower/increase the price to avoid capital gains taxes – it being assumed here that the sponsor is a profit-maximising entity and will always act to minimise its tax liability and to avoid any tax assessment;

(b): The sponsor typically retains a ‘residual’ interest in the SPV in the form of IOs, POs and “junior pieces”, which are typically taxed differently and on a different tax-basis compared with the original collateral: hence, the sponsor can lower the price of the collateral upon transfer to the SPV, and convert what would have been capital gains, into a non-taxable basis in the SPV “residual”;

(c): There is typically the requisite “intent” by the sponsor – evidenced by the arrangement of the transaction and the transfer of assets to the Special Purpose Vehicle;

(d): Before securitisation, collateral is typically reported in the sponsors’ financial statements at book value (that is, lower-of-cost-or-market: under both the US and the international accounting standards, loans and accounts receivable are typically not re-valued to market-value unless there has been some major impairment in value) which does not reflect true Market Values, and results in effective tax evasion on transfer of the collateral to the SPV, as any unrealised gain is not taxed;

(e): The actus reus is manifested by the execution of the securitisation transaction and transfer of assets to the Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV);

(f): The mens rea or specific intent is manifested by the elaborate arrangements implicit in securitisation transactions, the method of determination of the price of the collateral to be transferred to the SPV, the aims of securitisation, and the sponsor’s transfer of assets to the SPV;

(g): The unpaid tax liability consists of foregone tax on the capital gains from the collateral (the transaction is structured to avoid recognition of capital gains), and tax on any income from the collateral which is ‘converted’ into basis or other non-taxable forms;

(h): Income (from the collateral) that would have been taxable in the sponsor’s own financial statements, is converted to a non-taxable basis in the form of the SPV’s Interest-Only (IO) and Principal-Only (PO) securities: part of the Interest-Spread (the difference between the SPV’s income and what it pays as interest and operating costs) is paid out to PO-holders, and this transforms interest into return-of-capital or just capital repayment, with no tax consequences.

In cases of ‘disguised loan’ or ‘assignment’ securitisation transactions, tax evasion occurs:

(a): Because the sponsor determines the price at which the collateral is transferred to the SPV, and hence can lower/increase the price of the collateral to avoid capital gains taxes;

(b): Because the sponsor typically retains a ‘residual’ interest in the SPV which is normally taxed differently and on a different tax-basis compared to the original collateral: hence, the sponsor can lower the price upon transfer to the SPV, and convert what would have been capital gains, to a non-taxable basis for tax purposes;

(c): Because the transfer of collateral to the SPV and the creation of Interest-Only and Principal-Only securities converts what would have been taxable capital gains into non-taxable basis;

(d): Because gain in the value of the collateral is not recognised for tax purposes, because there has not been any ‘sale’;

(e): Where the Asset-Backed Security (ABS) is partly amortising, any capital gains are converted into interest payments;

(f): Because actus reus is manifested by the execution of the securitisation transaction and transfer of assets to the SPV;

(g): Because the mens rea or specific intent is manifested by the elaborate arrangements implicit in securitisation transactions, the objectives of securitisation and the sponsor’s transfer of assets to the Special Purpose Vehicle;

(h): Because the unpaid tax liability consists of tax on the capital gains from the transfer of the collateral (the transaction is structured to avoid recognition of a sale, whereas the transfer to the Special Purpose Vehicle is effectively a sale), and tax on any income from the collateral which is ‘converted’ into basis or other non-taxable forms, by securitisation.

SECURITISATION VIOLATES THE U.S BANKRUPTCY CODE
AND THEREFORE ALSO CONTRAVENES PUBLIC POLICY
Any transfer or conveyance of the assets of a debtor that is deemed to be made for the purposes of hindering, delaying or defrauding actual or potential creditors, may be determined by Courts to be a Fraudulent Conveyance under Section 548 of the US Bankruptcy Code or under a relevant theory of Constructive Fraud.

Although each US State has its own laws regarding the appropriate elements of proof of Constructive Fraud, Section 548(a)(2) of the US Bankruptcy Code permits an inference of Constructive Fraud if the following factors exist:

(1): The debtor received less than reasonably equivalent value for the property transferred; and:

(2): The debtor was insolvent or became insolvent as a result of the transfer, or else retained unreasonably small capital after the transfer, or made the transfer with the intent or belief that it would incur debts beyond its ability to pay.

The following theories of Fraudulent Conveyance within the context of securitisation may apply:

• Where the sponsor/originator receives insufficient value for assets transferred.

• Where there is an ‘intent to hinder, delay or defraud’ creditors (representing an implicit pre-petition waiver of one’s right to file for bankruptcy), with regard to the originator’s transfer of assets to the SPV, or the originator’s transfer of assets to the SPV has clearly not been undertaken on an arms’-length basis.

• Where securitisation increases the originator’s bankruptcy risk; and:

• In all instances where securitisation usurps the United States’ bankruptcy laws and is therefore illegal on such a basis alone.

SECURITISATION VIOLATES FEDERAL R.I.C.O. STATUTES
Turning now to the reality that securitisation constitutes a violation of US Federal R.I.C.O. Statutes [see Legal Notes below], we can state without equivocation that the entire securitisation process constitutes violations of Federal R.I.C.O. statutes, because:

(1): There is the requisite criminal or civil ‘enterprise’ – consisting of the sponsor/issuer, the trustees and the intermediary bank. These three parties work closely together to effect the securitisation transaction.

(2): There are ‘predicate acts’ of:

(a): Mail fraud – using the mails for sending out materials among themselves and to investors.

(b): Wire fraud – using wires to engage in fraud by communicating with investors.

(c): Conversion – where there isn’t proper title to collateral.

(d): Deceit: misrepresentation of issues and facts pertaining to the securitisation transaction.

(e): Securities fraud: disclosure issues.

(f): It entails loss of profit opportunity.

(g): It involves the making of false statements and or misleading representations
about the value of the collateral.

(h): It entails stripping the originator/issuer of the ability to pay debt claims or judgment claims in bankruptcy court – a state of affairs that may apply where the sponsor is financially distressed and the cash proceeds of the transaction are significantly less than the value of the collateral.

There is also typically the requisite ‘intent’ by members of the enterprise – evident in knowledge (actual and inferable), acts, omissions, purpose (actual and inferable) and results. Intent can be reasonably inferred from:

(a): The existence of a sponsor that seeks to raise capital – and cannot raise capital on better terms by other means;

(b): The participation of an investment bank that has very strong incentives to consummate the transaction on any agreeable (but not necessarily reasonable) terms.

SECURITISATION ALSO VIOLATES U.S. ANTITRUST LEGISLATION
Securitisation further constitutes violations of US Antitrust laws, because the American Asset-Backed Securities and Mortgage-Backed Securities markets are dominated by relatively few large entities such as FNMA (Fannie Mae), Freddie Mac, the top five investment banks (all of which have conduit programs), and the top five credit card issuers (MBNA, AMEX, Citigroup, etc.), etc.. As a consequence, the top five ABS/MBS issuers control more than 50% of the US ABS/MBS market.

• This constitutes illegal market concentration under US Antitrust legislation.

THE ‘PHILIPPINES EXCEPTION’ BURIED IN THE CLAYTON ACT
In the Antitrust context, however, observe the following text from the Clayton Act, which specifically EXCLUDES transactions undertaken with The Philippines. Isn’t that interesting?

It provides a blanket rationale for the massive past and ongoing US clandestine focus on The Philippines, the CIA’s need for ‘black hole’ conditions there in connection with successive US operations to relieve Presidents Marcos and Aquino of the stolen and hidden ‘Yamashita’s gold’, the US Fraudulent Finance operations using Philippine institutions and related operations based in that territory, an aborted US operation to convert The Philippines into a new US State (as had been planned under Clinton for Somalia), and the frequent visits of operatives known to ourselves to The Philippines under cover of attending to ‘orphanages’:

§ 1 Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 12 Definitions; short title:
(a) “Antitrust laws”, as used herein, includes the Act entitled:
‘An Act to protect trade and commerce against unlawful restraints and monopolies’, approved July second, eighteen hundred and ninety; sections seventy-three to seventy-seven, inclusive, of an Act entitled ‘An Act to reduce taxation, to provide revenue for the Government, and for other purposes’, of August 27th, eighteen hundred and ninety-four; an Act entitled ‘An Act to amend sections seventy-three and seventy-six of the Act of August twenty-seventh, eighteen hundred and ninetyfour’, entitled ‘An Act to reduce taxation, to provide revenue for the Government, and for other purposes’, approved February twelfth, nineteen hundred and thirteen; and also this Act.

‘Commerce’, as used herein, means trade or commerce among the several States and with foreign nations, or between the District of Columbia or any Territory of the United States and any State, Territory, or foreign nation, or between any insular possessions or other places that are under the jurisdiction of the United States, or between any such possession or place and any US State or Territory of the United States or the District of Columbia or any foreign nation, or within the District of Columbia or any Territory or any insular possession or other place under the jurisdiction of the United States:

Provided, That nothing in this Act contained shall apply to the Philippine Islands. The word ‘person’ or ‘persons’ wherever used in this Act shall be deemed to include corporations and associations existing under or authorized by the laws of either the United States, the laws of any of the Territories, the laws of any State, or the laws of any foreign country.

FANNIE MAE, FREDDIE MAC ENGAGED IN FURTHER ILLEGAL SECURITISATION:
RE-SECURITISING ALREADY SECURITISED ‘DUD’ ASSETS TO DUMP BACK ON THE BANKS
Even so, it became apparent in early March that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, both controlled by the US Government, were planning to force financial enterprises such as the CIA’s Bank of America Corporation, JP Morgan Chase & Co, Wells Fargo and Citigroup, Inc., to buy back further waves of newly securitised packages of mortgages – i.e., the former Government-Sponsored Enterprises are reportedly engaged again in repackaging mortgage securities already marked down to ‘true’ value.

In other words, they are trying to dump faulty securitised loans, as well as straight loans, back on the participating banks – under cover of such fantasies as the double-minded statement attributed to Sharon McHale, spokes‘person’ for Freddie Mac, located adjacent to the CIA in McLean, Virginia, on 5th March 2010: ‘We are trying to be good stewards of taxpayer dollars and as part of that, it’s important that those dollars not go to loans that should not have been sold to us in the first place’ – throwing the blame for Freddie Mac’s own scandalous racketeering behaviour back at the banks.

• Being interpreted, what this woman was saying was: this:

‘We are covering ourselves with a mantle of rectitude by posing as protectors of the taxpayer’s dollars in order to obfuscate our own ongoing racketeering behaviour, even as we prepare further Fraudulent Finance securitisations in violation of the relevant US legislation: and we couldn’t care less because we are owned by the Government itself, which is up to its neck in such violations’.

And Paul Miller, a former examiner for the Federal Reserve (hardly a guarantee of integrity, given the Fed’s own reputation for Fraudulent Finance), based in Arlington, VA, let the cat out of the bag with: ‘If you want to originate mortgages and keep that pipeline running, you have to deal with the push-backs. It doesn’t matter how much you hate Fannie and Freddie’ – and neither, apparently, does it matter to what extent the Rule of Law is cynically violated ‘in order to keep the pipeline (of Fraudulent Finance) running’. It doesn’t matter that securitisation is a form of racketeering.

GARY GENSLER IS NOT AS OPPOSED TO FRAUDULENT FINANCE AS HE SEEMS
The appointment of Gary Gensler as Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission under President Obama was greeted with signs of relief on Wall Street. Here was a hardened former Goldman Sachs trader with 18 years’ experience with that cynical, ruthless money shop, who could be relied upon to act at all times in the interests of Wall Street, not the investor and taxpayer.

But, as has since been reported elsewhere, over a private lunch at the Waldorf Astoria in midtown Manhattan on 6th January 2010, the 52-year-old Gary Gensler caused indigestion among the self-satisfied guests at the luncheon – Timothy O’Hara, head of global credit at Crédit Suisse Holdings USA, Inc.; Robert P. Kelly, CEO at Bank of New York Mellon Corporation; David B. Heller, co-head of the securities division at Goldman Sachs; and Seth Waugh, CEO of Deutsche Bank Americas.

Because when one banker asked Gensler what or whom he saw as the biggest obstacles to reform in the securities and commodities sectors, he replied: ‘You’.

Mr Gensler has been seeking derivatives control legislation that goes beyond current proposals, including what President Obama put forward during the summer of 2009. Notwithstanding the fact that if the derivatives situation is not addressed, the forthcoming crash will be so horrific as to be likely to tip the world into open, rather than covert, warfare, a certain Dr Samuel Hayes, Professor Emeritus of Investment Banking at Harvard Business School, Boston, told Bloomberg in February 2010 that ‘Gensler is going to raise real concerns’ for financial firms.

‘Derivatives are absolutely central to what is Wall Street in the 21st century’ – namely, a casino. ‘Nobody wants the regulations to affect them’.

‘GREATER TRANSPARENCY’ IS EVIDENTLY ALL HE‘S AFTER
On closer examination, Mr Gensler has actually been pushing for ‘more transparency’ in the over-the-counter derivatives market, so as to lower spreads between buyers and sellers and to make it easier for new competitors to enter the market – which the big banks aren’t keen on, as more participants will deprive them of profit.

So, Gary Gensler is not actually in the business of tackling the underlying crisis arising from the determination of financial institutions to continue playing Russian roulette, using the model first developed by the US Intelligence Power as it sought what it thought were foolproof methods of ensuring its financial independence from Congress and the open-ended funding pipelines that it considered appropriate to buttress its usurped status as a recalcitrant ‘State within the State’ impervious to reform and determined to brook no interference with its stolen hegemony.

INVESTORS’ MONEY USED TO REMUNERATE WALL STREET
In any case, the derivatives institutions and their back-up infrastructure have not the slightest intention of adopting any course other than ’business as usual‘ – and on a far larger scale than in the past. This obtuse madness WILL lead to a global collapse, as derivatives products are usually without real value. As a noted article in The New York Times of 7th February 2010 at last stated, investment banks trading derivatives do not own the mortgage bonds, the obligations from home owners, notes signed by home owners or the mortgage deeds of the deeds of trust.

The ‘structured products’, consisting of bundled documents ostensibly relating to the above but having NO RECOURSE to underlying real value, were, however, invested with ‘value’ arising from the name of the institution marketing the ‘asset’ – that is to say, arbitrary ‘value’ arising from the fact that, as a Goldman Sachs compliance officer actually admitted to the Editor of this service: ‘A structured product is worth what someone is prepared to pay for it’ – a penetrating statement which encapsulates the possibility that it may be (is) worthless: which is indeed the case.

‘THE MONEY YOU MAKE BY MISUSING MY MONEY IS MY MONEY’ – I.E., THE HOME OWNER’S
The money sloshing around between investment banks in this dirty market was investors’ money unwittingly advanced into pools of capital which winds up being used primarily to finance the fees, profits, insurance proceeds, insurance premia, and so forth – all for the benefit of Wall Street, paid to the investment banks, and not to investors who stumped up the money in the first place.

These fees and relationships are not and have never been disclosed to the home owner despite, in the United States, clear legislation requiring such transparency, including the Truth in Lending Act, and Deceptive Lending – which require full transparency and disclosure.

• Further legislation applicable to the securities sector in the United States is re-listed below – in the list that we have republished at the foot of our website reports for the past three years.

• The list of applicable securities regulations and laws is augmented by a legal tutorial which, again, we have published for the past three years at the foot of these reports,

It would appear that, notwithstanding such reminders, Wall Street and its compliant infrastructure, as well as its co-conspiring portfolio of dubious foreign trading counterparty institutions, has every intention of continuing to violate the relevant US rules and legislation – while at the same time continuing to abuse, in the mortgage sector, the home owner with the same cynicism as in the past.

Given the legal principle that ‘the money you make from misusing my money is my money’, it is quite clear that undisclosed fees, profits, kickbacks and other financial abuses perpetrated by these big speculative financial entities which produce no real wealth at all, but simply move money around between themselves, are payable to the home owner who signed the ‘loan’ papers in the first place.

THE ILLEGALITY OF SECURITIZATION
A legal analysis by MICHAEL NWOGUGU,
Certified Public Accountant (Maryland, USA); B.Arch.
(City College of New York). MBA (Columbia University).
Attended Suffolk Law School (Boston, USA).

Abstract:
Under US laws, securitization is illegal, primarily because it is fraudulent and causes very specific violations of R.I.C.O., usury, and antitrust laws. Securitization of many types of assets (loans, credit cards, auto receivables, intellectual property, etc.) has become and remains prevalent, particularly for financially distressed companies and companies with low or mid-tier credit ratings. This analysis focuses on securitization as it pertains to asset-backed securities and mortgage-backed securities, and analyzes critical legal and corporate governance issues.

Editor’s Note: This analysis does not elaborate that the illegal securitization model was developed and hijacked by the criminalised Intelligence Power, which is our contribution to the issue; but that is the sum of the matter, to be kept in mind at all times.

Keywords:
Securitization; antitrust; R.I.C.O.; constitutional law; capital markets; complexity; fraud.
[Some American English spelling has been retained].

Main abbreviations:
ABS = Asset-Backed Securities; SPV = Special Purpose Vehicle.

EDITOR’S INTRODUCTION
Under US legislation, securitization is illegal. Indeed many authors have illustrated the deficiencies in securitization (1). This analysis focuses on securitization as it pertains to asset-backed securities and mortgage-backed securities (2), (3).

The existing literature on legal and corporate governance issues pertaining to securitization is extensive, but has several gaps that have not been addressed at all or sufficiently:

• Whether securitization is legal.
• Whether securitization causes usury.
• The standards for usurious loans/forbearance.
• The specific components of cost-of-capital, for purposes of assessing usury violations.
• Antitrust liability in securitization transactions.
• Federal/State R.I.C.O. liability in securitization transactions.
• The constitutionality of securitization transactions.
• The validity of contracts used in effecting securitization transactions.
• Whether securitization usurps the purposes of the US Bankruptcy Code.

This analysis seeks to fill these significant gaps in the literature [and to answer questions vexing the US and international financial markets, for the definitive elimination of doubt – in support of our long-standing demonstration that securitization and the creation and marketing of ‘structured products’ represents serious fraud – Ed.].

Although the following analysis is supported with US case law, the principles derived are applicable to securitization transactions in both common-law countries and civil-law countries – which means that they are applicable in, for instance, the United Kingdom. In analyzing the legality of securitization, the following criteria are relevant:

• Origins and history of securitization – legislative history, evolution of securitization processes, and current practices. Carlson (1998), Janger (2002) and Lupica (2000) (4) trace the known history of US securitization to direct and specific efforts/collaborations to avoid the impact of US bankruptcy laws. Klee & Butler and other authors have traced the history of securitization to attempts to handle the problem of non-performing debt.

• Types of contracts used in securitization:

The primary criteria for enforceability.

• Purposes, wording and scope of applicable laws – state contract laws, State trusts laws, US Bankruptcy Code, and State/Federal securities laws. The legislative intent of the US Congress in drafting and revising the US Bankruptcy Code.

• How the applicable laws are applied in securitization processes – by market participants, regulators and lawyers that represent investors.

•The people, markets, and entities and organizations affected by securitization.

• The usefulness of existing (if any), possible and proposed (if any) deterrence measures designed to reduce fraud/crime/misconduct [such as has been extensively reported by this service, and in International Currency Review – Ed.].

• Transaction costs.

• The results and consequences of the application (or non-application) of relevant laws.

A: SECURITIZATION VIOLATES STATE USURY LAWS
Securitization violates State usury laws, because the resulting effective interest rate typically exceeds legally allowable rates (set by State usury laws) (5). There is substantial disagreement (conflicts in case-law holdings) among various US court jurisdictions, and also within some judicial jurisdictions, about some issues; and these conflicts have not been resolved by the US Supreme Court 6. On these issues, even the cases for which the US Supreme Court denied certiorari, vary substantially in their holdings. The pertinent issues are as follows:

1: What constitutes usury.
2: What costs should be included when calculating the effective cost-of-funds.
3. What types of forbearance qualify for applicability of usury laws.
4: Conditions for pre-emption of state usury laws. Where the securitization is deemed an assignment of collateral, the effective cost-of-funds for the securitization transaction is not the advertised interest cost (investor’s coupon rate) of the ABS securities, but rather the sum of the following elements:

• The greater of the sponsor’s/originator’s annual cost-of-equity (in percentages) or the percentage annual cash yield from the collateral (in a situation where the SPV’s corporate documents expressly state that the Excess Spread should be paid to the sponsor, the Excess Spread should be subtracted from the resulting percentage). The Excess Spread is defined as the Gross Cash Yield From The Collateral, minus the interest paid to investors, minus the Servicing Expense (paid to the servicer), minus Charge-offs (impaired collateral).

• The Amortized Value Difference:
The difference prevailing between the Market Value of the collateral, and the amount raised from the ABS offering (before bankers’ fees), which is then amortized over the average life of the ABS bonds (at a discount rate equal to the US Treasury Bond rate of same maturity) and then expressed as percentage of the market value of the collateral. This difference can range from 10-30% of the Market Value of the collateral, and is highest where there is a senior/junior structure, and the junior/first-loss piece serves only as credit enhancement.

• Amortized Total Periodic Transaction Cost:
The Pre-offering Transaction Costs are amortized over the average life of the ABS, a rate equal to the interest rate on an equivalent-term US Treasury bond. The Periodic Transaction Costs are then added to the Amortized Pre-offering Transaction Costs to obtain Total Periodic Transaction Cost which is expressed as a percentage of the value of the pledged collateral.

The Pre-offering Transaction Costs include external costs (underwriters’ commissions/fees, filing fees, administrative costs (escrow, transfer agent, etc.), marketing costs, accountant’s fees, legal fees, etc.) and internal costs incurred solely because of the securitization transaction (namely, costs incurred internally by the sponsor/originator, viz. direct administrative costs, printing, etc.). Periodic Transaction Costs = admin. costs, servicing fees, charge-off expenses, escrow costs.

• Foregone Capital Appreciation:
The foregone average annual appreciation/depreciation of the value of the collateral minus the interest rate on demand deposits, with the difference expressed as a percentage of the Market Value of the collateral.

The sum of these four elements is typically greater than state-law usury benchmark rates.

Where the securitization is deemed a ‘true-sale’, there is an implicit financing cost which is typically usurious, because it is equal to the sum of the following:

• Base Cost of Capital:
The greater of the sponsor’s or originator’s annual weighted-average-cost-of-capital, or the annual percentage yield from the collateral.

• The Amortized Total Periodic Transaction Cost:
The Pre-Securitization Transaction Costs paid by the sponsor or originator and directly attributable to the offering is amortized over the life of the ABS, at a rate equivalent to the interest rate on an equivalent-term US Treasury bond, and the result (the Amortized Pre-Securitization Costs) is then added to the Periodic Transaction Costs for only one period in order to obtain the Total Periodic Transaction Cost, which is then expressed as a percentage of the market value of the collateral. This is the Amortized Total Periodic Transaction Cost.

The Pre-Securitization Transaction Costs include external costs (underwriters’ commissions/fees, filing fees, administrative costs (escrow, transfer agent, etc.), marketing costs, accountant’s fees, legal fees, etc.) and internal costs incurred solely because of the securitization transaction (viz. costs incurred internally by the sponsor/originator, namely direct administrative costs, printing). Periodic Transaction Costs = admin. costs, servicing fees, charge-off expenses, escrow costs.

• The Value Difference:
This is the difference between the Market Value of the collateral, and the amount raised from the ABS offering (before bankers’ fees), is amortized over the average life of the ABS bonds and the result is then expressed as percentage of the Market Value of the collateral.

• This difference can range from 10 to 30%, and is highest where the senior/junior structure is used and the junior piece serves only as credit enhancement.

• Amortized Unrealized Losses:
Any unrealized loss in the carrying amount of the collateral, is amortized over the estimated average life of the ABS, and the result for one period is expressed as a percentage of the book value of the collateral. Most Asset-Backed Securities collateral data are recorded in financial statements at the lower-of-cost-or-market.

• Foregone Capital Appreciation:
foregone average annual appreciation/depreciation of the value of the collateral minus the interest rate on demand deposits, with the difference expressed as a percentage of the Market Value of the collateral. The sum of these elements is typically greater than state-law usury benchmark rates.

B: ALL ‘TRUE-SALE’, DISGUISED LOAN’ AND ‘ASSIGNMENT
SECURITIZATIONS ARE ESSENTIALLY TAX-EVASION SCHEMES
In the United States, the applicable tax evasion statute is the US Internal Revenue Code Section 7201 7 which reads as follows: “…….Any person who willfully attempts in any manner to evade or defeat any tax imposed by this title or the payment thereof shall, in addition to other penalties provided by law, be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not more than $100,000 ($500,000 in the case of a corporation), or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both, together with the costs of prosecution………”.

Under this statute and related case law, prosecutors
must prove three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

(1): The actus reus (the guilty conduct) – which consists of an affirmative act (and not merely an omission or failure to act) that constitutes evasion or an attempt to evade either: (a) the assessment of a tax or (b) the payment of a tax.

(2): The mens rea or “mental” element of willfulness –
the specific intent to violate an actually known legal duty.

In the case of ‘true sale’ transactions, the tax evasion (8) occurs because:

(a): The sponsor determines the price at which the collateral is transferred to the Special Purpose Vehicle and hence, can arbitrarily lower/increase the price to avoid capital gains taxes – it being assumed here that the sponsor is a profit-maximizing entity and will always act to minimize its tax liability and to avoid any tax assessment;

(b): The sponsor typically retains a ‘residual’ interest in the SPV in the form of IOs, POs and “junior pieces”, which are typically taxed differently and on a different tax-basis compared with the original collateral: hence, the sponsor can lower the price of the collateral upon transfer to the SPV, and convert what would have been capital gains, into a non-taxable basis in the SPV “residual”;

(c): There is typically the requisite “intent” by the sponsor – evidenced by the arrangement of the transaction and the transfer of assets to the Special Purpose Vehicle;

(d): Before securitization, collateral is typically reported in the sponsors’ financial statements at book value (lower-of-cost-or-market: under both American and international accounting standards, loans and accounts receivable are typically not re-valued to market-value unless there has been some major impairment in value) which does not reflect true Market Values, and results in effective tax evasion upon transfer of the collateral to the SPV because any unrealized gain is not taxed;

(e): The actus reus is manifested by the execution of the securitization transaction and transfer of assets to the Special Purpose Vehicle;

(f): The mens rea or specific intent is manifested by the elaborate arrangements implicit in securitization transactions, the method of determination of the price of the collateral to be transferred to the Special Purpose Vehicle, the objectives of securitization, and the sponsor’s transfer of assets to the Special Purpose Vehicle;

(g): The unpaid tax liability consists of foregone tax on the capital gains from the collateral (the transaction is structured to avoid recognition of capital gains), and tax on any income from the collateral which is ‘converted’ into basis or other non-taxable forms;

(h): Income (from the collateral) that would have been taxable in the sponsor’s financial statements, is converted into non-taxable basis in the form of the SPV’s Interest-Only (IO) and Principal-Only (PO) securities: part of the Interest-Spread (the difference between the SPV’s income and what it pays as interest and operating costs) is paid out to PO-holders, and this transforms interest into return-of-capital or just capital repayment, with no tax consequences.

In the case of ‘disguised loan’ or ‘assignment’ securitization transactions,
the tax evasion occurs because:

(a): The sponsor determines the price at which the collateral is transferred to the SPV, and hence can lower/increase the price of the collateral to avoid capital gains taxes;

(b): The sponsor typically retains a ‘residual’ interest in the SPV which is typically taxed differently and on a different tax-basis compared to the original collateral: hence, the sponsor can lower the price upon transfer to the SPV, and convert what would have been capital gains, into non-taxable basis for tax purposes;

(c): The transfer of collateral to the SPV and the creation of interest-only and principal-only securities essentially converts what would have been taxable capital gains into non-taxable basis;

(d): Any gain in the value of the collateral is not recognized for tax purposes, because there has not been any ‘sale’;

(e): Where the ABS is partly amortizing, any capital gains are converted into interest payments;
(f): The actus reus is manifested by the execution of the securitization transaction and transfer of assets to the Special Purpose Vehicle;

(g): The mens rea or specific intent is manifested by the elaborate arrangements implicit in securitization transactions, the objectives of securitization and the sponsor’s transfer of assets to the Special Purpose Vehicle;

(h): The unpaid tax liability consists of tax on the capital gains from the transfer of the collateral (the transaction is structured to avoid recognition of a sale, whereas the transfer to the Special Purpose Vehicle is effectively a sale), and tax liability on any income from the collateral which is ‘converted’ into basis or other non-taxable forms (Interest-Onlys and Principal-Onlys), by securitization.

C – 1: IN ALL ‘TRUE-SALE’, ‘DISGUISED LOAN’ AND ‘ASSIGNMENT’ SECURITIZATIONS, THE
CONFLICT OF INTEREST INHERENT IN THE SPONSOR ALSO SERVING AS THE SERVICER,
CONSTITUTES FRAUD AND CONVERSION: SEE OUR STANDARD LEGAL NOTES BELOW.
In most securitization transactions, the sponsor eventually serves as the servicer of the Special Purpose Vehicle asset pool.

As servicer, the sponsor: (a) determines when there has been impairment of collateral; (b) selects collateral for replacement; and (c) monitors collateral performance.

To prove fraud, prosecutors must prove several elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

(1): The actus reus (the guilty conduct) – which consists of an affirmative act (and not merely an omission or failure to act) of misrepresentation of material facts. In securitizations, the sponsor typically makes material misrepresentations:

(a) The sponsor/servicer selects the assets to be transferred to the SPV, and the terms of the offering Prospectus typically misrepresent the level of objectivity and fairness of the servicer/sponsor;

(b) The sponsor/servicer selects collateral for substitution where there are problems – the past and present disclosure statements and ABS offering documents materially misrepresent the sponsor/servicer’s objectivity/fairness.

(2): The mens rea or ‘mental’ element of willfulness – the specific intent to misrepresent the sponsor/servicer’s acts, truthfulness and objectivity/fairness, is manifested by the dual rôle of sponsor/servicer which constitutes a conflict-of-interest. Mens rea is also clearly inferable from the facts and circumstances: the sponsor/servicer clearly has significant economic, psychological and ‘legal’ incentives to maximize its profits by:

(a): Delaying substitution of collateral for as long as possible;

(b): Delaying recognition of collateral impairment, and:

(c): Substituting impaired collateral with sub-standard collateral; all of which make the sponsor highly unsuitable for the rôle of servicer;

(3): The reliance element: ABS investors rely heavily on the structure/arrangements, contracts and disclosure statements in securitizations, which are always relatively complex. These form the primary source of knowledge and valuation terms for the investor;

(4): The victim(s) suffer(s) loss as a result of the misrepresentations (whether of direct or proximate causation). Investors suffer losses because of the sponsor’s/servicer’s misrepresentations of its obligations, fairness, objectivity and fiduciary duties:

Specifically:

(a) Investors’ estimates of the values of Asset-Backed Securities are inaccurate and too high due to the servicer’s/sponsor’s misrepresentations;

(b) Investors incur unnecessary trading costs to re-balance their portfolios as the Asset-Backed Security becomes riskier;

(c) Investors and the sponsor/servicer incur additional monitoring costs whenever there is any report of impairment of collateral or substitution. Furthermore, in the ABS sales process, the underwriter makes certain representations concerning the effectiveness and predictability of the collection process. Under certain conditions, investors relying on such representations may have a securities fraud claim if the servicer fails to perform, such as in bankruptcy.

C-2: IN ALL ‘TRUE-SALE’, ‘DISGUISED LOAN’ AND ‘ASSIGNMENT’ SECURITIZATIONS WHERE
THE SPECIAL PURPOSE VEHICLE IS A TRUST, THE DECLARATION OF TRUST IS VOID AS IT EXISTS FOR AN ILLEGAL PURPOSE. [ALL CONTRACTS STRUCK FOR AN ILLEGAL PURPOSE ARE NULL AND VOID, SOMETHING THE CRIMINAL ENTERPRISES DON’T WANT YOU TO KNOW].
The declaration of trust relating to the SPV is void because the intent and purpose of the SPV is illegal and unconstitutional as described in this analysis and in Nwogugu (2006).

D: OFF-BALANCE SHEET TREATMENT OF ASSET-BACKED SECURITIES (BOTH
FOR ‘TRUE-SALE’ AND FOR ‘ASSIGNMENT’ TRANSACTIONS) CONSTITUTES FRAUD
Under prevailing accounting rules in the United States and most countries, if certain criteria were met, the debt raised by the Special Purpose Vehicle in securitization can be treated as off-balance sheet debt. However this requires compliance with three criteria:

(i) The Special Purpose Vehicle should be truly independent from the sponsor and the directors, fiduciary administrative duties notwithstanding.

(ii) The sponsor’s transfer of the assets to the SPV should be a ‘true sale’ and the sponsor should not have any ongoing economic interest in the assets.

(iii) The form and substance should transparently be identical, and the structure should not appear to be illusory or deceptive.

Nevertheless, these off-balance-sheet treatment criteria have been recently reformed by changes in accounting standards. The British-based International Accounting Standards Board and the US FASB are moving towards stricter reporting standards. Specifically:

• FIN 46 (FASB): Effective in 2003, FIN 46 applies only to companies subject to regulation by the FASB. Its objective is to substantially tighten the criteria necessary to obtain off-balance-sheet treatment for Special Purpose Vehicles, and its main thrust is capital adequacy.

• FIN 46 also imposes an obligation on originators to consolidate the accounts of an SPV (denying off-balance-sheet treatment) unless the total equity at risk is regarded as sufficient to enable the SPV to finance its own activities.

• IAS 32, IAS 39, and IFRS 7: International Accounting Standards (IAS) 32 covers the disclosure and presentation of financial instruments, but from 2007 onwards the disclosure aspects were replaced by the introduction of International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS) (7). IAS 39 deals with the recognition and measurement of financial instruments, and has been challenged in two aspects:

(1): Introducing the concept of “fair value” accounting for financial instruments and (2): whether SPVs should be consolidated back into the balance sheet of the originator. Like Fin 46, IAS 32 may result in consolidation of most SPVs on-balance-sheet of the sponsors.

• Basel II: The Basel II disciplines are aimed at the global banking industry and call for a more scientific measurement of risk and of capital requirements for banks in order to support that risk. Since the general expectation has been that, in overall terms, the proposals could require the banking industry to maintain a higher rather than lower capital base, the proposals have met resistance from many banks. The Basel Committee’s rules/codes are not binding because the Committee is not a regulator: a situation exploited by the racketeering institutions.

But off-balance sheet treatment of ABS (Asset-Backed Securities) debt in securitizations, constitutes fraud because:

(1): The mens rea or ‘mental’ element of willfulness – the specific intent to misrepresent the true ‘Trust’ nature of the Special Purpose Vehicle debt – is manifested by the elaborate arrangements and structure of the securitization transaction.

(2): The actus reus (the guilty conduct): This consists of the affirmative act of misrepresentation of materials facts by not consolidating the Special Purpose Vehicle on the sponsor’s Balance Sheet.

In securitization, consolidation of the Special Purpose Vehicle onto the sponsor’s financial statements is warranted because the sponsor:

(a) Typically retains a residual economic interest in the Special Purpose Vehicle;

(b) Functions as servicer of the Special Purpose Vehicle asset pool – which grants the sponsor significant control over the assets and the SPV’s operations;

(c) Determines recognition of impairment of collateral, and selects and provides assets for ‘substitution’ of collateral; and:

(d) Typically misrepresents the level of objectivity and fairness of the servicer/sponsor in disclosure statements.

Taken together, these factors and all the aforementioned new accounting standards constitute sufficient actus reus.

(3): The reliance element:
The sponsor’s current and his prospective shareholders and other investors rely heavily on the structure/arrangements of securitizations, associated disclosure statements and assurances of off-balance sheet treatment of SPV debt in securitizations, which are relatively complex. These form the primary source of knowledge and valuation terms for the investor.

(4): The victim suffers loss as a result of the misrepresentation (direct or proximate causation): Investors suffer loss because of the sponsor/servicer’s misrepresentations of its obligations:

(a) Investors’ estimates of the values of the sponsor’s equity are inaccurate and excessively high due to the servicer’s/sponsor’s misrepresentations of the SPV debt;

(b) Investors incur unnecessary trading costs to re-balance their portfolios as the sponsor is deemed more risky;

(c) The investor and the sponsor/servicer incurs additional monitoring costs whenever there is any report of impairment of collateral or substitution.

E: ALL ‘TRUE-SALE’, ‘DISGUISED LOAN’ AND ‘ASSIGNMENT’
SECURITIZATIONS INVOLVE FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCES

Any transfer or conveyance of the assets of a debtor that is deemed to be made for the purposes of hindering, delaying or defrauding actual or potential creditors, may be determined to be a Fraudulent Conveyance (9).

In the United States, three sets of laws cover potential Fraudulent Conveyances:

(a) Section 548 of the US Bankruptcy Code (the Code); or

(b) Most States have adopted the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (UFTA) (10) or else the older Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act (UFCA); or

(c) Fraudulent Transfers claims can also be made under a theory of constructive fraud, in which circumstantial evidence may warrant a finding that Fraudulent Transfers were made with the primary purpose of shielding assets from current or future creditors. Although each US State has its own laws regarding the appropriate elements of proof of constructive fraud, Section 548(a)(2)
of the US Bankruptcy Code permits an inference of constructive fraud if the following factors exist:

(1): The debtor received less than reasonably equivalent value for the property transferred; and:

(2): The debtor either: was insolvent or became insolvent as a result of the transfer, retained unreasonably small capital after the transfer, or made the transfer with the intent or belief that it would incur debts beyond its ability to pay.

The following are the various theories of Fraudulent Conveyance
within the context of securitization.

E-1: Sponsor/Originator receives insufficient value for assets transferred:

All ‘true sale‘ as well as ‘assignment’ securitizations involve Fraudulent Conveyances (as defined within the US Bankruptcy Code and the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act) because the originator receives insufficient value for assets that it transfers to the Special Purpose Vehicle (11), (12):

(i): Horizon mismatch:
In the case of receivables and fixed income assets, since the originator/sponsor sells these assets before their maturities, their effective yields and values are much lower than their stated yields, and hence, the originator receives less-than-normal value for assets transferred.

(ii): The originator always incurs substantial cash and non-cash transaction costs in such transfers, which reduces the net-value it receives from the transfer to the Special Purpose Vehicle. These costs include all legal fees, accounting fees, underwriting fees, monitoring costs, administrative costs, regulatory compliance costs, capital-budgeting costs (because the decision to securitize has inherent negotiation costs), conflict costs and resource allocation costs, etc.;

(iii): In these asset transfers, the originator loses all the future appreciation of the transferred assets: the transfers are done at book values or stated adjusted costs. The asset valuations for the transfers don’t consider future increases in asset value, and hence are an implicit undervaluation.

(iv): Where the assets transferred have residual values (as in computer leases and equipment leases), the originator often cannot accurately calculate such residual values and does not incorporate them in asset valuation, and loses such residual value; and hence, receives less than normal value for the assets transferred;

(v): In some securitizations, the originator’s transfer of assets to the SPV is backed by recourse (to the originator’s assets) and such recourse has economic value that reduces the net-value that the originator receives from the transfer. [Higgin & Mason (2004), Pantaleo et al. (1996) and Plank (1991) (13) describe the basis for the value of such recourse].

(vi): Where the originator and sponsor is financially distressed, securitization is often the chosen form of financing, and under Fraudulent Conveyance laws, securitizations are illegal because:

(1): Securitizations increase the bankruptcy risk of the originator/sponsor;

(2): The distressed company’s assets are typically valued at higher interest rates (which yield lower asset values) and hence, the originator loses value in the transfers.

(vii): The originator’s/sponsor’s net-cash proceeds from the securitization transaction is often significantly less than either the pre-transaction carrying value of the collateral, or the net realizable value of the collateral (liquidation value in a supervised open auction) – primarily because of transaction costs, over-collateralization, etc..

E-2: ‘Intent to hinder, delay or defraud creditors’:
Implicit pre-petition waiver of right to file for bankruptcy:

All ‘true sale‘ as well as ‘assignment’ securitizations involve Fraudulent Conveyances (as defined in the US Bankruptcy Code and the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act) because as described in this analysis, such securitizations are the equivalent of illegal pre-petition waivers of the right to file bankruptcy, and the waiver of the bankruptcy stay – all of which are sufficient evidence of ‘intent to hinder, delay, or defraud any creditor of the debtor’, which is the major element of Fraudulent Conveyance under the UFTA and the US Bankruptcy Code.

E-3: ‘Intent to hinder, delay or defraud creditors’:
originator’s transfer of assets to the Special Purpose Vehicle:

All ‘true sale‘ and ‘assignment’ securitizations involve Fraudulent Conveyances (as defined in the US Bankruptcy Code and the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act) because the originator‘s/sponsor‘s mere act of transferring assets to an SPecial Purpsoe Vehicle reduces the values of any of its unsecured creditors’ claims – i.e. trade creditors, holders of any unsecured loans, holders of certain preferred stock, etc.. (14).

Without such transfers, the unsecured creditors would have had access to such assets. This is sufficient evidence of ‘intent to hinder, delay or defraud’ existing creditors.

[It follows that the Rule of Law has been comprehensively flouted,
with the rot starting and condoned at the highest levels – Ed.].

E-4: ‘Intent to hinder, delay or defraud creditors’:
Originator’s transfer of assets to the SPV has not been undertaken on an arms’-length basis:

The originator’s transfer of assets to the SPV via a ‘true sale’ or ‘assignment’ is typically not done by means of arms’-length transactions. Most originators have substantial influence/control over the valuation of collateral, the selection of the appraiser and valuers, the choice of appraised collateral, the corporate form and life of the SPV, and the selection of the officers/trustees of the SPV. Hence, the originator can manipulate the values of collateral for accounting and economic purposes. The originator typically creates, funds and staffs the SPV – hires the SPV’s officers and directors and determines the SPV’s corporate governance policies. The combination of such excessive control, and the originator’s transfer of assets to the SPV is prima facie evidence of ‘intent to hinder, delay or defraud’ the originator’s existing and future creditors.

E-5: Securitization increases the originator’s bankruptcy risk:
Securitization can increase the bankruptcy risk of an originator (15), where:

(a) The cash proceeds from the securitization transaction are significantly less than either the carrying value of the collateral, or the net realizable value of the collateral (liquidation value in a supervised auction); or:

(b) Management reinvests the cash proceeds of securitization in projects that yield returns that are less than what the collateral would have yielded, or less than the company’s cost of debt.
Securitization via ‘assignments’ or else ‘disguised loans’ increases the risk to be borne by the originator/sponsor, and also increases its post-transaction cost of capital primarily because:

(a) The amount raised is less than the assets pledged;

(b) The pledge of assets to the SPV reduces the originator’s borrowing
capacity and financial flexibility;

(c) The pledge of assets to the Special Purpose Vehicle reduces the originator’s ability to repay other debt. Hence, the originator/sponsor loses value in the transfer of assets to the SPV.

F: SECURITIZATION USURPS UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY LAWS AND HENCE IS ILLEGAL
Securitization undermines US Federal bankruptcy policy, because it is used (in lieu of secured financing) as a means of avoiding certain bankruptcy-law restrictions (16). Indeed, the origins of securitization in the United States can be traced directly to attempts by banks and financial institutions to avoid bankruptcy law restrictions.

An analysis of the legislative intent of the US Congress with regard to the US Bankruptcy Code confirms that securitization contravenes most policies of the US Bankruptcy Code (17).

• IT ALSO CONTRAVENES PUBLIC POLICY, WHICH EMBRACES:

(a): Recognition of financial distress;
(b): Stay of bankruptcy proceedings;
(c): Determination of claims and priorities of security interests;
(d): Fair division of value;
(e): The continuance or liquidation decision;
(f): Efficient reorganization.

In most cases, insolvency often occurs before management decides to file for bankruptcy. Many firms that are either financially distressed and or technically insolvent continue to operate as if they are normal companies, and enter into securitization transactions. often, securitization enables them to reduce the effect of actual and or perceived low credit ratings. Securitization is often a major strategic choice for financially distressed corporations (18). Under the US Internal Revenue Tax Code, securitization qualifies as a reorganization. The underlying issues are as follows.

F-1: Implicit waiver of right to file for bankruptcy and/or Stay of Bankruptcy:

Securitization involves an implicit (and often an express) waiver of the debtor’s, originator’s, sponsor’s right to file for voluntary bankruptcy. This is achieved by using a bankruptcy-remote Special Purpose Vehicle and segregating the assets that otherwise would have been part of the bankruptcy estate (19), (20). Securitization involves an implicit (and very often an express) waiver of the creditor/Asset-Backed Securities-investor’s right to file for involuntary bankruptcy (21), (22).

US Courts have repeatedly held that such waivers are void as against public policy. In the absence of securitization, these same investors/creditors would have been creditors/ a.k.a. lenders to the sponsor/originator. This implicit waiver is achieved by employing a Special Purpose Vehicle and segregating the assets that otherwise would have been part of the bankruptcy estate; and by various forms of credit enhancement.

Without the automatic stay of the Bankruptcy Code, the debtor/sponsor would not need to transfer assets to an SPV. Carlson (1998) traces the history of securitization to direct and specific efforts/collaborations to avoid the impact of US bankruptcy laws (23).

Furthermore, there is a distinct difference of opinion among US courts about the enforceability of pre-petition waivers (of rights to file for voluntary or involuntary bankruptcy) which has not been resolved by the US Supreme Court (24). However, the standard securitization processes diverge substantially from the conditions in cases where the courts held that pre-petition waivers (or rights to file for bankruptcy) were unenforceable.

F-2: The U.S. Bankruptcy Code expressly invalidates certain pre-filing transfers:

Sections of the US Bankruptcy Code expressly invalidate certain types of pre-filing transfers, payments and transactions (that occur within a specific time period before the filing of bankruptcy). Most securitizations fall under the classes of voidable pre-filing transfers.

• Hence, under these foregoing circumstances/conditions, bankruptcy laws and associated principles are implicated and apply where the firm has not filed for bankruptcy.

Therefore, any pre-bankruptcy filing transactions that invalidate or contravene the principles of Bankruptcy Codes are illegal. The bankruptcy-remoteness characteristic of securitizations prevents the efficient functioning of US bankruptcy law, and jeopardises the law.

G: NEW THEORIES ON THE EFFECTS OF SECURITIZATION ON BANKRUPTCY EFFICIENCY
The following are new theories that explain how securitization
contravenes the basic principles of US bankruptcy laws:

G-1: The illegal wealth-transfer theory:

Securitization can result in Fraudulent Conveyance and in illegal transfer of wealth where the transaction effectively renders the originator/issuer company technically insolvent; or fraudulently transfers value to the SPV (in the form of low collateral values) and then to the ABS/MBS [Mortgage-Backed Securities] bond holders (in the form of low bond prices, and or high interest rates) (25). Courts have held that stripping a company of the ability to pay judgment claims is a ‘predicate act’ that is actionable under Federal R.I.C.O. statutes (26). Securitization can also result in illegal wealth transfers to the intermediary bank where it retains a residual interest in the Trust/SPV (residual securities) or is over-compensated (excessive cash fees, trustee positions, underwriter is granted a percentage of securities offered, etc.).

G-2: The Priority-changing theory:

To the extent that bankruptcy laws are designed to facilitate rehabilitation of troubled companies, and increase efficient allocation of debtor assets to creditors, securitization enables the debtor to defeat the Absolute-Priority principle; and effectively to re-arrange priorities of claims, particularly where the debtor/originator does not have any secured claims (but has only unsecured claims). This is achieved by securitizing unencumbered assets and applying credit enhancement to provide higher-quality securities (which is the equivalent of higher priority) to other creditors.

G-3: The Facilitation of inefficient-continuance theory:

Securitization enables the debtor/originator to change the progression of financial distress, by supplying cash that typically lasts for short periods of time, and often at a high effective cost of funds. This implicates the principles of ‘inefficient continuance’ (where an otherwise non-viable company that should be liquidated, sold/merged or substantially reorganized, continues to operate solely as a result of short-term solutions and or bankruptcy court orders), and hence, the sections of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (‘SOX’) – which require certification of solvency of the company and adequacy of internal controls, and also carry criminal penalties for non-compliance (27).

The question of whether ‘inefficient continuance’ has occurred is a matter of law that should be decided by judges. Thus, all else remaining constant, where the necessary elements occur, (a securitization and ‘inefficient continuance’ and management’s certification of solvency and adequate internal controls), management and the company become criminally liable.

G-4: The information-content effect theory:

Securitization changes and distorts the perceived financial position of the originator/sponsor, because various forms of credit enhancement (senior/junior pieces, loan insurance, etc.) are used to achieve a high credit rating for the Special Purpose Vehicle – which may be misconstrued by stock-market investors as evidence of good prospects for the originator-company. To the extent that all securities offerings have relevant information content and associated signalling, then securitization by financially distressed companies effectively conveys the wrong signals to capital markets and hence, changes the expectations of creditors and shareholders (and in the case of bankruptcy, makes it more difficult to form consensus efficiently on a plan of reorganization once the bankruptcy petition is filed). In this realm, investor and creditor expectations are critical and have utility value and typically form the basis for investment/disinvestment and for negotiations about restructuring or any plan of reorganization.

US Courts have held that persons that create false impressions about the financial condition of a company are potentially liable under Federal R.I.C.O. statutes (28).

G-5: The information-content effect theory:

To the extent that securitzation defers or eliminates a potential creditor’s rights to file for involuntary bankruptcy, then securitization can be deemed to be fraudulent, and gives rise to criminal causes of action such as deceit, conversion, etc. The creditor’s right to file for a debtor’s involuntary bankruptcy is a valid property right that arises from State property law, State contract law, State constitutional laws, and Federal bankruptcy laws (29). Deprivation of, or interference with, this property right is a violation of the US Constitution. Securitization can defer or eliminate this property right, and hence violate the US Constitution where the transaction:

(a): Effectively rearranges priority of claims; or:

(b): Reduces the debtor-company’s borrowing capacity (value of unencumbered/unpledged collateral) to the detriment of secured and or unsecured creditors; or:

(c): Uses the proceeds of the transaction to pay-off some (but not all) members of a potential class of creditors that can file an involuntary bankruptcy petition.

H: SECURITIZATION CONSTITUTES A VIOLATION OF FEDERAL R.I.C.O. STATUTES
In ‘true-sale’, ‘disguised loan’ or ‘assignment’ securitizations, there are fraudulent transactions which serve as ‘predicate acts’ under Federal R.I.C.O. statutes (30).

The specific R.I.C.O. sections implicated are:
• Section 1341 (mail fraud)
• Section 1343 (wire fraud)
• Section 1344 (financial institution fraud)
• Section 1957 (engaging in monetary transactions in property
derived from specified unlawful activity).
• Section 1952 (racketeering).

The prices of the collateral are determined in negotiations between the sponsor/issuer and the intermediary bank and on occasion, the SPV’s trustees. This presents opportunities for ‘predicate acts’ (ie. fraud, conversion, etc.) because:

(1): The collateral could be under-valued or over-valued. There are no State or Federal laws that require independent valuation of collateral or appointment of independent/certified trustees in securitization transactions. The parties involved are often business acquaintances.

The originatorsponsor controls the entire process.

(2): The trustees can be, and are influenced by the sponsor/originator and or intermediary investment-bank.

(3): The required disclosure of collateral is sometimes insufficient. Specifically:

(a): It does not include historical performance of collateral pools;
(b): It does not include criteria for selection of collateral and for substitution of collateral;
(c) Criteria for replacement of impaired collateral are sometimes not reasonable;

(4): Mail and wire are used extensively in communications with investors and participants
in the transaction; and:

(5): There is compulsion – because the intermediary or investment bank has very substantial incentives to under-price the securities, and to inflate/deflate the value of the collateral in order to consummate the transaction and earn fees.

The entire securitization process constitutes violations of Federal R.I.C.O. (31) statutes because:

(1): There is the requisite criminal or civil ‘enterprise’ – consisting of the sponsor/issuer, the trustees and the intermediary bank. These three parties work closely together to effect the securitization transaction.

(2): There are ‘predicate acts’ (32) of:

(a): Mail fraud – using the mails for sending out materials among themselves and to investors.
(b): Wire fraud – using wires to engage in fraud by communicating with investors.
(c): Conversion – where there isn’t proper title to collateral.
(d): Deceit: Misrepresentation of issues and facts pertaining to the securitization transaction.
(e): Securities fraud: disclosure issues.
(f): Loss of profit opportunity.
(g): Making false statements and or misleading representations about the value of the collateral.
(h): Stripping the originator/issuer of the ability to pay debt claims or judgment claims in bankruptcy court – a state of affairs that may apply where the sponsor is financially distressed and the cash proceeds of the transaction are significantly less than the value of the collateral.

(3): There is typically the requisite ‘intent’ by members of the enterprise – evident in knowledge (actual and inferable), acts, omissions, purpose (actual and inferable) and results. Intent can be reasonably inferred from:

(a): The existence of a sponsor that seeks to raise capital – and cannot raise capital on better terms by other means;
(b) The participation of an investment bank that has very strong incentives to consummate the transaction on any agreeable (but not necessarily reasonable) terms.

I: SECURITIZATION CONSTITUTES VIOLATIONS OF U.S. ANTITRUST LAWS
The various processes in securitization constitute egregious violations
of the US Antitrust statutes (33), (34), (35). Specifically:

I-1: Market concentration:

The American Asset-Backed Securities and Mortgage-Backed Securities markets are dominated by relatively few large entities such as FNMA, Freddie Mac, the top five investment banks (all of which have conduit programs), and the top five credit card issuers (MBNA, AMEX, Citigroup, etc.), etc.. As a consequence, the top five ABS/MBS issuers control more than 50% of the US ABS/MBS market.
This constitutes illegal market concentration under US Antitrust legislation

I-2: Market integration:

The American Asset-Backed Securities and Mortgage-Backed Securities markets are essentially both national and international (that is to say, geographically-diverse entitiesand individuals participate in each transaction). Each Asset-Backed Securities (ABS) transaction/offering typically involves a ‘roadshow’ which consists of presentations to investors in various cities.

The cost of the roadshow is often paid by the underwriter(s) before its fees are paid by the sponsor. In addition, there are printing, mailing, traveling and administrative costs that increase with the greater geographical dispersion of investors. This has two main effects:

(a): It reduces competitive pressure on dominant investment banks and groups of investment banks (to the detriment of smaller investment banks); and:
(b): It raises market-entry barriers by making it more expensive to conduct ‘roadshows’ for new offerings. Hence, the market integration created by the industry practices of securities underwriters is anti-competitive and violates the Sherman Act, and the FTC Antitrust statutes.

I-3: Syndicate collusion:

The syndicates (of investment banks) used in distributing Asset-Backed Securities and Mortgage-Backed Securities (ABS/MBS) essentially collude to determine:
(a): The price at which each ABS tranche is sold;
(b): Which investors can purchase different tranches.

Collusion occurs because:

(a): In the typical Asset-Backed Securities (ABS) offering, the price determination process is not transparent or democratic because the lead underwriters typically negotiate the offering price with the originator/sponsor and the prospective investors (although some underwriters use auctions).

The lead underwriters purchase most of the new-issue ABS, and the balance is typically sold to ‘junior’ syndicate members (who presumably can arrange to buy more Asset-Backed Securities from the lead underwriters than were allocated to them).

In essence, the true price-demand characteristics and negotiability of junior underwriting-syndicate members are hidden simply because of the structure of the underwriting/bidding process. Hence, the existing syndicate-based ABS distribution system for new issue Asset-Backed Securities distorts the true demand for the ABS, clearly reduces competition, and facilitates and results in collusion, and therefore constitutes violations of the Sherman Act and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Antitrust statutes.

(b) Similarly, the ABS allocation process is not transparent. The lead underwriter and junior underwriters allocate new-issue ABS to investors based on subjectively determined ‘suitability’ and also ‘in-house criteria’. There are no established or generally accepted important guidelines for such ‘in-house’ criteria and associated allocation.

The lead and junior underwriters can typically collude to determine that only certain investors deemed appropriate are allocated the Asset-Backed Securities in question. Hence, the antitrust violation (collusion) occurs solely because of the underwriters’ discretionary choice of investors to whom ABS are allocated. This is more evident where the poll of investors consists mostly of institutional investors – so that final offering prices are more sensitive to choice of investors, and prices can change significantly simply by changes in allocation to investors. In such circumstances, the collusion is reasonably inferable here, so long as there are no statutory or generally accepted allocation criteria that have been approved by the NASD or other trade associations.

I-4: Price formation:
The prices of ABS securities may often be linked to the prices/yields of US Treasury bonds – the credit risk of ABS/MBS being priced relative to the risks of US Treasury bonds.

• This system distorts the true demand and supply balance for the ABS/MBS, and erroneously incorporates the demand/supply relationships of the US Treasury Bond market, into the ABS/MBS markets. The key question then, is whether there are conditions under which the US Treasury Bond market is completely de-coupled from the ABS market: or, phrased differently, whether there is sufficient justification for actual or perceived de-coupling of the US Treasury Bond market and the US ABS market. These conditions are as follows:

(1): The credit fundamentals of the US Treasury market differ substantially from those of the ABS market. (The Treasury market is much more sensitive to US Federal Reserve actions, currency fluctuations, consumer spending, Federal/State fiscal policies, etc.). The ABS market tends to be more sensitive to industry-specific and sometimes company-specific risks/factors.

(2): The use of various credit enhancement techniques and products further exacerbates the differences in the credit trends and/or quality in the US Treasury and ABS markets. In Asset-Backed Securities transactions, most forms of credit enhancement create a floor, but do not limit or affect other industry exposures or company exposures. In the US Treasury market, investors are subject to a greater variety of risks.

(3): Investors’ objectives in the US Treasury Bond markets differ from those of investors in Asset-Backed Securities markets. Hence, investors are very likely to view these two markets and the underlying risks differently, and should value the securities differently.

I-5: Vertical foreclosure:

In the ABS/MBS markets, some investment banks and commercial banks are active in almost all phases of the securitization process: origination (through in-house conduits); due diligence; disclosure and pricing; new issue securities offerings; and also in secondary-market trading. Similarly, non-bank entities can use their own asset portfolios (the origination of credit card receivables or mortgage receivables), shelf-registration and marketing procedures and/or Regulation-D/Rule 144A procedures (pricing and new-issue offerings) and in-house trading (secondary-market trading) to participate in almost all aspects of securitization processes.

Hence, these companies have almost no incentive to, and are not required to make their infrastructure and relationships available to competitors.

• Such vertical foreclosure constitutes violation of US antitrust laws.

I-6: Tying (36):

This arises in the following manner:

(a): The sponsor is sometimes formally or informally required to purchase other financial services (loans, letters of credit, custody services, etc.) from the investment bank, in order to effect the securitization transaction;

(b): The investors are sometimes required simultaneously to purchase two or more tranches of an ABS offering, or to promise to buy the same or similar ABS/MBS securities in order to be allocated ABS in new offerings;

(c): The sponsor and or investment bank may formally or informally require investors to purchase minimum dollar volume of ABS in specific offerings in order to be eligible for ‘allocations’ in future offerings. These acts constitute tying, which is anticompetitive and therefore illegal.

I-7: Price-fixing (37):

The Locus-shifting Theory is introduced here. Locus-shifting occurs when a potential and obvious party to a price-fixing scheme is effectively replaced (in pricing negotiations) by a third party that has the resources and willingness to alter dramatically the pricing of goods and services in either the transaction, or via a series of transactions or in the sector or the industry as a whole. Normally, price-fixing would occur between two sponsors or two intermediary banks.

Since the intermediary-investment bank is central to ABS offerings, and associated pricing and negotiations, the price fixing should be deemed to occur between the sponsor/originator and the investment bank (or between two sponsors).

Since each active investment binstitution typically underwrites many offerings simultaneously, and essentially controls the pricing of each new-issue ABS, the investment banks are the locus of said price fixing and are potentially liable for the associated antitrust violations. Further evidence of price fixing maybe obtained by analysing:

(a): The yield differentials of various ABS offerings in various asset classes (ie. automobiles, home equity, mortgages, etc.) by different sponsors within a specific block of time;

(b): The price differentials of various ABS offerings in various asset classes (autos, home equity, credit cards, mortgages, etc.) with the same rating, within a specific block of time.

I-8: Price-fixing (38):

Exclusive contracts facilitate and enhance anti-competitive behavior by contractually restricting conduct by and trade among participants in the market. In the US ABS/MBS markets, existing illegal exclusive contracts include:

(a) Contracts preventing the intermediary investment bank from providing financial services to other prospective securitization sponsor-companies in the same industry/sector;

(b) Contracts (by the sponsor, underwriter(s) or third parties) that prevent or limit the formation of a syndicate of securities dealers;

(c) Contracts that prevent the sponsor from selling securities through other underwriters, other than an appointed intermediary investment bank. These types of contract constitute direct violations of US Antitrust statutes.

I-9: Price-fixing (39):

There are several classes of Asset-Backed Securities:

(1): Securities that involve pure ‘pass-through’ of cash- flows, and hence rights to payment of cash from the SPV pool, but no ownership interest in the pool to:

(a): Interest-Only (IO) securities;
(b): Principal-Only (PO) securities; and:
(c): ‘Traditional’ Asset-Backed Securities that pay both interest and principal.

(2): Securities that confer ownership interests in the underlying pool to:

(a): Interest-Only (IO) securities;
(b): Principal-Only (PO) securities; and:
(c): ‘Traditional’ Asset-Backed Securities that pay both interest and principal.

(3): Debt-type securities that involve a security interest in the underlying collateral:
these manifest themselves as:

(a): Interest-Only (IO) securities;
(b): Principal-Only (PO) securities; and:
(c): ‘Traditional’ Asset-Backed Securities that pay both interest and principal.

In many instances, the Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) offers many tranches in each of the above-mentioned classes of ABS. The tranches within each class typically vary by term, interest rate, duration, and bond-rating/risk-rating. Hence, in any situation where the tranches don’t have any priority as to security interests or rights-to-payment of cash flows from the pool, such stratified offerings within each class (‘IO’, or ‘PO’ or ordinary; or ‘pass-through’, collateral-type or equity-interest) constitute price discrimination because the underlying ‘asset’ and risk is essentially the same, although different securities are being offered in the same transaction (or in a series of transactions), at different prices to investors, based on the same underlying pool of assets.

• The distinguishing and critical element is that there is no contractually agreed-upon priority of claims as to security interests or right-to-payment of cash from the pool of assets.

I-10: Predatory pricing (40):

This occurs when investment banks under-price ABS offerings in order to obtain more investors, and to build name recognition for a particular issuer (that does or intends to come to the ABS market regularly). Evidence of predatory pricing may be inferred or established by:

(a): Comparing the offering prices of various new-issue ABS bonds sold by one sponsor/originator, in the same asset class (auto loans, home equity, credit cards, etc.), but at different times of the year, to offering prices of similar ABS bonds sold by other regular ABS sponsors/originators in the same time periods.

(b): Running regressions to identify any statistically significant relationship between:

(1): The difference in the yield of company XYZ’s ABS bond and the yields of other similar Asset-Backed Securities bonds; and:

(2): Various independent variables such as yield, price, asset type, bond rating, duration, industry, amount of offering, frequency of ABS offerings, types of investors, etc..

(c): Comparing the offering prices of various new-issue ABS bonds underwritten by one investment bank (in the same asset class, but at different times of the year) to offering prices of similar Aset-Back Securities bonds underwritten by other investment banks in the same time periods.

I-11: Rigging of allocations:

Most Asset-Backed Securities offerings are done via allocations of securities by investment banks to their brokerage customers:

(1): Most sponsors issue their Asset-Backed Securities or Mortgage-Backed Securities through bids by investment banks. Most bids for ABS securities are won by a few investment banking firms.

• This may suggest that customers have been ‘allocated’ among investment banks, which is also an indication of collusion.

(2): On occasion, the primary underwriters subcontract work (re-sell securities)
to secondary underwriters.

J: SECURITIZATION INVOLVES VOID CONTRACTS
The process of securitization involves several contracts that are either signed simultaneously or are all signed within a short timeframe. Many of these contracts are void and wholly illegal due to:

(a) Lack of consideration (41): There is no consideration in many contracts used in effecting securitizations. Many of these contracts are unilateral executory undertakings and contain illusory promises. There are three main issues:

(1): Unilateral Executory Promise (42): A unilateral executory promise is not consideration.
The following are some unilateral executory contracts in securitizations:

• The promise made by the Special Purpose Vehicle to pay out periodic interest, whether contingent or non-contingent on whether the collateral pays cash interest.

• Collateral-substitution Agreements contain a promise whereby
the sponsor agrees to substitute impaired collateral.

• Assignment Agreement: Assignment of future collateral (not yet existing)
may be deemed a unilateral executory promise by the assignor.

• Transfer Agreement: The sponsor agrees to transfer the collateral to the Special Purpose Vehicle, and the SPV in return pays cash to the sponsor.

(2): Illusory Promises (43): An illusory promise is not a valid consideration for a contract.

The following are some illusory promises inherent in securitization transactions:

• The Subscription/Purchase Agreement: The SPV’s promises to acquire the collateral with the cash raised from investors are essentially illusory promises. These promises are embedded in the offering Prospectus, but are typically not included other corporate documents. In most cases, the offering Prospectuses don’t state the exact steps in the SPV’s promised purchase of the collateral.

• The Purchase or Subscription Agreement: The Special Purpose Vehicle’s investors purchase beneficial interests in the SPV or the SPV’s debt. These beneficial interests evidence:

(a): The right to receive payments from the SPV; or:
(b): An ownership interest in the underlying collateral, or:
(c): A ‘participation’ in the underlying collateral.

However, at the time of executing this agreement, the only consideration that the SPV can grant to investors in exchange for the purchase amount, consists of promises to purchase the collateral in the future, and to make payments from the SPV’s assets.

Hence, an existing asset is being exchanged for a future asset that does not exist as of the date of the purchase/subscription agreement.

• Furthermore, all securitization offerings are done pursuant to ‘Subscription Agreements’ and likewise pursuant to Investor Questionnaires – both of which documents have to be signed by the prospective investor. None of the agreements signed by the investor as part of his/her purchase of the Special Purpose Vehicle’s Asset-Backed Securities expressly incorporates the promises that are embodied in the offering Prospectus. What typically exists is an implied agreement to subject the investor to the SPV’s articles of incorporation, Trust Indenture, and or Trustees’/Board of Directors’ (or Board of Trustees’) decisions.

• The SPV’s promise to pay interest/dividends on ABS IOs, Preferreds and POs are essentially illusory promises because the underlying collateral may not produce any cash flows: so there won’t be interest/dividend payments.

(3): No Bargain: Some courts have held that there is no consideration (and hence, the contract is void) where one party was not allowed to bargain for the alleged agreement (44).

In some securitizations, the process of setting offering prices for new Asset-Backed Securities issues does not afford all parties the opportunity to negotiate terms of the offering, especially individual investors, because the price of the ABS is typically determined primarily by the sponsor and the lead underwriters. Furthermore, in securitizations, the originator sets the terms of the Special Purpose Vehicle (trust documents, articles of incorporation, bylaws, etc.).

(4): No mutuality (45): In the securitization context, for there to be mutuality:

(a): Each party must have firm control of the subject matters of the contract and the underlying assets (consideration), and:
(b): There should/MUST be a direct contractual relationship between the parties concerned. At time of the Subscription Agreement, the Special Purpose Vehicle typically does not own or have rights to the collateral, and hence, there is not mutuality.

Furthermore, the concept of ‘piercing the SPV veil’ is introduced here (similar to ‘piercing the corporate veil’) and applies, since the following conditions exist:

• The economics of the transaction are an asset transfer from the sponsor/originator party to the Special Purpose Vehicle investors, in exchange for a loan to the sponsor.

• However, there is no direct contractual relationship.

• The sponsor typically controls the Special Purpose Vehicle before the Asset-Backed Securities offering and thus determines (or very substantially influences) the SPV’s post-offering operating characteristics. Since the prospective ABS investors don’t have firm pre-offering control of the SPV and cannot influence its post-offering policies, there is no mutuality between the SPV and the ABS investors; and securitization is accordingly void.

• The sponsor influences the appointment of the SPV’s Trustees or Board of Directors.
Thus, under contract law, the use of the Special Purpose Vehicle in securitization effectively eliminates any mutuality between the two main contracting parties: the sponsor and the investors. Secondly, there is no mutuality between the Special Purpose Vehicle and the investors:

• The Special Purpose Vehicle’s corporate documents (trust indentures or bylaws or articles of incorporation) typically limit the rights of each ABS investors and the group of Asset-Backed Securities investors.

Thirdly, there is no mutuality at all between the Special Purpose Vehicle and the sponsor/originator, because both entities are essentially the same, and are controlled by the sponsor before and after the securitization takes place.

(5): Illegal subject matter and contravention of public policy 46: As explained in preceding sections of this analysis, securitization constitutes violations of the Antitrust laws and US Federal R.I.C.O. statutes; and hence, the contracts used to effect securitizations are void and illegal.

CONCLUSION:
Under US legislation, Securitization is MANIFESTLY ILLEGAL.

Notes and References:

(1): Yamazaki Kenji, What makes Asset Securitization Inefficient? (2005); Berkeley Electronic Press, Working Paper #603; Steven Schwarcz, Enron and The Use and Abuse of Special Purpose Entities In Corporate Structures, 70 U. Cin. L. Rev. 1309 (2002); See further: Carlson D. (1998), The Rotten Foundations of Securitization, William & Mary Law Review, 39; Lupica L (2000), Circumvention of The Bankruptcy Process: The Statutory Institutionalization of Securitization, Connecticut Law Review, 33: 199-210; Thomas Plank, 2004, The Security of Securitization and The Future of Security, 25 Cardozo L. Rev. 1655 (2004).

(2): On securitization, see: Eastgroup Properties v. Southern Motel Association, Ltd., 935 F.2d 245 (11th Cir. 1991); Union Savings Bank v. Augie/Restivo Baking Co. (In Re Augie/Restivo Baking Co.), 860 F.2d 515 (2d Cir. 1988); In Re Bonham, 229 F.3d 750 (9th Cir. 2000); In Re Central European Industrial Development Company LLC, 288 B.R. 572 (Bankr. N.D. Cal. 2003); Special Report by the TriBar Opinion Committee, Opinions in the Bankruptcy Context: Rating Agency, Structured Financing, and Chapter 11 Transactions, 46 Business Lawyer 717 (1991); Sargent, Bankruptcy Remote Finance Subsidiaries: The Substantive Consolidation Issue, 44 Business Lawyer 1223 (1989). See In re Kingston Square Associates, 214 B.R. 713 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1997). On “True-sale” and “signment” distinctions, see: Major’s Furniture Mart, Inc. v. Castle Credit Corporation, Inc., 602 F.2d 538 (3rd Cir. 1979); In re Major Funding Corporation, 82 B.R. 443 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. 1987); Fox v. Peck Iron and Metal Company, Inc., 25 B.R. 674 (Bankr. S.D. Cal. 1982); Carter v. Four Seasons Funding Corporation, 97 S.W.3d. 387 (Ark. 2003); A.B. Lewis Co. v. Nat’l Investment Co. of Houston, 421 S.W.2d 723 (Tex. Civ. App. – 14th Dist. 1967); Resolution Trust Corp. v. Aetna Casualty and Surety Co. of Illinois, 25 F.3d 570, 578 (7th Cir. 1994); In re Royal Crown Bottlers of North Alabama, Inc., 23 B.R. 28 (Bankr. N.D. Ala. 1982) (addressing ‘reasonably equivalent value’ in transfer by parent to subsidiary); Butner v. United States, 440 U.S. 48 (U.S. 1979); In re Schick, 246 B.R. 41, 44 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2000): (State law determines the extent of the debtor’s interest; bankruptcy law determines whether that interest is “property of the estate”).

See specifically: Homburger & Andre, Real Estate Sale and Leaseback Transactions and the Risk of Recharacterization in Bankruptcy, 24 Real Property, Probate and Trust Journal 95, (1989). See: In re Integrated Health Services, Inc., 260 B.R. 71 (Bankr. Del. 2001).

See: HSBC Bank v. United Air Lines, Inc., 317 B.R. 335 (N.D. Ill. 2004). See: Jonathan C. Lipson, Enron, Asset Securitization and Bankruptcy Reform: Dead or Dormant?, 11 J. Bankr. L. & Prac. 1 (2002). See: Peter J. Lahny IV, Asset Securitization: A Discussion of the Traditional Bankrupt Attacks and an Analysis of the Next Potential Attack, Substantive Consolidation, 9 Am. Bankr. Inst. L. Rev. 815 (2001). See: Lois R. Lupica, Revised Article 9, Securitization Transactions and the Bankruptcy Dynamic, 9 Am. Bankr. Inst. L. Rev. 287 (2001). See: Lois R. Lupica, Circumvention of the Bankruptcy Process: The Statutory Institutionalization of Securitization, 33 Conn. L. Rev. 199 (2000). See further: Lois R. Lupica, Asset Securitization: The Unsecured Creditors Perspective, 76 Tex. L. Rev. 595 (1998). See: Stephen I. Glover, Structured Finance Goes Chapter 11: Asset Securitization by the Reorganizing Companies, 47 Bus. Law 611, 627 (1992). See: Thomas J. Gordon, Securitization of Executory Future Flows as Bankruptcy-Remote True Sales, 67 U. Chi. L. Rev. 1317, 1322-23 (2000).

See: In Re Kingston Square Assocs., 214 B.R. 713 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1997) (creditors brought an involuntary petition against an SPV).

(3): On corporate governance issues pertaining to SPVs and securitization see the following materials: See: In Re Buckhead America Corp., #s 91-978 through 91-986 (Bankr. D. Del, Aug. 13, 1992); In Re Minor Emergency Center of Tamarac Inc., 45 BR 310 (Bankr. SD.FL., 1985); Revlon Inc. v. Mac andrews & Forbes Holdings, 506 A2d 173 (Del. 1986); In Re Kingston Square Associates, 214 BR 713 (Bnakr. SDNY 197).

See: Sheryl Gussset, A Not-So-Independent Director In A Bankruptcy Remote Structure, 17 Am. Bankr. Inst. J. 24 (1998). See: Roberg Dean Ellis, Securitization, Fiduciary Duties and Bondholders Rights, 24 J. Corp. L. 295 (1999). See: Richard Graf, Use of LLCs As Bankruptcy Proof Entities Widens, National L. J. , April 10, 1995 at B16. See: Schwarcz Steven, Enron and The Use and Abuse of Special Purpose Entities In Corporate Structures, 70 U. Cin. L. Rev. 1309 (2002). See: Schwarcz, Steven, Securitization Post-Enron, 25 Cardozo L. Rev. 1539 (2004). See also: Thomas Plank, 2004 Symposium: The Security of Securitization and The Future of Security, 25 Cardozo L. Rev. 1655 (2004). See: Thomas H, Effects of Asset Securitization On Seller Claimants, Journal of Financial Intermediation, 10: 306-330. See also: Nolan, Anthony, Synthetic Securitizations and Derivatives Transactions by Banks: Selected Regulatory Issues, Journal of Structured Finance, Fall 2006.

See: American Securitization Forum, ASF Securitization Institute: The Securitization Legal and Regulatory Framework, 2006. See: Yamazaki, Kenji, What makes Asset Securitization Inefficient? Working Paper # 603, Berkeley Electronic Press.

(4): See: Schwarcz S. (1999). Rethinking Freedom of Contract: A Bankruptcy Paradigm, Texas Law Review, 77: 515-599. See: Klee K & Butler, Asset-Backed Securitization, Special Purpose Vehicles and Other Securitization Issues. Uniform Commercial Code Law Journal, 35( 2). See: Carlson D (1998). The Rotten Foundations of Securitization, William & Mary Law Review, 39: See: Janger, Edward J, Muddy Rules For Securitizations, Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law, 2002. See: Lois R. Lupica, Circumvention of the Bankruptcy Process: The Statutory Institutionalization of Securitization, 33 CONN. L. REV. 199 (2000). See: Steven L. Schwarcz, The Inherent Irrationality of Judgment Proofing, 52 STAN. L. REV. 1 (1999). See: S. 420, 107th Cong. 912 (2001); H.R. 333, 107th Cong. 912 (2001). See: Steven L. Schwarcz, The Impact on Securitization of Revised UCC Article 9, 74 Cm. KENT L. REV. 947 (1999) (“Revised Article 9 attempts to broaden its coverage to virtually all securitized assets”). See: Claire A. Hill, Securitization: A Low-Cost Sweetener for Lemons, 74 WASH. U. L.Q. 1061 (1996). See: Yamazaki Kenji, What makes Asset Securitization Inefficient? (2005); Berkeley Electronic Press, Working Paper #603. See: Saayman, Andrea, Securitization and Bank Liquidity In South Africa, Working Paper, Potchefstroom University, South Africa.

See: Sargent Patrick, Structural and Legal Issues in Commercial Mortgage Securitization Transactions, November 1, 2004.

(5): See: Schwarcz S. (2004). Is Securitization Legitimate? International Financial Law Review, 2004 Guide To Structured Finance, pp.115. See additionally: Schwarcz S (2002). The Universal Language of International Securitization, Duke (University) Journal of Comparative and International Law, 12:285-300. See: Frankel T., Cross-Border Securitization: Without Law But Not Lawless, Duke Journal of Comparative and International Law, 8: 255-265.

See further: Kanda H. Securitization In Japan, Duke Journal of Comparative and International Law, 8: 359-370. See: Klee K & Butler B. Asset-Backed Scuritization, Special Purpose Vehicles and Other Securitization Issues, Uniform Commercial Code Law Review, 35(3):23-33. See: Higgin E & Mason J. (2004). What Is The Value of Recourse To ABS? A Study of The Credit Card Bank ABS Rescue, Journal of Banking & Finance, 28(4):857-874. See: Carlson D (1998), The Rotten Foundations of Securitization, William & Mary Law Review, 39: See: Elmer P., Conduits: Their Structure and Risk, FDIC Banking Review, pp. 27-40.

See: Dawson P. Ratings Games With Contingent Transfer: A Structured Finance Illusion, Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law, 8: 381-391.

(6): See: Fogie v. Thorn, 95 F3d 645 (CA8, 1996) (cert. den.) 520 US 1166; Police v. National Tax Funding LP, 225 F3d 379 (CA3, 2000); Najarro v. SASI Intern. Ltd, 904 F2d 1002 (CA5, 1990) (cert. den.) 498 US 1048; Video Trax v. Nationsbank NA, 33 Fsupp2d 1041 (S.D.Fla.,1998) (affirmed) 205 F3d 1358(cert. den.) 531 US 822; In Re Tammy Jewels, 116 BR 290 (M.D.Fla., 1990); and: ECE technologies v. Cherrington Corp., 168 F3d 201 (CA5, 1999); Colony Creek Ltd. v. RTC, 941 F2d 1323 (CA5, 1991) (rehearing denied); Sterling Property Management v. Texas Commerce Bank, 32 F3d 964 (CA5, 1994); Pearcy Marinev. Acadian offshore Services, 832 Fsupp 192 (S.D.TX, 1993); In Re Venture Mortgage Fund LP, 245 BR 460 (SDNY, 2000); In Re Donnay, 184 BR 767 (D.Minn, 1995); Johnson v. Telecash Inc., 82 FSupp2d 264 (D.Del., 1999) (reversed in part) 225 F2d 366 (cert. denied) 531 US 1145; Shelton v. Mutual Savings & Loan Association, 738 FSupp 50 (E.D.Mich., 1990); S.E.C. v. Elmas Trading Corporation, 638 F. Supp 743 (D.Nevada, 1987) (affirmed) 865 F2d 265; contrast: J2 Smoke Shop Inc. v. American Commercial Capital Corp., 709 FSupp 422 (SDNY 1989) (cost of funds); In Re Powderburst Corp., 154 BR 307 (E.D.Cal. 1993) (original issue discount); In Re Wright, 256 BR 626 (D.Mont., 2000) (difference between the face amount and amount actually recovered or owed by debtor); In Re MCCorhill Pub. Inc., 86 BR 283 (SDNY 1988); In Re Marill Alarm Systems, 81 BR 119 (S.D.Fla., 1987) (affirmed) 861 F2d 725; In Re Dent, 130 BR 623 (S.D.GA, 1991); In Re Evans, 130 BR 357 (S.D.GA, 1991); contrast: In Re Cadillac Wildwood Development, 138 BR 854 (W.D. Mich., 1992) (closing costs are interest costs); In Re Brummer, 147 BR 552 (D.Mont., 1992); In Re Sunde, 149 BR 552 (D.Minn., 1992); Matter of Worldwide Trucks, 948 F2d 976 (CA5,1991) (agreement concerning applicable interest rate may be established by course of conduct); Lovick v. Ritemoney Ltd, 378 F3d 433 (CA5, 2004); In Re Shulman Transport, 744 F2d 293 (CA2, 1984); Torelli v. Esposito, 461 NYS2d 299 (1983) (reversed) 483 NYS2d 204; Reschke v. Eadi, 447 NYS2d 59 (NYAD4, 1981); Elghanian v. Elghanian, 717 NYS2d 54( NYAD1, 2000) (leave to appeal denied) 729 NYS2d 410 (here, there was no consideration in exchange for loan, and transaction violated usury laws); Karas v. Shur, 592 NYS2d 779 (NYAD2, 1993); Simsbury Fund v. New St. Louis Associates, 611 NYS2d 557 (NYAD1, 1994); Rhee v. Dahan, 454 NYS2d 371 (NY.Sup., 1982); Hamilton v. HLT Check Exchange, LLP, 987 F. Supp. 953 (E.D. Ky. 1997); Turner v. E-Z Check Cashing of Cookeville, TN, Inc., 35 F.Supp.2d 1042 (M.D. Tenn. 1999); Hurt v. Crystal Ice & Cold Storage Co., 286 S.W. 1055, 1056-57 (Ky. 1926); Phanco v. Dollar Financial Group., Case No. CV99-1281 DDP (C.D. Cal., filed Feb. 8, 1999). See: Van Voris, B. (May 17, 1999) ‘‘Payday’ Loans Under Scrutiny’, National Law Journal, p. B1.

(7): See: 26 U.S.C. § 7201. 26 USC Subtitle F, Chapter 75.
See: Cheek v. United States, 498 U.S. 192 (1991).

(8): SEC v. Towers Financial Corp. et al., 93 Civ. 744 (WK) (S.D.N.Y.)

(9): See: Schwarcz Steven, Enron and The Use and Abuse of Special Purpose Entities In Corporate Structures, 70 U. Cin. L. Rev. 1309 (2002). See: Schwarcz, Steven, Securitization Post-Enron, 25 Cardozo L. Rev. 1539 (2004). See: Thomas Plank, 2004 Symposium: The Security of Securitization and The Future of Security, 25 Cardozo L. Rev. 1655 (2004).

See further: Thomas H., Effects of Asset Securitization On Seller Claimants, Journal of financial Intermediation, 10: 306-330. See: Yamazaki, Kenji, What Makes Asset Securitization Inefficient? Working Paper # 603, Berkeley Electronic Press.

(10): The Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act reads as follows:

SECTION 4: TRANSFERS FRAUDULENT AS TO PRESENT AND FUTURE CREDITORS:

(a) A transfer made or obligation incurred by a debtor is fraudulent as to a creditor, whether the creditor’s claim arose before or after the transfer was made or the obligation was incurred, if:

(1) with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud any creditor of the debtor; or (2) without receiving a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the transfer or obligation, and the debtor:

(i): was engaged or was about to engage in a business or a transaction for which the remaining assets of the debtor were unreasonably small in relation to the business or transaction; or:
(ii): intended to incur, or believed or reasonably should have believed that he [or she] would incur, debts that would be beyond his [or her] ability to pay as they became due.

(b) In determining actual intent under subsection (a)(1), consideration may be given, among other factors, to whether:

(1): The transfer or obligation was to an insider;
(2): The debtor retained possession or control of the property transferred after the transfer;
(3): The transfer or obligation was disclosed or concealed;
(4): Before the transfer was made or obligation was incurred, the debtor had been sued or threatened with suit;
(5): The transfer was of substantially all the debtor’s assets;
(6): The debtor absconded;
(7): The debtor removed or concealed assets;
(8): The value of the consideration received by the debtor was reasonably equivalent to the value of the asset transferred or the amount of the obligation incurred;
(9): The debtor was insolvent or became insolvent shortly after the transfer was made or the obligation was incurred;
(10): The transfer occurred shortly before or shortly after a substantial debt was incurred; and:
(11): The debtor transferred the essential assets of the business to a lienor who transferred the assets to an insider of the debtor. Under both the US Bankruptcy Code and UFTA (Section 544 of the US Bankruptcy Code also allows unsecured creditors to sue in Federal Bankruptcy Court using applicable State), judges must determine whether there has been Fraudulent Conveyance. Courts have developed a series of factors as criteria for proving the requisite intent. The factors to be considered (“badges of fraud”) in determining Fraudulent Conveyance include:

• Whether the transfer represented substantially all of the debtor’s assets.
• Whether the transfer was made around the time a substantial debt was incurred.
• Whether the debtor received reasonable consideration equivalent to the value of the assets conveyed or the obligation incurred.
• Whether the debtor became insolvent soon after the transfer.
• Whether the transfer was made to insiders or family members.
• Whether the transfer or the assets were concealed

(11): See: Roman Dan, Sarlito M & Mukhtiar A (Winter 2007), Risks to Consider when purchasing Technology-based IP for Securitization, Working Paper. See additionally: Nolan Anthony, Synthetic Securitizations and Derivatives Transactions by Banks: Selected Regulatory Issues, The Journal of Structured Finance, Fall 2006. See: Lucas Douglas, Goodman Laurie & Fabozzi Frank, Hybrid Assets in an ABS CDO: Structural Advantages and Cash Flow Mechanics, Journal of Structured Finance (Fall 2006). See further: Prince, Jeffrey, A General Review of CDO Valuation Methods, Journal of Structured and Project Finance (Summer 2006).

(12): See: Peter V. Pantaleo et al., Rethinking the Role of Recourse in the Sale of Financial Assets, 52 Bus. Law. 159, 159-63 (1996) (discussing types of permissible and impermissible recourse for sale treatment). See: Thomas E. Plank, The True Sale of Loans and the Rôle of Recourse, 14 GEO. MASON L. Rev. 287 (1991). See: Gordon T (2000). Securitization of Executory Future Flows As bankruptcy-Remote True Sales, University of Chicago Law Review, 67:1317-1322. See: Higgin E & Mason J (2004). What Is The value of Recourse To Asset-Backed Securities? A Study of Credit Card Bank ABS Rescues, Journal of Banking & Finance, 28(4); 857-874.

(13): See: Peter V. Pantaleo et al., Rethinking the Rôle of Recourse in the Sale of Financial Assets, 52 Bus. Law. 159, 159-63 (1996) (discussing types of permissible and impermissible recourse for sale treatment); See: Thomas E. Plank, The True Sale of Loans and the Role of Recourse, 14 GEO. MASON L. Rev. 287 (1991). See: Higgin E. & Mason J. (2004), What Is The value of Recourse To Asset-Backed Securities? A Study of Credit Card Bank ABS Rescues, The Journal of Banking & Finance, 28(4); 857-874. See: Lois R. Lupica, Revised Article 9, Securitization Transactions and the Bankruptcy Dynamic, 9 AM. BANKR. INST. L. REV. 287, 291-92 (2001). See: Carol M. Rose, Crystals and Mud in Property Law, 40 STAN. L. REV. 577, 600 (1988). See: Louis Kaplow, Rules Versus Standards: An Economic Analysis, 42 Duke L.J. 557 (1992).

(14): See: Yamazaki, Kenichi, What makes Asset Securitization Inefficient?, 2005.
Working Paper #603, Berkeley Electronic Press.

(15): See: Yamazaki (2005), supra.

(16): See: Schwarcz (2002), supra. See: Schwarcz (2004), supra. See: Klee & Butler, supra. See: Lipson J C (2002). Enron, Asset Securitization and Bankruptcy Reform: Dead or Dormant? Journal
of Bankruptcy Law & Practice, 11: 1-15. See: Lupica L (2001). Revised Articles Nine, Securitization Transactions and The Bankruptcy Dynamic, American Bankruptcy Institute Law Review, 9:287-299. See: Garmaise M (2001), Rational Beliefs and Security Design, Review of Financial Studies, 14(4):1183-1213. See: David A (1997), Controlling Information Premia by Repackaging Asset Backed Securities, Journal of Risk & Insurance, 64(4):619-648. See: DeMarzo P (2005), The Pooling and Tranching of Securities: A Model of Informed Intermediation, Review of Financial Studies, 18(1):1-35. See further: Report by The Committee On Bankruptcy and Corporate Reorganization of The Association of The Bar of The City of New York (2000): New Developments In Structured Finance, The Business Lawyer, 56: 95-105. See: Lupica L (2000), Circumvention of The Bankruptcy Process: The Statutory Institutionalization of Securitization, Connecticut Law Review, 33:199-209.

See further: Glover S (1992), Structured Finance Goes Chapter Eleven: Asset Securitization by the Reorganizing Companies, The Business Lawyer, 47:611-621. See: Gordon T (2000), Securitization of Executory Future Flows as bankruptcy-Remote True Sales, The University of Chicago Law Review, 67:1317-1322. See: Elmer P., Conduits: Their Stricture and Risk, FDIC Banking Review, pp.27-40. See: Lois R. Lupica, Revised Article 9, Securitization Transactions and the Bankruptcy Dynamic, 9 AM. BANKR. INST. L. REV. 287, 291-92 (2001). See: Steven L. Schwarcz, The Inherent Irrationality of Judgment Proofing, 52 STAN. L. REV. 1 (1999). See: Lynn M. LoPucki, The Irrefutable Logic of Judgment Proofing: A Reply to Professor Schwarcz, 52 STAN. L. REV. 55 (1999). See: Steven L. Schwarcz, The Impact on Securitization of Revised UCC Article 9, 74 Cm.KENT L. REV. 947 (1999) (“Revised Article 9 attempts to broaden its coverage to virtually all securitized assets”).

See: Christopher W. Frost, Asset Securitization and Corporate Risk Allocation, 72 TUL. L. REV. 101 (1997); See: Claire A. Hill, Securitization: A Low-Cost Sweetener for Lemons, 74 WASH. U. L. Q. 1061 (1996). See: Steven L. Schwarcz, Judgment Proofing: A Rejoinder, 52 STAN. L. REV. 77 (1999).

(17): See: Reams B & Manz W (eds.), FEDERAL BANKRUPTCY LAW: A LEGISLATIVE HISTORY OF THE BANKRUPTCY REFORM ACT OF 1994. See further: The Legislative History of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005; (FRB Leg. Hist); (S. 256 -LoC); Pub. L. 109-8, April 20, 2005, 119 Stat, 23. http://www.llsdc.org/sourcebook/leg-hist.htm.

See: Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978: A Legislative History, Hein. See: Federal Bankruptcy Law: A Legislative History of The Bankruptcy Act of 1994; Pub. L. No. 103-394, 108 Stat. 4106, including the National Bankruptcy Commission Act and Bankruptcy Amendments (1987-1993).

See further: Ahern, Lawrence (Spring 2001). “Workouts” Under Revised Article Nine: A Review of Changes and Proposal For Study, American Bankruptcy Institute Law Review, 9:115-125.

See also: Ribstein, Larry & Kobayashi, Bruce (1996), An Economic Analysis of Uniform State Laws, Journal of Legal Studies, 25(1):131-199.

(18): See: Ashta A & Tolle L (2000), Criteria for Selecting Restructuring Strategies for Distressed or Declining Enterprises, Cahners Du Ceren, 6:1-20. See: Carlson D (1998). The Rotten Foundations of Securitization, William & Mary Law Review, 39. See: Higgin E & Mason J (2004), What is the value of Recourse to Asset-Backed Securities? A Study of Credit Card Bank ABS Rescues, in the Journal of Banking & Finance, 28(4); 857-874. See: Albany Insurance v. Esses, 831 F2d 41 (CA2, 1987) (making false statements about value of asset was a “predicate act”); Howell Hydrocarbons v. Adams, 897 F2d 183 (CA5 1990) (under Federal R.I.C.O. statutes, making a company look solvent when its not, constitutes a ‘predicate act’); The Matter of Lewisville Properties, 849 F2d 946 (CA5, 1988) (under Federal R.I.C.O., false pretenses constitutes ‘predicate acts’). See also: Bens D & Monahan S (Feb. 2005), Altering Investment Decisions to [conform to] Management Financial Reporting Outcomes: Asset Backed Commercial Paper Conduits and FIN 46, Working Paper.

(19): In the following cases, the named courts held that pre-petition waivers of the right to file for voluntary/involuntary bankruptcy, were unenforceable. See: In Re Huang, 275 F3d 1177 (CA9, 2002) (it is against public policy for a debtor to waive the pre-petition protection of the Bankruptcy Code); In Re South East Financial Associates, 21 BR 1003 (M.D.Fla, 1997); And: In Re Tru Block Concrete Products Ins., 27 BR 486 (E.D.Pa., 1995) (advance agreement to waive the benefits of bankruptcy law is void as against public policy); In Re Madison, 184 BR 686, 690 (E.D.Pa, 1995) (even bargained-for and knowing waivers of the right to seek bankruptcy protection must be deemed void); In Re Club Tower LP, 138 BR 307 at 312 (N.D.Ga, 1991); In Re Graves, 212 BR 692 (BAP, CA1, 1997); In Re Pease, 195 BR 431 (D.Neb., 1996); And: In Re Jenkins Court Associates Ltd. Partnership, 181 BR 33 (E.D.Pa., 1995); In Re Sky Group International Inc., 108 BR 86 (W.D.Pa., 1989); Association of St.Croix Condominium Owners v. St. Croix Hotel Corp., 692 F2d 446 (CA3, 1982).

But contrast: In Re University Commons LP, 200 BR 255 (M.D.Fla.) (debtors agreement that in the event debtor enters bankruptcy proceedings, the secured lender shall be entitled to court order dismissing the case as ‘bad faith’ filing an determining that: (i) no rehabilitation or reorganization is possible, and (ii) dismissing all creditor/ ABS-investor’s right to file for involuntary bankruptcy 21, 22: US courts have repeatedly asserted that bankruptcy proceedings are in the best interests of parties and all other creditors, and this is binding); In Re Little Creek Development, 779 F2d 1068 (CA5, 1986). See: 124 Congr. Record H 32, 401 (1978).

(20): There are several cases that hold that pre-petition waivers of the right to file for voluntary or involuntary bankruptcy, are enforceable: thus: In Re Shady Grove tech Center Associates Limited Partnership, 216 BR 386 (D.Md., 1998) (waiver of the right to file for bankruptcy is unenforceable) (opinion supplemented) 227 BR 422 (D.Md., 1998); In Re Atrium High Point Ltd. partnership, 189 BR 599 (MDNC 1995); In Re Darrell Creek Associates, 187 BR 908 (DSc, 1995); In Re Cheeks, 167 BR 817 (D.Sc, 1997); In Re McBride Estates, 154 BR 339 (N.D.Fla., 1993); In Re citadel Properties, 86 BR 275, MD.Fla., 1988); In Re Gulf Beach Development Corp., 48 BR 40 (M.D.Fla., 1985).

However, these cases are very distinguishable from standard securitization transactions because the following characteristics and/or conditions existed in these cases: (a) they involve only single-asset entities; (b) these entities had no employees; (c) the timing of filing of bankruptcy petition indicates an intent to delay or to frustrate creditors’ proper efforts to enforce their rights after a workout had failed; (d) there were no or few unsecured non-insider creditors (those existing had small claims); (e) there was no realistic chance of rehabilitation or reorganization; (f) the assets did not produce any cashflow.

(21): See cases cited in Notes 5, 6, 19 and 20.

(22): On pre-petition waivers of right to file for bankruptcy and waivers of bankruptcy stays, see: In re Huang, 275 F.3d 1173, 1177 (9th Cir. 2002) (“It is against public policy for a debtor to waive the pre-petition protection of the Bankruptcy Code”); In re Shady Grove Tech Center Assocs. Limited Partnership, 216 B.R. 386, 389 (Bankr. D. Md. 1998) (“The courts have uniformly held that a waiver of the right to file a bankruptcy case is unenforceable”); In re Tru Block Concrete Prods., Ins., 27 B.R. 486, 492 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1995) (advance agreement to waive the benefits conferred by bankruptcy law is void as against US public policy); In re Madison, 184 B.R 686, 690 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1995) (even bargained-for and knowing waivers of the right to seek bankruptcy protection must be deemed void); In re Club Tower L.P., 138 B.R. 307, 312 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 1991); further, In re Orange Park S. Partnership, 79 B.R. 79, 82 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1987); In re Aurora Invs., 134 B.R. 982, 985 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1991) (debtor’s agreement that petition, if filed, would be in “bad faith” if its primary purpose is to delay foreclosure sale, is binding); In re University Commons, L.P., 200 B.R. 255, 259 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1996) (debtor’s agreement that in the event that debtor becomes subject of bankruptcy case secured lender shall be entitled to order dismissing case as “bad faith” filing and determining that (i) no rehabilitation or reorganization is possible, and (ii) dismissing all court proceedings is in the best interest of parties and all other creditors, is binding); In Re Little Creek Dev. Co., 779 F.2d 1068, 1073 (5th Cir. 1986). 47212 B.R. 1003, 1005 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1997). See: 124 Cong. Rec. H 32, 401 (1978) (“The explicit reference in Title-11 forbidding the waiver of certain rights is not intended to imply that other rights, such as the right to file a voluntary bankruptcy case under section 301, maybe waived”). See further: Klee, Kenneth & Butler, Brendt, Asset-backed Securitization, Special Purpose Vehicles and Other Securitization, Working Paper. Cases that enforced pre-petition waivers of the automatic stay focus upon:

(i): The financial sophistication of the borrower;
(ii): The creditor’s demonstration that significant consideration was given
for the pre-petition waiver;
(iii): The effect of the enforcement of the pre-petition waiver upon other
parties having legitimate interests in the outcome;
(iv): Circumstances of the parties at the time enforcement of the pre-petition waiver is sought;
(v): The enforcement of the pre-petition waiver being consistent
with public policy of encouraging out of court restructurings and settlements with creditors; and:
(vi): Other indicia which support granting relief from stay, such as “bad faith” criteria (i.e. single-asset case, two-party dispute, long history of pre-petition workouts, newly formed entity, filing on eve of foreclosure, no ongoing business to reorganize, few employees, no unencumbered funds, etc.). Cases that held that pre-petition stay waivers were enforceable include: In Re Shady Grove Tech Ctr. Assocs., L.P., 216 B.R.386, 390 (Bankr. D. Md. 1998); In Re Atrium High Point L.P., 189 B.R. 599, 607 (Bankr. M.D.N.C. 1995); In Re Darrell Creek Assocs., L.P., 187 B.R. 908, 910 (Bankr. D.S.C. 1995); In Re Cheeks, 167 B.R. 817, 818 (Bankr. D.S.C. 1994); In Re Powers, 170 B.R. 480, 483 (Bankr. D. Mass. 1994); In Re McBride Estates, Ltd., 154 B.R. 339, 343 (Bankr. N.D. Fla. 1993); In Re Citadel Properties, Inc., 86 B.R. 275, 276 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1988); In Re Gulf Beach Development Corp., 48 B.R. 40, 43 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1985).

Several courts, however, have refused to enforce pre-petition waivers
for any of the following reasons:

(i): The pre-petition waiver is the equivalent to an ipso facto clause;
(ii): Such clause is void as against public policy by depriving the debtor
of the use and benefit of property upon the filing of a bankruptcy case;
(iii): The borrower lacks the capacity to act on behalf of the debtor in possession;
(iv): The debtor has a business with a reasonable chance at reorganization and enforcement of the waiver would otherwise prejudice third-party creditors;
(v): The automatic stay is designed to protect all creditors and may not be waived by the debtor unilaterally to the detriment of creditors; and:
(vi): The waiver was obtained by coercion, fraud or mutual mistake of facts. Courts that have refused to enforce pre-petition waivers of the automatic stay have reasoned that the automatic stay protects not only debtors but also other creditors. US Courts disagree sharply about the utility, benefits and desirability of the enforcement of pre-petition waivers, and relevant criteria. Some courts have held that a pre-petition automatic stay waiver may be considered as a factor in determining whether cause exists for relief from the stay.

See aslo: In Re Darrell Creek Assocs., L.P., 187 B.R. 908, 913 (Bankr. D.S.C. 1995) (“out of court workouts are to be encouraged and are often effective”); In Re Cheeks, 167 B.R. 817, 819 (Bankr. D.S.C. 1994) (“the most compelling reason for enforcement of the forbearance agreement is to further the public policy in favor of encouraging out of court restructuring and settlements”);
In Re Club Tower L.P., 138 B.R. 307, 312 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 1991) (“enforcing pre-petition settlement agreements furthers the legitimate public policy of encouraging out of court restructurings and settlements”). Cases holding pre-petition automatic stay waivers unenforceable include: In Re Southeast Financial Assocs., Inc., 212 B.R. 1003, 1005 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1997); In Re Graves, 212 B.R. 692, 694 (B.A.P. 1st Cir. 1997); In Re Pease, 195 B.R. 431, 433 (Bankr. D. Neb. 1996); In Re Jenkins Court Assocs. L.P., 181 B.R. 33, 37 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1995);Farm Credit of Cent. Fla., ACA v. Polk, 160 B.R. 870, 873-74 (M.D. Fla. 1993); Farm Credit of Cent. Fla., ACA v. Polk, 160 B.R. 870, 873-74 (M.D. Fla. 1993) (”The policy behind the automatic stay is to protect the debtor‘s estate from being depleted by creditor’s lawsuits and seizures of property before the debtor has had a chance to marshal the estate’s assets and distribute them equitably among creditors“); In Re Sky Group Int’l, Inc., 108 B.R. 86, 89 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 1989) (”To grant a creditor relief from stay simply because the debtor elected to waive the protection afforded the debtor by the automatic stay ignores the fact that it also is designed to protect all creditors and to treat them equally“) (citing Assoc. of St. Croix Condominium Owners v. St. Croix Hotel Corp., 682 F.2d 446 (3d Cir. 1982)). Also see: In re Shady Grove Tech Ctr. Assocs., L.P., 216 B.R. 386, 393-94 (Bankr. D. Md. 1998); In re S.E. Fin. Assocs., Inc., 212 B.R. 1003, 1005 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1997); In re Darrell Creek Assocs., L.P., 187 B.R. 908, 910 (Bankr. D.S.C. 1995); In re Powers, 170 B.R. 480, 483 (Bankr. D. Mass. 1994); In re Cheeks, 167 B.R. 817, 819 (Bankr. D.S.C. 1994); In Re Shady Grove Tech Ctr. Assocs., L.P., 216 B.R. 386, 393-94 (Bankr. D. Md. 1998) (granting a stay relief for cause based upon a finding which included debtor’s pre-petition agreement not to contest request for stay relief given as part of pre-petition restructuring in which debtor was afforded substantial consideration). See: Steven L. Schwarcz, Rethinking Freedom of Contract: A Bankruptcy Paradigm, 77 Tex. L. Rev. 515 (1999). See: In Re Club Tower L.P., 138 B.R. 307, 311-12 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 1991).

(23): See: Schwarcz S. (1999). Rethinking Freedom of Contract: A Bankruptcy Paradigm, Texas Law Review, 77: 515-599. See: Klee K & Butler B Asset-Backed Securitization, Special Purpose Vehicles and Other Securitization Issues, Uniform Commercial Code Law Journal, 35(2):. See: Carlson D (1998), The Rotten Foundations of Securitization, William & Mary Law Review, 39:

(24): See notes 5, 6, 19 and 20, supra.

(25): See: Shakespeare C (2003). Do Managers Use Securitization Volume and Fair Value Estimates To Hit Earning Targets? Working Paper, University of Michigan (School of Business). See further: Shakespeare C (2001), Accounting For Asset Securitizations: Complex Fair Values and Earnings Management, Working Paper, University of Michigan.

(26): Wooten v. Loshbough, 649 Fsupp 531 (N.D.Ind. 1986) (on reconsideration) 738 Fsupp 314 (affirmed) 951 F2d 768 (under Federal R.I.C.O. statutes, the stripping of a company’s ability to pay a Court-ordered judgment claim was a ’predicate act‘).

(27): See: Kulzick R (2004). Sarbanes-Oxley: Effects on Financial
Transparency, S.A.M. Advanced Management Journal, 69(1): 43-49.

(28): See: Albany Insurance v. Esses, 831 F2d 41 (CA2, 1987) (under Federal R.I.C.O. statutes, making false statements about the value of asset was a ‘predicate act’); Howell Hydrocarbons v. Adams, 897 F2d 183 (CA5 1990) (under Federal R.I.C.O. statutes, making a company look solvent when its not, constitutes a ‘predicate act’).

(29): See: Lockheed Martin v. Boeing, 357 Fsupp2d 1350 (M.D.Fla., 2005) (bidder violated competitor’s property rights to proprietary information by using it to produce winning bids).

(30): See: Colloff M (2005), The Rôle of the Trustee in Mitigating Fraud in Structured Financings, Journal of Structured Finance, 10(4):73-85. See further: Shakespeare C (2003), Do Managers Use Securitization Volume and Fair Value Estimates to Hit Earning Targets? Working Paper, University of Michigan (School of Business).

See: Shakespeare C (2001), Accounting For Asset Securitizations: Complex Fair Values and Earnings Management. Working Paper, University of Michigan. See: Katyal K (2003), Conspiracy Theory, The Yale Law Journal, 112(6):1307-1398.

See: Geary W (2002), The Legislative Recreation of R.I.C.O.: Reinforcing The ‘myth’ of Organized Crime, Crime, Law & Social Change, 38(4):311-315. See: Kulzick R (2004), Sarbanes-Oxley: Effects on Financial Transparency, S.A.M. Advanced Management Journal, 69(1): 43-49. See: Painter R (2004), Convergence and Competition In Rules Governing Lawyers and Auditors, The Journal of Corporation Law, 29(2):397-426. See: Jordans R. (2003), The legal approach to investment advisers in different jurisdictions, Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance, 11(2):169-171.

See: Blanque P. (2003), Crisis and Fraud, Journal of Financial Regulation & Compliance, 11(1):60-70. See: Pickholz M & Pickholz J (2001), Manipulation, Journal of Financial Crime, 9(2):117-133. See: Zey M(1999), The subsidiarization of the securities industry and the organization of securities fraud networks to return profits in the 1980s, Work and Occupations, 26(1):50-76.

See: Aicher R, Cotton D & Khan T (2004), Credit Enhancement: Letters of Credit, Guaranties, Insurance and Swaps, The Business Lawyer, 59(3):897-973. See: Brief T & Ms Sweeney T (2003), Corporate Criminal Liability, The American Criminal Review, 40(2): 337-366. See: Landrum D (2003), Governance of limited liability companies – Contrasting California and Delaware models, The Real Estate Finance Journal, 19(1).

(31): See: 18 USC 1961-1968.

(32): See: Alexander v. Thornbough, 713 FSupp 1271 (D.Minn. 1989) (appeal dismissed) 881 F2d 1081; Mira v. Nuclear Measurements Corp., 107 F3d 466 (CA7, 1997); US v. Manzella, 782 F2d 533 (CA5, 1986)(cert. Denied.) 476 US 1123; Cadle Co v. Flanagan, 271 Fsupp2d 379 (D.Conn., 2003); Seale v. Miller, 698 Fsupp 883 (N.D.G.A., 1988); Georgia Gulf Corp. v. Ward, 701 Fsupp 1556 (NDGA 1988); Wooten v. Loshbough, 649 FSupp. 531 (N.D.Ind. 1986) (on reconsideration) 738 Fsupp 314 (affirmed) 951 F2d 768 (stripping of company’s ability to pay judgment claim was ‘predicate act’ under R.I.C.O. statutes); Formax v. Hostert, 841 F2d 388 (CAFed, 1988); Abell v. Potomac Insurance, 858 F2d 1104 (CA5, 1988) (appeal after remand) 946 F2d 1160 (cert. denied) 492 US 918; Aetna Ca. Ins. Co. v. P & B Autobody, 43 F3d 1546 (CA1, 1994); Albany Insurance v. Esses, 831 F2d 41 (CA2, 1987) (making false statements about value of asset was a “predicate act”); Alfadda v. Fenn, 935 F2d 475 (CA2, 1991)(certiorari denied) 502 US 1005; Laird v. Integrated Resources, 897 F2d 826 (CA5, 1990); Shearin v. E F Hutton, 885 F2d 1162 (CA3, 1989); Bank One of Cleveland v. Abbe, 916 F2d 1067 (CA6, 1990); BancOklahoma Mortgage Corp. v. Capital Title Co., 194 F3d 1089 (CA10, 1999); Howell Hydrocarbons v. Adams, 897 F2d 183 (CA5 1990) (under Federal R.I.C.O. statutes, making a company look solvent when its not, constitutes a ‘predicate act’); Matter of Lewisville Properties, 849 F2d 946 (CA5, 1988) (false pretenses constitutes ‘predicate acts’).

See: Securities Investor Protection Corp. v. Vigman, 908 F2d 1461 (CA9, 1990); International Data Bank v. Zepkin, 812 F2d 149 (CA4, 1987); Warner v. Alexander Grant & Co., 828 F2d 14528 (CA11, 1987); Mauriber v. Shearson/American Express, 546 FSupp 391 (SDNY, 1982); Farmers Bank F Delaware v. Bell Mortgage Corp., 452 FSupp 1278 (D.Del, 1978); Moss v. Morgan Stanley Inc., 719 F2d 5 (CA2, 1983); USACO Coal v. Carbomin Energy Inc., 689 F2d 94 (CA6, 1982); Binkley v. Shaeffer, 609 FSupp 601 (E.D.Pa., 1985); Sedima v. Imrex Co., 473 US 479 (1985) . See: Glanz M (1983). R.I.C.O. and Securities Fraud: A Workable Limitation, Columbia Law Review, 6:1513-1543. See: Masella J (1991), Standing to Sue In A Civil R.I.C.O. Suit Predicated On Violation OF SEC Rule 10b-5: The Purchase Or Sale Requirement, Columbia Law Review, 91(7):1793-1812. See: Coffey P (1990), The Selection, Analysis and Approval of Federal R.I.C.O. Prosecutions, Notre Dame Law Review, 65: 1035-1055. See: Matthews A (1990), Shifting The Burden of Losses In The Securities Markets: The Rôle of Civil R.I.C.O. In Securities Litigation, Notre Dame Law Review, 65: 896-906.

(33): See: Bradford National Clearing Corp. v. SEC, 590 F2d 1085 (DCCir, 1978); In Re Stock Exchanges Options Trading Antitrust Litigation, 317 F3d 134 (CA2, 2003); Gordon v. NYSE, 422 US 659 (1975); National Gerimedical Hospital v. Blue Cross of Kansas City, 452 US 378 (1981); Silver v. NYSE, 373 US 341 (1963) (no Antitrust immunity); Strobl v. NY Mercantile Exchange, 768 F2d 22.

(34), (35):
§ 1 Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1:

Trusts, etc., in restraint of trade illegal; penalty:

Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal. Every person who shall make any contract or engage in any combination or conspiracy hereby declared to be illegal shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding $10,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $350,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding three years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.

§ 2 Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2:

Monopolizing trade a felony; penalty:

Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $10,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $350,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding three years, or by both said punishments, in discretion of the court.

§ 3 Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 3:

Trusts in Territories or District of Columbia illegal; combination a felony:

Every contract, combination in form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce in any Territory of the United States or of the District of Columbia, or in restraint of trade or commerce between any such Territory and another, or between any such Territory or Territories and any State or States or the District of Columbia (DC), or with foreign nations, or between the District of Columbia and any State or States or foreign nations, is declared illegal. Every person who shall make any such contract or engage in any such combination or conspiracy, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $10,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $350,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding three years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.

3. CLAYTON ACT, 15 U.S.C. §§ 12-27, 29 U.S.C. §§ 52-53:

• § 1 Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 12 Definitions; short title:

§ 1 Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 12 Definitions; short title:
(a) “Antitrust laws”, as used herein, includes the Act entitled:
‘An Act to protect trade and commerce against unlawful restraints and monopolies’, approved July second, eighteen hundred and ninety; sections seventy-three to seventy-seven, inclusive, of an Act entitled ‘An Act to reduce taxation, to provide revenue for the Government, and for other purposes’, of August 27th, eighteen hundred and ninety-four; an Act entitled ‘An Act to amend sections seventy-three and seventy-six of the Act of August twenty-seventh, eighteen hundred and ninetyfour’, entitled ‘An Act to reduce taxation, to provide revenue for the Government, and for other purposes’, approved February twelfth, nineteen hundred and thirteen; and also this Act.

‘Commerce’, as used herein, means trade or commerce among the several States and with foreign nations, or between the District of Columbia or any Territory of the United States and any State, Territory, or foreign nation, or between any insular possessions or other places that are under the jurisdiction of the United States, or between any such possession or place and any US State or Territory of the United States or the District of Columbia or any foreign nation, or within the District of Columbia or any Territory or any insular possession or other place under the jurisdiction of the United States:

Provided, That nothing in this Act contained shall apply to the Philippine Islands. The word ‘person’ or ‘persons’ wherever used in this Act shall be deemed to include corporations and associations existing under or authorized by the laws of either the United States, the laws of any of the Territories, the laws of any State, or the laws of any foreign country.

(b) This Act may be cited as the “Clayton Act”.

• § 2 Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 13(2):

Discrimination in price, services, or facilities:

(a) Price; selection of customers:

It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course of such commerce, either directly or indirectly, to discriminate in price between different purchasers of commodities of like grade and quality, where either or any of the purchases involved in such discrimination are in commerce, where such commodities are sold for use, consumption, or resale within the United States or any Territory thereof or the District of Columbia or any insular possession or other place under the jurisdiction of the United States, and where the effect of such discrimination may be substantially to lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly in any line of commerce, or to injure, destroy, or prevent competition with any person who either grants or knowingly receives the benefit of such discrimination, or with customers of either of them: Provided, That nothing herein contained shall prevent differentials which make only due allowance for differences in the cost of manufacture, sale, or delivery resulting from the differing methods or quantities in which such commodities are to such purchasers sold or delivered:

Provided, however, That the Federal Trade Commission may, after due investigation and hearing to all interested parties, fix and establish quantity limits, and revise the same as it finds necessary, as to particular commodities or classes of commodities, where it finds that available purchasers in greater quantities are so few as to render differentials on account thereof unjustly discriminatory or promotive of monopoly in any line of commerce; and the foregoing shall then not be construed to permit differentials that are based on differences in quantities greater than those so fixed and established: and provided further, That nothing herein contained shall prevent persons engaged in selling goods, wares, or merchandise in commerce from selecting their own customers in bona fide transactions and not in restraint of trade: and provided further, That nothing herein contained shall prevent price changes from time to time where in response to changing conditions affecting the market for or the marketability of the goods concerned, such as but not limited to actual or imminent deterioration of perishable goods, obsolescence of seasonal goods, distress sales under court process, or sales in good faith in discontinuance of business in the goods concerned.

(b) Burden of rebutting prima-facie case of discrimination:

Upon proof being made, at any hearing on a complaint under this section, that there has been discrimination in price or services or facilities furnished, the burden of rebutting the prima-facie case thus made by showing justification shall be upon the person charged with a violation of this section, and unless justification shall be affirmatively shown, the Commission is authorized to issue an order terminating the discrimination: Provided, however, That nothing herein contained shall prevent a seller rebutting the prima-facie case thus made by showing that his lower price or the furnishing of services or facilities to any purchaser or purchasers was made in good faith to meet an equally low price of a competitor, or the services or facilities furnished by a competitor.

(c) Payment or acceptance of commission, brokerage, or other compensation: It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course of such commerce, to pay or grant, or to receive or accept, anything of value as a commission, brokerage, or other compensation, or any allowance or discount in lieu thereof, except for services rendered in connection with the sale or purchase of goods, wares, or merchandise, either to the other party to such transaction or to an agent, representative, or other intermediary therein where such intermediary is acting in fact for or in behalf, or is subject to the direct or indirect control, of any party to such transaction other than the person by whom such compensation is so granted or paid.

(d) Payment for services or facilities for processing or sale:

It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce to pay or contract for the payment of anything of value to or for the benefit of a customer of such person in the course of such commerce as compensation or in consideration for any services or facilities furnished by or through such customer in connection with the processing, handling, sale, or offering for sale of any products or commodities manufactured, sold, or offered for sale by such person, unless such payment or consideration is available on proportionally equal terms to all other customers competing in the distribution of such products or commodities.

(e) Furnishing services or facilities for processing, handling, etc.: It shall be unlawful for any person to discriminate in favor of one purchaser against another purchaser or purchasers of a commodity bought for resale, with or without processing, by contracting to furnish or furnishing, or by contributing to the furnishing of, any services or facilities connected with the processing, handling, sale, or offering for sale of such commodity so purchased upon terms not accorded to all purchasers on proportionally equal terms.

(f) Knowingly inducing or receiving discriminatory price:
It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course of such commerce, knowingly to induce or receive a discrimination in price which is prohibited by this section. Discrimination in rebates, discounts, or advertising service charges; underselling in particular localities; penalties:

• 15 U.S.C. § 13a:

It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course of such commerce, to be a party to, or assist in, any transaction of sale, or any contract to sell, which discriminates to his knowledge against competitors of the purchaser, in that, any discount, rebate, allowance, or advertising service charge is granted to the purchaser over and above any discount, rebate, allowance, or advertising service charge available at the time of such transaction to the said competitors in respect of a sale of goods of like grade, quality, and quantity; to sell, or to contract to sell, goods in any part of the United States at prices lower than those exacted by said person elsewhere in the United States for the purpose of destroying competition, or of eliminating a competitor in such part of the United States; or, to sell, or contract to sell, goods at unreasonably low prices for the purpose of destroying competition or eliminating a competitor.

• Any person violating any of the provisions of this section shall, upon conviction thereof, be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

• 15 U.S.C. § 13b:

Cooperative association; return of net earnings or surplus:
Nothing in sections 13 to 13b and 21a of this title shall prevent a cooperative association from returning to its members, producers, or consumers the whole, or any part of, the net earnings or surplus resulting from its trading operations, in proportion to their purchases or sales from, to, or through the association.

• § 3 Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 14:

Sale, etc., on agreement not to use goods of competitor:

It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course of such commerce, to lease or make a sale or contract for sale of goods, wares, merchandise, machinery, supplies, or other commodities, whether patented or unpatented, for use, consumption, or resale within the United States or any Territory thereof or the District of Columbia or any insular possession or other place under the jurisdiction of the United States, or fix a price charged therefor, or discount from, or a rebate upon, such price, on the condition, agreement, or the understanding that the lessee or the purchaser thereof shall not use or deal in the goods, wares, merchandise, machinery, supplies, or other commodities of a competitor or competitors of the lessor or seller, where the effect of such lease, sale, or contract for sale or such condition, agreement, or understanding may be to substantially lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly in any line of commerce.

• FTC Regulations: Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act outlaw ”unfair methods of competition“ but do not define unfair. The Supreme Court has ruled that violations of the Sherman Act are also violations of Section 5, but Section 5 covers some practices that are beyond the scope of the Sherman Act. It is the FTC’s job to enforce Section 5.

(36): See: Eastman Kodak Co v. Image technical Services, 504 US 451 (1992); Jefferson parish Hospital v. Hyde, 466 US 2 (1984); Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, 395 US 100 (1969).

(37): See: Business Electronics Corp. v. Sharp Electronics Corp, 485 US 717 (1988); Copperweld Corp. v. Independence Tube, 467 US 752 (1984); Monsanto Co. v. Spray-Rite Service Corp., 465 US 752 (1984); US v. Arnold, Schwin et al, 388 US 365 (1967); USPS v. Flamingo Industries, #02-1290 (2004); Brown v. Pro Football, 518 US 213 (1996); FTC v. Ticor Title Insurance Company, 504 US 621 (1992); Allied Tube & Conduit Corp. v. Indian head Inc., 486 US 492 (1988).

(38): See: Standard Oil Co v. US, 337 US 293 (1949); See: US v. Griffith, 334 US 100 (1948). See: Brooke Group Ltd. V. Brown & Williamson Tobacco, 509 US 209 (1993).

(39): See: Texaco v. Hasbrouck, 496 US 543 (1990); J Truet Payne Co v. Chrysler Motors, 451 US 557 (1981); Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Federal Trade Commission, 440 US 69 (1979); US v. United States Gypsum, 438 US 422 (1978); FTC v. Sun Oil Co., 371 US 505 (1963).

(40): See: Brooke Group Ltd. V. Brown & Williamson Tobacco, 509 US 209 (1993); Matsushita Electric v. Zenith Radio, 475 US 574 (1986); Utah Pie Co. v. Continental Baking Co. et al, 386 US 685 (1967).

(41): See: Parmenter v. FDIC, 925 F2d 1088 (CA8,1991); Ace-Federal Reporters v. Barram, 226 F3d 1329 (Ca.Fed., 2000)(on remand) 2002 WL 1292032; Workman v. UPS, 234 F3d 998 (CA7, 2000); Dibrell Brothers v. Banca Nazionale Del Lavoro, 383 F3d 1571 (CA11, 1999); Gibson v. Neighborhood Health Clinics, 121 F3d 1126 (CA7, 1997); Floss v. Ryans Family Steakhouses, 211 F3d 306 (CA6, 2000)(cert. denied) 531 US 1072; Heinig Furs, 811 Fsupp 1546 (M.D.Ala., 1993); Flanders Medeiros v. Bogosian, 88 Fsupp 412 (DRI, 1994)(affirmed in part) 65 F3d 198; Johnson Enterprises v. FPl Group, 162 F3d 1290 (CA2, 1998); Hoffman v. Bankers Trust, 925 Fsupp 315 (M.D.Pa, 1995); Prudential Insurance v. Sipula, 776 F2d 157 (CA7, 1985); In Re Sulakshma, 207 BR 422 (E.D.Pa, 1997).

(42): See: Gordon T (2000), Securitization of Executory Future Flows as bankruptcy-Remote True Sales, University of Chicago Law Review, 67:1317-1322.

(43): See: Valdiviezo v. Phelps Dodge, 995 Fsupp 1060 (D.Ariz., 1997). Johnson enterprises v. FPL Group, 162 F3d 1290 (CA2, 1998). Ryan v. Upchurch, 474 Fsupp 211 (SND, 1979)(reversed) 627 F2d 836. See: Rose J & Dawson P (Sept. 1997), Contingent Transfer: The Illusory Promise of Structured Finance. S&P Structured Finance, page 10.

(44): Prudential Insurance v. Sipula, 776 F2d 157 (CA7, 1985) (no consideration where party to contract could not bargain for alleged agreement).

(45): See: Tampa Pipeline Transport v. Chase Manhattan Service Corp., 928 Fsupp 1568 (MD.Fla., 1995) (affirmed) 87 F3d 1329.

(46): See: Imel v.Laborer’s Pension Fund Trust, 904 F2d 1327 (CA9, 1990) (cert. den.) 498 US 939 (contract should not alter statutory duties); Truck Ins. Exchange v. Ashland Oil, 951 F2d 787 (CA7, 1992); Cramer v. Consolidated Freightways, 255 F3d 806 (CA9, 2001) (cert. denied) 122 SCt 806; Lake James Community v. Burke County NC, 149 F3d 277 (CA4, 198) (cert. denied) 525 US 1106; Davis v. Parker, 58 F3d 183 (CA5, 1995); In Re NWFx, 881 F2d 530 (on rehearing) 904 F2d 469 (cert. denied) 498 US 941; Biomedical Systems v. GE Marquette, 287 F3d 707 (CA8, 2002) (cert. denied) 123 SCt 636 (post-contract formation failure to obtain statutorily required license invalidated agreement).

THE FOLLOWING DATA HAS BEEN PUBLISHED AT THE FOOT OF MOST OF THESE REPORTS FOR THE PAST THREE YEARS++. IT WAS COMPILED BY MICHAEL C. COTTRELL, B.A., M.S..

• THEY ARE 100% CONSISTENT WITH THE FOREGOING ANALYSIS, AND VICE VERSA:

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].

CMKM/CMKX $3.87 TRILLION LAWSUIT GOES ‘MAINSTREAM’

cropped-chrisstory

TIM BARELLO’S EXPOSURE REPORT ON EXAMINER.COM

Friday 9 April 2010 11:30

• CMKM DIAMONDS AND THE $3.87 TRILLION LAWSUIT YOU DIDN’T HEAR ABOUT

• UNLESS YOU FOLLOW WORLD REPORTS IN WHICH CASE YOU READ IT HERE FIRST

•* CMKM GOES MAINSTREAM WORLDWIDE AND IN GERMANY
Tim Barello has reported to us from New York [9th April 2010]: ‘Following a tremendous impact from Monday’s RT broadcast (which was seen in over 100 nations, and has since been reproduced and viewed many times over online) and the accompanying Examiner.com article, we can now note that CMKM has gone mainstream in Germany, via ARD, a major German broadcaster.
Link: http://boerse.ard.de/content.jsp?key=dokument_426752

• We have re-dated this report, which was originally posted on 31st March 2010. The Editor is working on reports addressing the accelerating unravelling of the Fraudulent Finance crisis, revolutionary examples of the collapse of the Rule of Law, and the George H. W. Bush I regime’s attempt to grab the Falkland Islands by activating its long-term Nazi assets in Argentina in 1982.

• Like everything else this personification of the Evil One does, that grabitisation ploy collapsed.

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.

SECURITIZATION IS ILLEGAL UPDATE: In the Subs/Books Update panel immediately below the NEWS panel that you are currently viewing, you will see an announcement concerning publication of Economic Intelligence Review, Volume 12, Numbers 7 & 8. If you press that announcement text and open up the panel, you will see the contents list for the new [2010Q1] issue of E.I.R., including a breakdown of the Chapter Headings for the detailed analysis showing that Securitization is illegal. See our NEWS report dated 10th March 2010 for summaries of some of the data from this analysis. We understand that the report has created uproar in certain corridors of corrupt power.

• 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.

• 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.

• 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 extended Ad. for the INTERNET SECURITY SOLUTION.

• OUR PHONE SYSTEMS HAVE NOW BEEN CLOSED DOWN:
Due to incessant Psy-Ops harassment by the Cheney/Biden/NSA criminal operatives, we have had to close down our telephone connections. On returning to the London office, the Editor found 13 obscene messages from the paid USG maniac on our London voicemail overnight 30-31 March, and the USG maniac started up again shortly after noon UK time on 31st. All our telephone connections have therefore been severed and will remain severed and out of service until further notice. As previously noted, we must be doing something right, or these brainwashed sickos in urgent need of brain surgery wouldn’t have been doing this non-stop since February 2008.

• Note: Although we were advised that this is a Cheney/Biden/NSA harassment offensive, we bear in mind that it could be a DVD operation. That would make sense, given Bush Sr.’s links with DVD, and his close association with Dr Helmut Kohl, the former Chancellor of Germany, as a partner in Deutsche AG (formerly Barrington Investment Group) and Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev*. It would also make sense given that this operation started in February 2008, with the Wanta ‘switch’.

• If this is a DVD operation, the US authorities have done NOTHING TO TERMINATE IT, so they are complicit in this illegal harassment and in the STEALING OF OUR COMMUNICATIONS.

• We can be contacted as normal via email or fax, and via the CONTACT US facility below.

* Gorbachev’s KGB/Oligarch associate, Lebedev, who has just lifted some of the stolen funds held in Deutsche AG to bail out the second-rate, loss-making UK newspapers The Independent and The Independent on Sunday, is now presiding over a full-frontal attack on The Queen’s finances in The Independent. This is NOT A COINCIDENCE and represents a new dimension of the ongoing attack on the British Monarchy, which is also being openly assisted by the corrupt German-Jewish Pope Ratzinger, whose contribution so far has been to ‘invite’ disillusioned clergy, bishops and members of the Church of England into his reprobate church, as a means of helping to destroy the Church of England, of which The Queen is Head. If they can destroy the Church of England, they remove a key prop from beneath the Monarchy. The Pope’s cynical offensive against the Church of England, like the Gorbachev/Lebedev offensive against The Queen’s finances, is a DVD operation. The KGB/GRU collaborate with DVD at the highest level, as previously reported by this service.

• MAIN CMKM REPORTS PUBLISHED HERE: SEE ARCHIVE:

• 09 January 2010: Text of the CMKM/CMKX lawsuit against the S.E.C.
Case Number CV10-00031-JVS (MLGX): See also Report dated 7th January 2010

• 29 January 2010: Service of CMKM/CMKX $3.87 trillion suit vs. S.E.C.
Biggest lawsuit in world history: The Phantom Shares giga-scandal

• 02 March 2010: S.E.C. Phantom shares fraud: New Intelligence
Latest developments following the blowing of the cauldron lid

• You can also access the CMKM/CMKX text at: http://viewer.zoho.com/docs/paKdda

REPORT BY TIM BARELLO, EXAMINER.COM, NEW YORK, STARTS HERE:

Tim Barello writes to us from New York City: This article is currently the #1 article on the entire NY hyperlocal site, meaning that hundreds of thousands and possibly millions of unique viewers are seeing it right now at:

http://www.examiner.com/x-9341-Manhattan-Headlines-Examiner~y2010m3d30-CMKM-Diamonds-and-the-387-trillion-lawsuit-you-didnt-hear-about

The link we provided works, but you musn’t include the period at the end of the sentence!!!!!:
http://www.examiner.com/new_york

Editor’s Note: Tim has done a first-rate job of summarising the essential points of the CMKM Case for the general reader.

S.E.C. COMMISSIONERS AT RECEIVING END OF WORLD’S BIGGEST-EVER LAWSUIT
As the United States continues to fracture in every way imaginable, most citizens are unable to keep up with the never-ending hodgepodge of government corruption. Each day, a new larger-than-life scandal emerges, and in the short mind span of news media, there is always a bigger and better story to chase. Right now, the hot button issue for mainstream news outlets is healthcare reform, and its myriad implications for our society; this doubtlessly ensures the aforementioned media will continue to overlook unprecedented accusations brought forth in a recent $3.87 trillion lawsuit against U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Mary L. Shapiro, as well as several other current and former SEC commissioners, among others.

This Bivens action suit represents the largest fraud case in world history, and was filed in the U.S. District Court, Central District of California, on January 8th by Pasadena attorney Al Hodges; in his complaint, made on behalf of CMKM Diamonds shareholders, Hodges alleges that:

• [Complaint paragraph 31] During the period of June 1, 2004 through October 28, 2005 a total of 2.25 Trillion “phantom” shares of CMKM Diamonds Inc, was sold into the public market through legitimate brokers, illegitimate brokers and dealers, market makers, hedge funds, ex-clearing transactions and private transactions” The sales of the majority of such shares were at all times known to the Securities and Exchange Commission, including Defendants herein”.

• [Complaint paragraph 32] At some date prior to June 1, 2004 the Securities and Exchange Commission in concert with the Department of Justice of the United States, together combined with Robert A. Maheu and others to utilize CMKM Diamonds, Inc. for the purpose of trapping a number of widely disbursed entities and persons who were believed to be engaged in naked short selling of CMKM Diamonds Inc. stock and cellar boxing the company.

The Securities and Exchange Commission and the Department of Justice, with assistance from the Department of Homeland Security, believed and developed evidence that said short sellers were utilizing their activities to illegally launder moneys, wrongfully export moneys, avoid payment of taxes, and to support foreign terrorist operations.

To fulfill the plan to criminally trap such wrongdoers, the Securities and Exchange Commission, with assistance from the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security:

(a) Assisted in and approved the retention of Roger Glenn, an ex-SEC trial attorney and drafter of Sarbanes-Oxley, to join CMKM Diamonds Inc. for the purpose of verifying claims value, increasing authorized shares of stock to 800,000,000,000, and supervising from the inside of the company;

(b) Encouraged the company to expand its promotional activities, assisted in the set up of the “racing activities” of the company, and underwrote a substantial portion of the cost of such activities;

(c) Consented to, facilitated, and supported the sale of certain company claims to several foreign corporations;

(d) Consented to, facilitated, and supported the conferences between Robert A. Maheu and his associates on the one hand, and the wrongdoing short sellers on the other, all for the purpose of settling the potential liability of said wrongdoers with consent of the U. S. Government and a representation of no criminal prosecution for such illegal sales;

(e) Consented to, facilitated, and supported the declaration of dividends payable by the company to each common shareholder of CMKM Diamonds, Inc.

(f) Consented to, facilitated, and supported the distribution of shares of CIM, a private company owned by Urban Casavant, as a stock dividend, including consent and approval of distribution of said shares to holders of more than 1.4 Trillion shares of CMKM Diamonds, Inc. common stock.
Based on these assertions, CMKM was used by the U.S. government as part of a covert sting operation – unbeknownst to shareholders – to apprehend criminals for their offenses. However, instead of prosecuting most of them, restitution deals were apparently cut:

• [Complaint paragraph 34] During the period from March, 2004 through August, 2006, on behalf of CMKM Diamonds, Inc. Robert A. Maheu, with assistance from others, negotiated a settlement with the illegitimate brokers, dealers, market makers, hedge funds, and other persons and entities that had engaged in naked short selling of CMKM Diamonds Inc. stock and cellar boxing the company. In exchange for a U. S. Government promise of no prosecution for such sales, the wrongdoers each promised to pay negotiated amounts to a frozen trust for disbursal at a later time.

• [Complaint paragraph 35] Plaintiffs herein are informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that other moneys have been collected for the benefit of the shareholders of CMKM Diamonds, Inc. from the Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation, from the United States Government, and from the sale of additional assets including consent to enter into joint venture agreements with other companies holding mineral claims in Saskatchewan, Canada. Plaintiffs herein are further informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that said moneys, collected for the benefit of shareholders have also been placed in a trust or are otherwise now held in trust by the Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation and the United States Treasury.

Therefore, the crux of this complaint – and the massive fraud allegedly committed by the SEC (and Department of Justice) – is as follows:

• [Complaint paragraph 36] Plaintiffs herein are informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that at all times mentioned, the Securities and Exchange Commission reserved unto itself the sole and absolute discretion to determine when moneys collected pursuant to the scheme set forth above would and could be released for distribution.

• [Complaint paragraph 37] Demand for release of said moneys has been repeatedly presented to the Securities and Exchange Commission without result. Agents and employees of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Department of Justice have represented repeatedly that the release of moneys for distribution was imminent, and/or would occur within several weeks, and/or would occur within less than a month. Each of said representations have been made knowing them to be false, and at the specific direction of the named Defendants. These actions of withholding distribution of said moneys, without compensation and without due process of law, amount to a taking of the property of the individual Plaintiffs and of all similarly situated.

During the timeframe referenced above, CMKM was registered as a publicly traded diamond and gold mining company. By 2005, concrete evidence detailing fraud within the company emerged; in addition, it became publicly apparent that CMKM also sold, at the very least, hundreds of billions of unregistered shares – a practice often referred to as naked short selling – to third parties.

Eventually, the SEC moved to delist CMKM stock, whose value never exceeded one penny per share, in accordance with Section 12(j) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. After several administrative proceedings, CMKM stock was ultimately deregistered in October 2005.

In September 2006, Floyd Norris, chief financial correspondent of The New York Times and The International Herald Tribune, caught wind of the CMKM scandals, and began to report on some elements of the criminal fraud that ravaged CMKM’s estimated 40,000 shareholders.

Norris has reported on more than one occasion that at least 259 billion shares of unregistered CMKM stock was sold; however, per the SEC’s 2008 action against CMKM, the agency itself acknowledges that as many as 622 billion shares of “purportedly unregistered stock” was sold by the company over a 20 month period.

So, how did Hodges initially determine that at least 2 trillion unregistered shares were sold?
[Complaint paragraph 25] A frequently asked question (FAQ) page was added to the web site [CMKMTaskForce.com] on the evening of November 4, 2005 and in response to a question about the degree of naked shorting of CMKM stock, the Task Force [consisting of Robert A. Maheu, Donald J. Stoecklein and Bill Frizzell] indicated that “Credible information indicates the number of naked short shares is potentially as high as 2 Trillion shares”.

‘QUITE A CASE’
Several weeks ago, I spoke with Al Hodges, a practicing attorney with four decades of experience, to find out more about this extraordinary case, and moreover, to determine from him exactly how he calculated his clients’ potential damages to be nearly $4 trillion – a figure many observers have openly scoffed at.

Almost immediately, I could not help but ask why the ‘mainstream’ media has not fairly reported on this case; frankly, given the scope of accusations, one would assume that, at the very least, Floyd Norris and The New York Times would have some interest in thoroughly examining the merits of this action; instead, Norris has essentially brushed off Hodges’ allegations as being baseless.
It’s not that Hodges and his associates haven’t tried to attract the media’s interest; in fact, on this side of the Atlantic, all the major dailies, including The Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post have all been informed of the suit.

Their respective editorial staffs – with the exception of Floyd Norris – have utterly decided to ignore it. In the United Kingdom, efforts have also been made to attract mainstream media interest. Veteran financial intelligence Editor and Publisher Christopher Story FRSA – an investigative specialist that focuses on covert government operations and scandals – has personally reached out to The Daily Telegraph’s International Business Editor Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, with whom he is acquainted, to notify him about Hodges’ case. To date, Pritchard has failed to respond to Mr. Story, who has authored a number of articles (1) – and other published commentary – in The Daily Telegraph over the course of his near 50-year-career.

Hodges noted that Story, publisher of International Currency Review, and several other serials, is “subscribed to by every intelligence operation in the world”.

If intelligence agencies are reading about CMKM, then why isn’t the mainstream press covering this case? Hodges prudently observed that “they’re not going to touch it” (2).

MAINSTREAM MEDIA WON’T COVER ISSUES TIED TO COVERT OPERATIONS? (EVIDENTLY NOT)
“They* used the shareholders without their consent to perform this ‘sting operation’ for National Security interests, and it wouldn’t have worked the way it worked if they had disclosed it”, he continued. [*: The Government, i.e. the Intelligence Power: Ed.].

“On the other hand, it isn’t right to bury a company and put them out of business for the purpose of trapping people who are using the company to cheat the government, to line their own pockets, and to fund their operations against the United States”.

As noted above in complaint paragraph 34, and per Hodges, a deal was eventually reached with the aforementioned criminals; they paid the government restitution for documented illegal actions, and in turn, were offered immunity from prosecution.

“Rob Maheu had all these people in a big room in Las Vegas, and made [an] offer to them”, he said.

“Every person, organization and representative in that room stepped up, and either transferred money while they were there, or agreed to transfer money upon some further schedule” to avoid indictment. Hodges also said: “I have a witness who was there, who saw it, and part of the 2.25 trillion phantom shares is documented by that person’s observations of how many shares were represented in that room”.

HOW MUCH MONEY DID THE FEDS REALLY COLLECT FOR RESTITUTION?
“People are going to laugh and titter about the amount of money that is being claimed, but understand the context of the lawsuit”, he said, before concluding: “We are not asking the Government to pay us $3.87 trillion: what we’re asking is for them to release the funds that have been collected for us”. Thus, the implication is that this sum also incorporates substantial punitive damages. Note: Mr Hodges confirmed to the Editor of this service on his return to London on 30th March that the lawsuit proceeds and will be prosecuted, which is causing the individual S.E.C. personnel extreme angst, as can be imagined (3).

In the end, Hodges believes the U.S. Government is going to settle the case before it actually moves to trial. On this possibility, he said, “I think its in the process of happening as we speak”.

Based on these explanations – and the recent scandals and assertions that have surfaced about the SEC – I believe the mainstream media is doing the public a great disservice by not properly examining Hodges’ CMKM case.

The same conclusion must also be drawn about Christopher Story’s reports on the criminality that is undermining international efforts to refund the U.S. dollar, which is dangerously close to losing its status as the world’s global reserve currency…but that’s touching on a whole other can of worms…or is it?

Notes and References:

(1): In Paul Johnson’s article “Unions, Pensions, and Financial Responsibility: The British Experience” published in the Journal of Labor Research, Volume 2, Issue 2 (1981) pp. 292, 294, 295, 296, he highlights Christopher Story’s authoritative research, as published in The Daily Telegraph on 30 April, 31 August and 1 September 1976, as well as on 4 September 1978.

(2): During the Editor’s stay in New York (16th to 30th March), he held conversations with a number of ‘connected’ people. One such impeccable source he has known personally for two decades has confirmed the Editor’s statement that ‘there’s an intelligence cell in every press room’. She replied:
‘That’s absolutely correct’. (One method of obtaining such information is to reach a conclusion and then to put that conclusion to the contact for assessment. If the information is accurate, the usual consequence is that the information will be confirmed. They can confirm or deny, but can’t ‘inform’).

(3): Telephone call placed by the Editor to Mr Hodges on his return to the London office on 30th March, at about 11:00pm UK time.

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 ARE IN BREACH [SEE REPORTS]:

All securitisation is illegal under US and Common Law: see report dated 10th March 2010.

• 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.

• 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].

SECURITISATION IS 100% ILLEGAL UNDER U.S. LEGISLATION

cropped-chrisstory

WHAT THE OFFICIAL RACKETEERS ARE DESPERATELY COVERING UP

Wednesday 10 March 2010 19:30

EAVESDROPPING AND CONSTANT AMERICAN TELEPHONE HARASSMENT
CONFIRM THAT THIS SERVICE IS RIGHT AT THE EPICENTRE OF THIS CRISIS

• REPORTS UPDATE: It has been decided to post this report, containing the ‘securitisation is illegal’ data, which was nearing completion when the fraud discovered on Monday and Tuesday, erupted. Our report on this monumental fraud (which we will call, for shorthand purposes, ‘the Pennsylvania Fraud’), will follow and will probably be alternated with the present analysis. The Editor has now obtained the underlying documentation on the Pennsylvania Fraud, and will be working on this exposure report immediately (so much for his regular publishing work schedule).

• MAJOR UPDATE, 12TH MARCH 2010:

OBAMA, GEITHNER AND THE D.C MEETING ON SECURITISATION
As elaborated below, securitisation in the United States is illegal and contrary to public policy.

All securitised contracts are void not least because they were created to facilitate one or more criminal acts, as explained in this presentation. By definition and US law, all contracts created to accommodate an illegal act are void.

So, what is happening in Washington, DC, ‘as we speak’? Why, a high-level meeting has been taking place to examine how SECURITISATION of FRNs can be used to dig the Obama Administration out of the void it has created by its bovine criminality and stupidity.

The prime movers of this demented, ILLEGAL activity are President Obama and Timothy Geithner, US Treasury Secretary, backed by other purblind officials such as Larry Summers. No doubt the careful timing of the publication of our exposure of securitisation here as completely illegal and contrary to the Rule of Law, will have given the underlings of these perpetrators some concern. Obama’s World Court-granted immunity from prosecution does not extend to domestic felonies.

UNITED KINGDOM: THE LAW OF PROPERTY ACT, 1925
In the United Kingdom, The Law of Property Act, 1925, particularly Section 136 which deals with assignments, makes it crystal clear that alienation by a mortgage provider of all assets that have been assigned without notice having been issued to, or permission granted by, the debtor, is void and fraudulent. Therefore, ALL SECURITISATION OPERATIONS BY FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS WITHIN THE BRITISH JURISDICTION WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN EXPLICITLY SANCTIONED IN ADVANCE BY THE MORTGAGOR, with the mortgagor fully aware of the situation, are void.

Northern Rock and all financial entities engaged in assigning, on-selling, trading and benefiting financially from such activity without notice to or the prior consent of the mortgagor, are engaged in CRIMINAL ACTIVITY. These institutions have accordingly been trading worthless paper between themselves within a fraudulent financial carousel, as repeatedly stated in these reports.

The Directors of these institutions should be investigated and prosecuted by the UK authorities: and if this does not happen, we will keep asking why not. No doubt Lord Myners [see Appendix below], the ‘City Minister’, knows the score perfectly well, and is being ‘economical with the truth’. In which case he is a co-conspirator in this criminality.

The bottom line here is that it is possible in the British jurisdiction to stop anyone who holds a contract for debt (the creditor) from passing that debt to a third party (debt collector) if they have not complied fully with The Law of Property Act 1925 and to hold them to the original contract and, therefore, to their stringent obligations to the debtor under the Consumer Credit Act, 1974. If they do not, the contract is toast and they cannot collect or sue for recovery of the debt. And the debtor is at liberty to counterclaim even if they do sue the debtor: which is another reason why they don’t do this. For this reason, no one talks about the The Law of Property Act, 1925. They will now!

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatutes/Acts/ukpga/1925/cukpga_19250020_en_1

136 Legal assignments of things in action:
(1): Any absolute assignment by writing under the hand of the assignor (not purporting to be by
way of charge only) of any debt or other legal thing in action, OF WHICH EXPRESS NOTICE IN WRITING HAS BEEN GIVEN TO THE DEBTOR, trustee or other person from whom the assignor would have been entitled to claim such debt or thing in action, is effectual in law (subject to equities having priority over the right of the assignee) to pass and transfer from the date of such notice:
(a) the legal right to such debt or thing in action;
(b) all legal and other remedies for the same; and
(c) the power to give a good discharge for the same without the concurrence of the assignor:

Provided that, if the debtor, trustee or other person liable
in respect of such debt or thing in action has notice:
(a) that the assignment is disputed by the assignor or any person claiming under him; or
(b) of any other opposing or conflicting claims to such debt or thing in action; he may, if he thinks fit, either call upon the persons making claim thereto to interplead concerning the same, or pay the debt or other thing in action into court under the provisions of the Trustee Act, 1925.

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.

• 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.

• 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 extended Ad. for the INTERNET SECURITY SOLUTION.

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 from this website.

• 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.

• UPDATES, 11TH MARCH: The outline report on the Northern Rock case, in which the bank lied in writing to the paid-up mortgagor whose Title Deeds the bank said had been ‘de-materialised’ and held on to for FIVE YEARS AFTER THE MORTGAGE HAD BEEN PAID OFF, and yet finally disgorged after five years (during which time the householder could not sell her home), has triggered much interest. So we have added some new data beneath the outline Northern Rock report below.

• Under US whistleblower legislation, the whistleblower is entitled to a proportion of the fraud uncovered, a point made to the Editor this morning, too. No doubt this will likewise help to focus the serpentine minds of the criminal operatives being exposed. 15% to 30% of $4.2 trillion, plus $6.2 trillion, plus multiple billions, is a lot of dosh. In fact 15% of $10.4 trillion is $1.56 trillion, and 30% is $3.12 trillion. OK, the percentage is usually 10%, applicable only after conviction of course. So make that $1.04 trillion, then. Such awards are naturally available only to US taxpayers: please see the next report, on The Philadelphia Fraud, identified by a US taxpayer.

• LISTENING-IN TO OUR PHONE CALLS GIVES THE GAME AWAY

• WHY DO THEY LISTEN-IN TO EVERY WORD? WE’VE COMMITTED NO CRIMES

• WE’VE BEEN HARASSED DAILY WITH OBSCENE U.S. CALLS SINCE FEBRUARY 2008

• ‘MR STORY IS A PROBLEM FOR THEM BUT THEY CAN HANDLE IT PROVIDED
WHAT HE EXPOSES IS BLOCKED FROM THE ‘MAINSTREAM’’

• AS WE’VE COMMITTED NO CRIMES, AUTHORITIES SHOULD SUPPORT WHAT WE’RE
DOING TO HELP THEM DO THE JOB THEY ARE TOO CORRUPT TO DO UNAIDED

• THEY FALL OVER THEMSELVES TO LISTEN-IN, SO THEY CAN WARN
THE GUTLESS ‘MAINSTREAM’ OUTLETS TO BLOCK OUR EXPOSURES

• ALL THEY DO IS INFORM US BY THEIR SORDID BEHAVIOUR THAT WE ARE RIGHT
‘ON MESSAGE’ – WHICH IS BEYOND STUPID OF THEM, WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT IT

• CRIMINALISED INTELLIGENCE POWER INCOMPATIBLE WITH SOUND GOVERNANCE

• RACKETEERS CONSTANTLY CONFRONTED WITH THE RULE OF LAW

• COWARDLY CONTROLLED NEWSPAPERS WHICH HAVE IGNORED CIMKM/CMKX

• THE DAILY TELEGRAPH: A CONTROLLED OUTLET FOR MI-6

• MI-6 ‘INTEND TO TAKE MR CHRISTOPHER STORY OUT’

• BRITISH INTELLIGENCE APPEARS TO BE BEHAVING TREACHEROUSLY, AS USUAL

• ‘MAINSTREAM’ NEWSPAPERS REVEALING THEMSELVES
TO BE CO-CONSPIRATORS IN COVERING UP THE RACKETEERING

• WHY CONFINING EXPOSURES TO THIS WEBSITE HAS BEEN
COUNTERPRODUCTIVE FROM THE RACKETEERS’ PERSPECTIVE

• OUR EXPOSURE MODUS OPERANDI: ‘WALKING IN A STRAIGHT LINE’

• QUEEN’S GOLD THEFT STILL NOT RECTIFIED:
SO, KICK THE U.S. AMBASSADOR OUT OF LONDON

• STEALING OF $4.2 TRILLION TAX MONEY ON 31ST DECEMBER 2009
STILL NOT RECTIFIED: SO MASSIVE CRIMES HAVE BEEN COMMITTED

• FISH ROTS FROM THE STINKING HEAD: WORLD COURT IMMUNITY DEMANDED
AND SCANDALOUSLY OBTAINED BY THE COLLECTIVE OF CORRUPT U.S. PRESIDENTS

• GORBACHEV MANIPULATING DEVELOPMENTS FROM HIS WING IN THE KREMLIN, AS BEFORE

• GORBACHEV, BUSH, KOHL, ACKERMANN: RACKETEERING PARTNERS IN DEUTSCHE AG.

• WANTA: THE COURIER BETWEEN BUSH SENIOR AND GORBACHEV

• WANTA’S ‘REAGAN’S JUNK-YARD DOG’ DIVERSION

• WANTA KNEW ABOUT 9/11 IN ADVANCE, LIKE VREELAND

• FRANCE COVERS FOR GERMANY UNDER TREATY OF THE ELYSEE

• FRAUDULENT WANTA ‘SNAKE HILL’ WEBSITE’S GERMAN CONNECTIONS

• CIA/DVD PRACTICE OF EXPLOITING AND STEALING OUTSIDE EXPERTISE

• THE AMERICAN INTELLIGENCE POWER WHICH HAS USURPED
THE GOVERNMENT DANCES TO THE TUNE OF FOREIGN POWERS

• WORLD REVOLUTION RACKETEERING OFFENSIVE

• ‘WALKING IN A STRAIGHT LINE’ WILL EXPOSE THE DECEPTIONS

• COTTRELL THREATENS TO SNATCH AWAY THE RACKETEERS’ COVER,
THROWING THEM INTO A MAD PANIC. THIS WAS NOT ANTICIPATED.

• THE TWO MI-6 OPERATIVES WITH THE QUEEN’S SIGNATURE:
ARE THEY WORKING FOR, OR ARE THEY DOUBLE-CROSSING THE QUEEN?

• WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO THE CHINESE CURRENCY BOXES?

• GREEK DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER EQUATES NAZI GERMANY
WITH CHANCELLOR MERKEL’S STASI GERMANY

• WHAT DO THE FOUR RACKETEERS HAVE IN COMMON
WITH OTHER WELL-KNOWN DECEASED AND LIVING OPERATIVES?

• ‘FORECLOSURE ANALYSIS’ PARA-LEGAL SERVICES SPRINGING UP IN THE UNITED STATES

• NORTHERN ROCK’S LIES TO A FORMER MORTGAGOR MASKING
THE FACT THAT HER TITLE DEEDS WERE ‘OTHERWISE ENGAGED’

• SECURITISATION IS A KEY ELEMENT OF A REVOLUTIONARY ATTACK ON PRIVATE PROPERTY

• YES, A RUTHLESS, SYSTEMATIC ATTACK ON PRIVATE PROPERTY

• LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR SCAMS STILL ‘OUT THERE’

• WHY SECURITISATION IS ILLEGAL UNDER U.S. AND COMMON LAW

• SECURITISATION ENTAILS GROSS VIOLATIONS OF R.I.C.O. STATUTES

• NOTWITHSTANDING THAT IT’S ILLEGAL, U.S. AUTHORITIES
CONTINUE TO PROMOTE AND ENCOURAGE SECURITISATION

• SUMMARY FORENSIC ANALYSIS PROVING THE ILLEGALITY OF SECURITISATION

• SECURITISATION: A COVER FOR TAX EVASION

• SECURITISATION VIOLATES THE U.S BANKRUPTCY CODE
AND THEREFORE ALSO CONTRAVENES PUBLIC POLICY

• SECURITISATION VIOLATES FEDERAL R.I.C.O. STATUTES

• SECURITISATION ALSO VIOLATES U.S. ANTITRUST LEGISLATION

• There is also the tenet of English law of contract which governs US law, too, that any contract entered into in order to commit a crime is (automatically) void. So what exactly do the American and British Governments think they are doing ‘accommodating’ securitisation, given this principle?

• THE ‘PHILIPPINES EXCEPTION’ BURIED IN THE CLAYTON ACT

• FANNIE MAE, FREDDIE MAC ENGAGED IN FURTHER ILLEGAL SECURITISATION:
RE-SECURITISING ALREADY SECURITISED ‘DUD’ ASSETS TO DUMP BACK ON THE BANKS

• GARY GENSLER IS NOT AS OPPOSED TO FRAUDULENT FINANCE AS HE SEEMS

• ‘GREATER TRANSPARENCY’ IS EVIDENTLY ALL GENSLER’S AFTER

• INVESTORS’ MONEY USED TO REMUNERATE WALL STREET

•’THE MONEY YOU MAKE BY MISUSING MY MONEY
IS MY MONEY‘ – I.E., THE HOME OWNER’S

• A PERVERSE AND ARROGANT OFFICIAL INTENT TO CONTINUE VIOLATING U.S. LAW

• THE DEPOSITORY TRUST & CLEARING CORPORATION IS IN OVERDRIVE

• THE FEDERAL RESERVE HAS BECOME
THE BACK-STOP GUARANTOR OF CREDIT DEFAULT SWAPS

• STAGE SET FOR AN UNIMAGINABLE (AVOIDABLE)
CATASTROPHE: A DEATH-WISH

• THE DTCC’S OBLIGATIONS WAREHOUSE SERVICE

• GREATER TRANSPARENCY WON’T ELIMINATE SYSTEMIC RISK,
OR PREVENT A CONFIDENCE CRISIS

• SO, WHERE ARE YOU, MR HOLDER?

• APPENDIX: LORD MYNERS SAYS THERE MUST BE PENALTIES FOR BANK EXCESSES

• POSTSCRIPT: STIGLITZ: ‘THE AMERICAN BANKING SYSTEM IS CORRUPT’

NEW REPORT STARTS HERE:

LISTENING-IN TO OUR PHONE CALLS GIVES THE GAME AWAY
If we go back to square one and start asking basic questions about our experiences with these exposures, interesting answers emerge. The first question that arises is this:

• Why is it that so many intelligence eavesdroppers listen to every domestic and especially international telephone call that we make and receive?

After all, the Editor has not stolen any money, has not murdered anyone, has not abducted anyone else’s child, is not a Nazi war criminal, is not engaged in espionage, is not an agent of a foreign power, has not defrauded anyone, and is not engaged in criminal activity in any shape or form. And neither, for instance, is Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., let alone Mr A. Clifton Hodges, the Attorney for the CMKM/CMKX victims, whom the Editor speaks to quite frequently on the transatlantic line.

Is it that these eager eavesdroppers like the sound of the Editor’s voice? Do they seek knowledge from us that they could not obtain from other sources? Are we the fount of all known wisdom in the universe? What do we know and say that others don’t know and can’t say, which these decadent snoopers find so electrifying in our conversations? There must be SOME explanation for their manic preoccupation with what we have to say in our private communications.

WHY DO THEY LISTEN-IN TO EVERY WORD? WE’VE COMMITTED NO CRIMES
Because given that we have committed no crimes, and neither are we patriots terrorists, there HAS to be a coherent reason why these despicable little UK, US and foreign snooping apparatchiks rush to pick up their earpieces every time we begin a conversation – knocking over their plastic coffee cups and making a mess of their work spaces in their frantic anxiety to garner every precious nugget that falls from our lips. One can hear these scum clicking in one after the other.

Oh, the red light’s gone on, we’ve got to record what Story and his correspondents are saying. Why do they need to fall over themselves to find out what we discuss, as we have committed no crimes and are not terrorists?

And why are they routinely engaged in issuing threats against the Editor of this service, and also against Mr Cottrell, and harassing both on a routine basis – Mr Cottrell as recently as 6th March? The Editor, as previously reported, has received daily voicemail messages from a controlled MK-Ultra-style ‘Black’ US DVD nutcase via Skype (Washington, DC) since the Wanta ‘switch’ in February 2008: on some days, we have counted as many as nine such demented harassment calls.

WE’VE BEEN HARASSED DAILY WITH OBSCENE U.S. CALLS SINCE FEBRUARY 2008
These crude harassment calls, which as indicated have been continuing since the Wanta ‘switch’ in 2008, reminiscent of a DVD operation (because of their Bavarian Illuminati-style ‘Black’ content and because Germans never know when to stop, and when they have been defeated) have no effect on the Editor’s work, mind or intentions: yet some ignorant cadre inside the US component of the CIA/DVD revolutionary structures is employed, for money, to continue this illegal harassment.

They seem to think it will wear us down. Instead, the parties being worn down are those who are determined, despite our exposures of their iniquity, to continue their racketeering operations in defiance of the Rule of Law that they despise.

They never thought they would encounter any opposition, and they have been on the wrong foot ever since we stood up to them. Real opposition was never anticipated.

What arrogance! What right do these little malodorous eavesdropping twerps have to intercept our telecommunications and to record what we have to say – sending, we understand, transcripts of our coveted exchanges to the White House?

What right do the National Security Agency, GCHQ, French, Israeli and German intelligence have to listen-in to our phone calls? Are we at the apex of human understanding? Do we dispense pearls of insight and wisdom so penetrating that that these little creeps cannot develop them from other sources? Now let’s broaden our enquiry further, leading in to the next question.

‘MR STORY IS A PROBLEM FOR THEM BUT THEY CAN HANDLE IT PROVIDED
WHAT HE EXPOSES IS BLOCKED FROM THE ‘MAINSTREAM’’
As displayed at the top of our report dated 2nd March 2010, Mr A. Clifton Hodges, Attorney for the 50,000 CMKM/CMKX scamees (whose CMKM stock was exploited when 2.25 trillion PHANTOM SHARES were floated via an illegal platform from WITHIN the Securities and Exchange Commission itself, under the criminal George W. Bush Administration (between June 2004 and October 2005)), was informed by an inside source that ‘Christopher Story is a problem for them, but they think they can handle it PROVIDED that what he exposes does not spill over into the ‘mainstream’ media’ [see our report dated 2nd March 2010].

The source of this information was a US official whose job it is to ENFORCE THE LAW, not to connive in violating it for purposes of expediency.

AS WE’VE COMMITTED NO CRIMES, AUTHORITIES SHOULD SUPPORT WHAT WE’RE
DOING TO HELP THEM DO THE JOB THEY ARE TOO CORRUPT TO DO UNAIDED
One would have thought that since what we are exposing is RAMPANT RACKETEERING AND CRIMINALITY WITHIN THE U.S. GOVERNMENT STRUCTURES, as well as inside the corrupted financial institutions, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the criminal enterprise known as the Central Intelligence Agency, such US operatives and officials would be only too keen on encouraging the broad dissemination of information liable to lead to the indictment and arrest of the racketeers and criminals that are being protected within and close to the Washington Beltway.

But that is not the case! On the contrary, this and other ‘inside’ sources appear to have been engaged in a systematic operation to use Story, Cottrell and now Hodges as a foil and barrier, behind which to plan double-dealing and continued financial deception, and to deceive at least the first two named, in order – as with the original Wanta deception – to preserve a smokescreen as cover for the pursuit of racketeering ‘business as usual’ in general.

The intention here has been to try to conduct the US Dollar Refunding themselves, with FRNs – which will lead very rapidly to a catastrophe, so that the racketeers below the radar can then, so they imagine, unscramble and release their accumulated and worthless nominal ‘derivative’ values from off-balance sheet and offshore sources, for deployment (as is currently happening to some extent) for the Fascist-style purpose of snapping up real assets at firesale prices.

• That’s the goal of the World Revolution.

THEY FALL OVER THEMSELVES TO LISTEN-IN, SO THEY CAN WARN
THE GUTLESS ‘MAINSTREAM’ OUTLETS TO BLOCK OUR EXPOSURES
So, on the one hand, the eavesdroppers knock over their dirty plastic coffee cups as they fall over themselves to listen to and record what we have to say on the telephone; while on the other hand, they appear to be seeing to it that what we have to discuss, and what the Editor is exposing, never reaches beyond the in-house intelligence censorship ‘pods’ sitting inside all press rooms of the controlled ‘mainstream’ media, prompting the next question:

• Why are these manipulators so anxious to hear what we have to say and simultaneously so determined that what we have to say and expose never hits the ‘mainstream’?

After all, given that we have committed no crimes and are not terrorists, and the governments which these despicable little eavesdropping worms serve, supposedly believe in ‘democracy’ and ‘free speech’, don’t you know, it should surely follow that if the eavesdroppers consider that what we have to say is so superb and priceless, their governments would all be awfully keen that our invaluable information and insights should be spread extensively abroad so that the sum of human understanding is enhanced, to the benefit of all, the governments included, n’est-ce-pas?

ALL THEY DO IS INFORM US BY THEIR SORDID BEHAVIOUR THAT WE ARE RIGHT
‘ON MESSAGE’ – WHICH IS BEYOND STUPID OF THEM, WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT IT
There is of course one benefit to all this – namely, that by listening in to all our telecommunications so routinely and conspicuously, and by engaging in such persistent and futile non-stop telephone harassment (which is recorded by us for future legal reference, not listened to, and zapped), the criminal intelligence cadres concerned are signalling to us LOUD AND CLEAR that we are indeed being highly effective: otherwise they wouldn’t be wasting their time and financial resources in such underhand and counterproductive activities, would they.

So, as we have previously pointed out, these intelligence and masonic cadres are indeed plain STUPID! By their behaviour, they are telling us that we’re being effective, making a difference, and that we’re getting in the way of their racketeering operations by exposing them (as you will see from the next post!). So the confused, panicking fools are telling us all we need to know. It’s neat!

Obviously, there’s something wrong here: and one doesn’t need a first class degree in logic to be able to discern the problem. We haven’t committed any crimes and are not terrorists. Why, then, do these authorities compete among themselves not only to listen to and record what we have to say, but also to prevent the ‘mainstream’ from picking up our insights and assessments?

• ANSWER: Because the governments themselves are engaged in the very financial terrorist criminality and racketeering that we are exposing, and are terrified that the exposures will lead to what from their perspectives might become intolerable ‘unintended consequences’, with rolling outcomes that they couldn’t control. And this is in fact what is going to happen, sooner or later.

CRIMINALISED INTELLIGENCE POWER INCOMPATIBLE WITH SOUND GOVERNANCE
At this point we need to insert an obvious but almost always overlooked anomaly arising from the fact, mentioned in earlier reports, that the coexistence of criminalised, racketeering intelligence powers enjoying carte blanche to embezzle public funds and break the law (and to indulge in petty dirty tricks and bearing false witness such as those involving Gordon Thomas on behalf of MI-6: see Note (1) below), with a system supposedly based on the Rule of Law, is INCOMPATIBLE WITH SOUND GOVERNANCE – let alone with the supposed supremacy of legality.

If they prefer a system without the Rule of Law, why bother any longer with Congress and routinely rigged elections which make a mockery of democracy and just confirm that the US authorities, who hypocritically preach democracy to the Rest of the World, are indistinguishable from corrupt ‘post’-Soviet régimes, where ballot boxes (as in Ireland) are brought pre-stuffed to the polling stations?

Because the criminalised intelligence powers and those serving them:

• Exhibit open contempt for the Rule of Law, but exploit it on an open-ended basis when it suits their own nefarious purposes.

• Seek to avoid leaving traces which would contravene the law when committing their endless crimes, and yet employ every delaying and obfuscation device known to Satan, to save their own skins whenever they perceive they are themselves in danger of the full wrath of legal enforcement.

• Have failed actually to ABOLISH the Rule of Law which they exploit, injure and contravene 24/7 in their pursuit of their ‘Black’ and illegal objectives – which they imagine are ‘allowed’ in the United States thanks to the cover that they assume to be provided under the National Security Act of 1947 et seq. (the criminals’ charter).

RACKETEERS CONSTANTLY CONFRONTED WITH THE RULE OF LAW
This sick mindset was further encouraged in the United States by such ill-advised liberties as President Reagan’s counterproductive Executive Order 12333 of 1981, which catastrophically authorised US intelligence operatives to form corporations of which the operatives themselves could own the shares and which would then ostensibly ‘contract’ with the compartmentalised components of the Intelligence Power and other US agencies to perform tasks required by the Executive Branch, for which the controlling Intelligence Power acts as the clandestine arm.

Obviously, to contract with intelligence operatives who are required by Statute to deny that they are intelligence operatives and therefore to lie for a living, is equivalent to entering into a contract with the fox to guard the chicken house. Significantly, Gorbachëv’s Politburo copied this crass 1981 Reagan formula in 1990.

Therefore, while abusing and contravening the despised Rule of Law, these amoral US officials are constantly being confronted by it. Despite their disdain of the Rule of Law, it stands in their way, and they keep bumping into it, even though they do their best all the time to corrupt it.

This ironical state of affairs provides, of course, another convenient underlying, ongoing dialectic (Thesis, Antithesis) – ripe for exploitation: but in this particular case, the dialectic is a ‘given’, not an artificial construct. In other words, short of an actual criminal dictatorship, there’s not a lot they can do to alleviate their situation here other than to continue compromising, abusing and eroding the Rule of Law, through bribery and corruption.

We have established already that: the criminal governments themselves are engaged in the very racketeering criminality that we are having to expose, given not least that, as reviewed below, ALL SECURITISATION IS ILLEGAL UNDER U.S. AND COMMON LAW – and are terrified that the endless exposures will lead to what, from their perspectives, might become truly intolerable ‘unintended consequences’, with rolling outcomes that they couldn’t control.

COWARDLY CONTROLLED NEWSPAPERS WHICH HAVE IGNORED CIMKM/CMKX
Because of this cowardice on the penetrated governments’ part, the newspapers listed below have been officially prevented, to our own certain updated knowledge [10th March], from reporting even the eminently reportable CMKM/CMKX case, in which payment of $3.87 trillion is demanded from the Securities and Exchange Commission and from certain of its current and former officials, given the unprecedented scandal of the S.E.C. having floated 2.25 trillion PHANTOM SHARES from a platform operated beneath the cover of the Securities and Exchange Commission itself (2).

• Note: Page B1 of the New York Edition of The New York Times dated 12th March carries the first ‘mainstream’ report of the CMKM/CMKX case, twisted to ignore the essence of the case and to suggest, contrary to the truth of the matter, that this is just another instance of the phenomenon that scamees can never admit that they have been scammed. Naturally, one did not expect such a newspaper to report the truth, which can be established from the Complaint [see our report dated 9th January (over two months prior to The New York Times’ article)]. No, the newspaper found a spurious, populist angle which has nothing to do with the substance of the Complaint against the S.E.C., indicating how nervous the US Establishment is over these developments.

Any ‘mainstream’ newspaper that was fulfilling its responsibilities objectively as a conscientious component of the Fourth Estate would have jumped on this story long ago. After all, we published the complete text of the Complaint within hours of it being filed [see our report dated 9th January 2010]. That was TWO MONTHS BACK: and so far, NONE of the ‘mainstream’ US/UK newspapers or broadcast outlets have touched this dynamite. SPECIFICALLY:

• Mr A. Clifton Hodges, Attorney for the 50,000+ CMKM/CMKX scammees, personally informed press contacts about the case, on the following media:

• The Los Angeles Times

• The Washington Post

• The Wall Street Journal

Mr Hodges received no response.

• The Editor of this service personally informed the prominent UK financial journalist Ambrose Evans-Pritchard on The Daily Telegraph, whom he has met in the past. Since The Daily Telegraph’s offices are within walking distance of our Central London office, the Editor offered to deliver a copy of the actual Summons and Complaint by hand last week.

• The Editor did not even receive the courtesy of an acknowledgment of his emails.

THE DAILY TELEGRAPH: A CONTROLLED OUTLET FOR MI-6
Notwithstanding his duplicitous behaviour in acting as an agent for MI-6 in bearing false witness against the Editor of this service in 2004, Gordon Thomas is persona grata at The Daily Telegraph, and recently published a large article in that paper on the subject of the use of British passports by Israel assassination operatives. As the Editor’s case shows, Thomas also acts as an agent for MI-6.

Therefore, The Daily Telegraph is under the thumb of MI-6, which helps to explain quite why this newspaper – which used to publish extensive op-ed. articles by the Editor of this service in the 1970s and early 1960s, until the takeover by the since disgraced and jailed corrupt globalist felon Conrad Black – has failed so far in its duty as a key member of the Fourth Estate to report (a) the biggest official corruption case to come to Court in world history and (b) the biggest and most-far-reaching exposure of government and financial institution racketeering since the world began.

MI-6 ‘INTEND TO TAKE MR CHRISTOPHER STORY OUT’
At about 10.45pm on Sunday 7th March, the Editor was informed via a transatlantic phone call that the Editor’s correspondent had been informed by an ‘inside’ source directly connected with MI-9 (MI-6) that ‘MI-6 intend to ‘take Mr Story out’’. Apparently the intention was or is to prepare one or more ‘stings’ and traps, in the hope that the Editor will fall into them, as happened once or twice before (given that, since these people only ‘do’ deception, it is almost impossible to avoid being deceived at some stage: except that the longer they drag out their cynical games, the easier it becomes to read their criminal minds and the unchanging techniques they use (the devil isn’t a great inventor)): so the deeper the discernment one eventually acquires, and the less chance do they have of pulling off a targeted dirty trick, as intended.

The Editor enquired why this evil intent should have surfaced at this late stage in the racketeering exposure proceedings: to which the answer was: ‘They want to move on by fixing things below the radar, they are furious that you have so much information, and they want to make sure you don’t publicise the outcome, especially concerning the Dollar Refunding which they have resisted so hard, when it happens’. To which the Editor responded words to the following effect: ‘Well, a gentleman’s word is his bond. They can walk across the bridge and ring our office doorbell’.

‘They wouldn’t do that. They’d sting you instead’.

Quite right: they can’t do that now, as they have squandered so many resources trying to entrap and trip the Editor up, that a ‘gentlemanly approach’ wouldn’t work now. It would probably have worked back in 2002: but not now. If you have been deceived and abused already by your own (let alone the hideous, criminalised American) intelligence services, you aren’t likely to succumb to such a ‘gentlemanly approach’. They burned their boats.

• Not very clever: but then again, as we’ve seen, these people are extraordinarily STUPID.

BRITISH INTELLIGENCE APPEARS TO BE BEHAVING TREACHEROUSLY, AS USUAL
Anyway, thanks for the heads-up – reiterated, by the way, by the faux-demented DVD ‘Black’ Psy-Ops voice who’s being paid to plague us daily since the completion of the Leo Wanta ‘switch’ in February 2008 (as revisited briefly above). So, what we have is the following devilish equation:

(1): The Editor of this service is a patriotic supporter of the nation state, is exactly what he says he is and has been for decades [see our testimonials], is viscerally opposed to the pagan, decadent, debauched World Revolution and its filthy ‘Black’ social and geopolitical detritus which is such a menace to civilisation, is a loyal subject of Her Majesty the Queen (with no other such connections whatsoever), believes (whether you like it or not) that Jesus Christ is the Lord, and is come in the flesh, and has stood up forcefully (because we have no choice, not because of any courage) to the abominations, abuses, verbal abuse and agitprop tirades, betrayals, successive threats (including seven death threats), innumerable lies and attempted ‘stings’, and the cynical exploitation by Mr Wanta of the Editor’s integrity and expertise; and has nevertheless sought to expose elements of the officially perpetrated and condoned racketeering and embezzlement of US taxpayers’ funds, and the myriad other Fraudulent Finance atrocities perpetrated with impunity under five self-acknowledged criminal Presidents of the United States.

(2): In exchange for which, conniving British intelligence cadres, according to the US ‘insider’ source whose identity is known to the Editor, are actively seeking ‘as we speak’ to ‘take Story out’ and to try, once again – à la Gordon Thomas – to discredit him.

This is to be the Editor’s reward for the serial abuse, deceit, lies, attempted ‘stings’, deceptions and other pathetic, underhand travesties, that the Editor has suffered in recent years in exposing these crimes. And these abuses, by the way, are AS NOTHING compared to what others, especially Michael C. Cottrell, have suffered at the hands of these serial thieves, racketeers and reprobate operatives over a much longer period of time.

• The Editor personally sent emails last week giving details of the CMKM/CMKX case to 14 well-known newspapers in India, Pakistan, China, Hong Kong, Malaysia and The Philippines, with the coordinates of Mr Hodges so that their journalists could check everything with the source. At the time of this posting, there had been no response.

‘MAINSTREAM’ NEWSPAPERS REVEALING THEMSELVES
TO BE CO-CONSPIRATORS IN COVERING UP THE RACKETEERING
None of this surprises us, given the above, nor does it even suggest that the Dark Forces are not in the process of being defeated. On the contrary, by cow-towing to their criminalised governments and intelligence communities, these newspapers are just allowing themselves to be tarred with the same Black Racketeering Brush that has covered the known official and financial criminalists with sticky black gunge that runs down into the sewer.

All that these media outlets are doing by ignoring these investigations is to confirm that they, too, are parties to, minded to be in favour of, and doubtless in many cases participants in, the familiar Fraudulent Finance racketeering practices that the perpetrators are trying in vain to cover up. In some US cases (known to this service), key media outlets are recipients of giant bribes paid out specifically in order to prevent them from covering these investigations.

We haven’t yet revealed the identities of the US news media concerned; but if there exists such a phenomenon as an honest journalist working for any of them, we would remind such persons of the basic reality that the bribee is actually in a stronger position than the distributor of the bribe – who won’t want to be exposed.

His bribe is presumably held in place by threats of lethal consequences, or blackmail: but these implied or actual threats are usually empty and cannot be fulfilled without entangling the source of the bribe in a cauldron of problems arising from his iniquity that he would wish to avoid.

WHY CONFINING EXPOSURES TO THIS WEBSITE HAS BEEN
COUNTERPRODUCTIVE FROM THE RACKETEERS’ PERSPECTIVE
And by adopting the strategy of trying to confine these exposures of official and financial sector racketeering to this website (even though some indications of broader coverage, with which we are associated, are ‘in the pipeline’), the US cover-up cadres have managed (counterproductively, from their disoriented perspective) to contrive that a reasonably consistent corpus of information has emerged into the public domain, as well as being captured for posterity and current research in successive issues of International Currency Review, which has official, central bank, institutional and library subscribers throughout the world – thereby precluding any possibility of the heirs of the perpetrators rewriting history so as to ‘airbrush’ this financial racketeering out of the record.

OUR EXPOSURE MODUS OPERANDI: ‘WALKING IN A STRAIGHT LINE’
Proceeding now to our modus operandi, we reiterate that our method is the straightforward one of ‘walking in a straight line’. Unlike your agents of influence and disinformation outlets – including notorious website peddlers of ‘Black Propaganda’, lies and confusion operating under Intelligence Power instructions to maximise the potential of the ‘Black’ fog of disinformation for the purpose of covering up the racketeering – our method, having done our due diligence to the extent possible, is to publish what we have learned either directly or else covered by a necessary ‘to the best of our knowledge and belief’ caution.

When we obtain information which can only be forthcoming from ‘inside’ and, very often, from dissident and double-crossed intelligence sources (because these people are always bitterly at loggerheads internally), we may publish such information ‘straight’ with no qualifications at all.

An example of this was our revelation that the late former Governor of the Bank of England, Lord ‘Eddie’ George, had been arrested and briefly jailed in July 2007. We have only recently learned, and publicised, WHY Lord George was arrested.

Lord George was seized because of his rôle in aiding, abetting and facilitating, with the criminal operative Dr Alan Greenspan, the stealing/diversion of The Queen’s gold on 29th-30th March 2007, as we reported six weeks or so later. Lord George, who died in April 2009, was instrumental in exchanging the gold for worthless pieces of ‘derivatives’ paper.

QUEEN’S GOLD THEFT STILL NOT RECTIFIED:
SO, KICK THE U.S. AMBASSADOR OUT OF LONDON
That operation represented the Bush-CIA-DVD’s biggest theft ever; AND IT STILL HASN’T BEEN RECTIFIED. If UK Governments consisted of people with conviction, knowledge and backbone, instead of the usual blackmailed, compromised and controlled psychological cases with dirty intelligence backgrounds, the American Ambassador should be ordered out of Britain, with his Embassy peremptorily closed sine die – until such time as this unspeakable assault has been resolved. When we mentioned this demand, which we first made in the summer of 2007, to a US contact, she said: ‘That’s precisely what the pan-Germans and the covert Soviets want’.

• To which our response is: SO WHAT?

If Lord George had even contemplated instructing his solicitors to try to obtain a retraction from us, he would immediately have been told advised nothing could be done because Christopher Story’s information was accurate (even though it was obtained from secret sources), and that Lord George couldn’t know what back-up information Mr Story held in support of his revelations.

In any case, to challenge such a report would certainly have embroiled the former Governor of the Bank of England in a dangerous encounter. Far better to assume that the sensational report would remain ‘buried’ in International Currency Review, and also covered by the Gordon Thomas MI-6 ‘blanket false witness’ lies about the Editor to the gullible so-called ‘mainstream’ media.

STEALING OF $4.2 TRILLION TAX MONEY ON 31ST DECEMBER 2009
STILL NOT RECTIFIED: SO MASSIVE CRIMES HAVE BEEN COMMITTED
Likewise, when we reported that the tax on the Settlements monies had indeed been subtracted effective 31st December 2009, we had obtained hard information to that effect, backing up ‘inside’ information provided via impeccably reliable sources. Specifically, we received an email at 20:24 UK time, on 1st January 2010, from a key figure involved in the Settlements (said by key US ‘inside’ sources, who may have been lying to our contacts, to be briefed to pay off corrupt US politicians) who was in almost daily contact with us by email under a pseudonym for over two and a half years, stating that: ‘sources here [in Dallas] and in Europe told me my taxes were taken off the top on or before 12/31 in order for them to be credited into Fiscal 2009. I got that word Wednesday 12/30/09’.

Since these taxes have not been restored to the Settlements funds which had not been paid out by the 45-day deadline of 14th February (by which date the funds from which the taxes had been taken should by law have been remitted):

• WHERE IS THAT TAX MONEY?

• WAS IT STOLEN AND IF SO, WHO STOLE IT, MR GEITHNER?

• WAS IT PLACED OUT ON CONTRACT, after $100 billion had been siphoned off into the hands of a well-known US false religion as we have reported, and if so, who is or was the foreign corrupt counterparty? Brazil? Zimbabwe? Denmark? Deutsche Bank, Frankfurt?

China Trust Bank? Barclays Bank?

• WHO are the foreign counterparties that have collaborated with the criminals in the White House, the US Treasury, the State Department and the CIA to STEAL over $4.0 trillion from the account of the US taxpayer, and imagine that there will be no ‘consequences’?

Of course, the problem that the official racketeers faced was that the tax accruals ‘could not be placed into the taxpayers’ accounts’ – because, suddenly, the $4.5 trillions squandered by the current reckless Obama Government would have been restored overnight – raising questions about SOURCE OF FUNDS. Ah, so THAT’s why there’s been a blackout across the board of these exposures and investigations, is it? Well, no: as will be shown, it’s much worse than that.

• They couldn’t pay the tax monies into the taxpayers’ accounts: so they just STOLE IT, which was what they always intended to do, anyway.

• Keep asking yourself basic questions like: WOULD THEY STEAL IT? THE ANSWER TO SUCH BASIC QUESTIONS CONCERNING THESE DESPERATE CRIMINALS IS: SURE. NATURLICH.

As can be seen from Mr Hodges’ letter to the Office of the New York State Attorney General [see our report dated 2nd March 2010], we know [and in any case, see above] that these tax monies were not ‘replaced’ back into the Settlements pool – as a consequence of which the perpetrators now face extremely severe criminal sanctions, as Mr Hodges has pointed out to Andrew Cuomo’s office when demanding an investigation, given that some of the main perpetrators, and many of his own client CMKM/CMKX victims (whose monies appear to be tied up with the Settlements funds) are resident in the State of New York [See Note 3].

How is it possible that this grievous official criminality and blatant racketeering has continued, notwithstanding these exposures (albeit in the context of the complicit and cowardly failure of the Fourth Estate to do its job properly)?

FISH ROTS FROM THE STINKING HEAD: WORLD COURT IMMUNITY DEMANDED
AND SCANDALOUSLY OBTAINED BY THE COLLECTIVE OF CORRUPT U.S. PRESIDENTS
The starting point here will be to remind you that FISH ROTS FROM THE HEAD and that we have reported that in or around September 2009, five US Presidents – Carter (39), Bush Senior (41), Clinton (42), Bush Junior (43) and Obama (44) DEMANDED IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION from the World Court. This immunity was, we were told, GRANTED – in a disgraceful abuse of power by the World Court, which appears to have caved in to Mr Obama’s DEMAND on behalf of himself and his four criminal predecessors.

As we can see from this episode, President Obama has been in lock-step with these four criminal predecessors – which eliminates all residual (courtesy) expectations that he might have had the guts to stand up to these racketeers. That would, however, have been impossible – since this operative, whatever his background, is of course a placeman and a puppet of the controlling criminalised US Intelligence Power.

We can thus state without fear of contradiction on the basis of the foregoing information that the five US Presidents openly acknowledge that THEY ARE CRIMINALS. If you are not a criminal, you do not need immunity from prosecution. These operatives, working together as a PRESIDENTIAL COLLECTIVE, demanded and received the immunity from prosecution that they sought.

That of course means that the World Court which sustains the figleaf of legality at the corrupted intergovernmental level (where in fact the Rule of Law does not operate properly or at all, or can be non-existent) is COMPLICIT IN LETTING ALL THESE CRIMINALS OFF THE HOOK – in other words, condones criminality at the highest level, irrespective of the consequences (which in this context includes destroying the lives, savings, hopes and physical assets of hundreds of thousands and probably millions of victims).

In translation, the World Court appears to regard its job as DEFENDING RACKETEERS IN HIGH PLACES – not to sustain the Rule of Law at the intergovernmental level without fear or favour.

GORBACHEV MANIPULATING DEVELOPMENTS FROM HIS WING IN THE KREMLIN. AS BEFORE
Behind this scandal of scandals, lies the deeper reality which we have publicised but which none of the ‘mainstream’ media has picked up on, and which, we are informed, is now of ‘no interest’ to the present generation. We refer to the PROVEN FACT that former President Mikhail Gorbachëv, who fronted ‘collapsible Communism’ for the benefit of the confused ‘mainstream media’ and strutted the stage for years thereafter (and indeed continues to do so, to this day), collaborated AND STILL COLLABORATES with the Black Godfather of the criminally penetrated US Intelligence Power, the Langley base of which is labelled the George Bush Center for Intelligence.

GORBACHEV, BUSH, KOHL, ACKERMANN: RACKETEERING PARTNERS IN DEUTSCHE AG.
Specifically, as we have exclusively reported, Gorbachëv is a partner with George H. W. Bush Sr. and Dr Helmut Kohl, the former Chancellor of Germany, together with Dr Joseph Ackermann, in Deutsche AG., formerly Barrington Investment Group, St. Gallen, Switzerland, which handles the illegal proceeds of racketeering operations – as was the case with the proceeds derived from the stealing of a contract belonging to Mr Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., and which was facilitated by the ‘electronic stealing and forging’ of Mr Cottrell’s signature. The background detail to these crimes is re-presented herewith:

• Former President Mikhail S. Gorbachev, working with former US President George H. W. Bush Sr., former German Chancellor Dr Helmut Kohl and Dr Joseph Ackermann, all partners in Deutsche AG (formerly Barrington Investment Group), Switzerland, stole a contract using the electronic tag to the securities account owned by Mr Michael C. Cottrell’s Pennsylvania Investments, Inc., with Benchmark Securities, Inc., New Jersey, at a table-top meeting in Geneva on 7th October 2002 by the means described below, which included the electronic ‘forging’ of Mr Cottrell’s signature.

This theft was preceded by seven related thefts from Mr Cottrell’s firm’s securities account.

• This means that former President Mikhail Gorbachev and former German Chancellor Helmut Kohl are financial criminals like George H. B. Bush Sr., and should be treated accordingly.

Mr Gorbachev and Helmut Kohl have, as partners in Deutsche AG, by definition been profiting from the theft of Mr Cottrell’s contract and property, and also from huge proceeds from the theft of The Queen’s gold, which, we were specifically informed at 1.15 am by telephone on 4th February 2010, have likewise been channelled through Deutsche AG, St Gallen, Switzerland.

• As of 10th March 2010, The Queen’s gold had not been restored.

• The proceeds of innumerable corrupt transactions involving Gorbachëv, Bush Sr., Kohl and Ackermann have been run through the DVD’s main institutions, Deutsche Bank and Dresdner Bank.
So what is being exposed is that George H. W. Bush Sr. (CIA/DVD) and Mikhail Gorbachev (Soviet Military Intelligence (GRU) and KGB/FSB) have been systematically ransacking American and non-American victims alike, and running this colossal open-ended racketeering through Germany, with the assistance of the former STASI of East Germany (who are GESTAPO in relabelled clothing).

Hence the presence on the scene of STASI operatives such as Eva Teleki, a (separate) ‘Swedish’ opera singer, and other dirty operatives suspected of being continuing STASI agents, such as Chancellor Angela Merkel (the former Secretary of the Agitation and Propaganda Department of the Young Communists at Marx Lenin University, in East Berlin). This explains why Merkel was earlier fingered by this service as the guardian in Germany of George H W Bush Sr.’s stolen and exploited racketeering assets with German institutions.

• Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin (Shalomov), who is a senior Soviet GRU operative, was based in East Germany before he migrated to Leningrad, and is believed to have been primarily responsible for orchestrating, at least from the Soviet side, the clockwork ‘collapsible Communism’ operations in Eastern Europe. Gorbachev has been reported to us to operate from a wing of the Kremlin, as though he never left the place.

• Which he didn’t. He’s been at the centre of this revolutionary criminality THROUGHOUT.

WANTA: THE COURIER BETWEEN BUSH SENIOR AND GORBACHEV
Reconsider now the unsavoury, treacherous rôle of Mr Leo/Lee Wanta in this context. As we have repeatedly shown [see our reports dated 20th September 2009, 22nd October 2009, 17th November 2009 and 29th January 2010 for instance], Wanta’s ‘Principality of Snake Hill’ cover, which provides him with a fraudulent virtual ‘Ambassadorship’ from the non-existent ‘Principality of Snake Hill’ to the United States ‘enabling’ him to continue using the false self-designation ‘Ambassador’, is the clumsy concoction of an undischarged felon who has stolen inter alia this Editor’s $35,000 loan plus interest and other monies, cannot own a bank account because he is a felon, and not only answers the telephone in German with ‘GUTEN TAG’, but spells telephone TELEFON, Groupe with an ‘e’ as in French, while also masquerading behind this false front using a 202 telephone number provided by the French Embassy in Washington, DC.

Thus AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc, with ‘Groupe’ spelt as in French, was a French/DVD operation set up with the assistance of the former French Ambassador to Washington, DC, Monsieur Levitte, now President Sarkozy’s top intelligence advisor – its purpose being to steal/divert funds on behalf of the Bush-CIA-DVD racketeers for which the bilateral treaty-bound Vichy-French authorities, being complicit with the pan-Germans in this corruption (think of the 3,000+ Bush-linked accounts with Paribas in Paris), provide permanent cover.

No wonder Wanta, who had operated out of Vienna in the late 1980s and early 1990s, had to sack Michael Cottrell as Treasurer of AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc. (which he did ‘illegally’ on 23rd March 2008: see website reports) when it became obvious that Cottrell and Story were hot on the trail of this devious foreign operation to steal vast funds belonging to the United States of America and its taxpayers. Against this background, please be reminded [see our report dated the 20th September 2009] that Wanta’s nauseating ‘excess patriotism’ and ‘apple-pie Americanism’ is ALL FAKE – part of his elaborate but now exposed cover, as is his false religiosity. Recall Story’s Third Law: ‘Sooner or later all operations and covers are BLOWN’.

WANTA’S ‘REAGAN’S JUNK-YARD DOG’ DIVERSION
Wanta told Claire Sterling, the late author of Thieves’ World [published by the CIA’s favourite book publisher, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1994], and also reconfirmed personally to the Editor of this service, that President Reagan used to refer to Wanta as his ‘junkyard dog’.

He told the Editor that George Bush Sr. was ‘never in the room when Ronald Reagan briefed me’. This statement conflicts with the reality, which has been emphatically reconfirmed to this Editor from ‘inside’ sources, that Wanta was indeed the courier between George Bush Senior and Mikhail Gorbachëv (who are, as indicated, joint partners with Dr Helmut Kohl and Dr Joseph Ackermann in Barrington Investment Group, now Deutsche AG, St Gallen, Switzerland: see above etc.).

So it transpires that Wanta systematically lies and lied to his contacts, including the Editor of this service, whose platform and expertise he exploited to provide a smokescreen behind which the Bush-CIA-DVD racketeers, which Wanta served, could continue unimpeded under the crook Henry M. Paulson’s supervision from the US Treasury.

• We did wonder why we encountered no interference from the highest US level for the first year while Wanta was using us in the manner described.

WANTA KNEW ABOUT 9/11 IN ADVANCE, LIKE VREELAND
Wanta was released from jail just over a week after 9/11, was collected from prison by Gerald Salchert, of Austrian extraction, and taken to a relative’s house in Chippewa Falls, Wisconsin. Because of his experiences at the hands of the Bush-Clinton Crime Syndicate (given that these mentally deranged capos always treat their underlings with cruelty), there was concern that his prior knowledge of the 9/11 abomination might be leaked prior to the event – which is in fact what the Office of Naval Intelligence and prospective/actual assassin, Lt. Mark Delmart Vreeland, did from jail in Toronto, after he had opened three diplomatic bags, which is treason.

In March 2005, the Pentagon-associated US operative nicknamed ‘The Visitor’, calling himself Walker whose real name is Demchuk, who pestered the Editor for information about the Soviet-originated Iraqi WMD-removal (‘Sarindar’) programme, informed the Editor that ‘Vreeland is in solitary confinement for a very long time, his case has been sealed and he is no longer a threat to you’ (Vreeland having threatened the Editor with death in 2003). Vreeland’s parole board meeting has been pencilled in for a date in 2163, according to an informed US source.

FRANCE COVERS FOR GERMANY UNDER TREATY OF THE ELYSEE
Under the Treaty of the Elysée dated January 1963, which is of indefinite duration, France and Germany are both required to coordinate their stances on all external matters, on which they are required to ‘reach an analogous position’. France is therefore indistinguishable from Germany in respect of international strategic deception operations (especially as there are special intelligence collaboration provisions under the Treaty), and accordingly fronts extensively for Germany.

In this particular context, it provides flimsy (and disintegrating, or disintegrated) cover for the Abwehr operative, Leo Wanta, who was indeed the courier between George H. W. Bush Sr. and Mikhail Gorbachev [see our report dated 4th February 2010]. Although he says he’s Polish, we think this felon and fraudster may be a DVD operative/double agent, possibly STASI.

The German Chancellor, Angela Merkel – formerly the Secretary of the Agitation and Propaganda Department of the Communist Yugend at Marx-Lenin University, East Berlin – is a STASI operative.

FRAUDULENT WANTA ‘SNAKE HILL’ WEBSITE’S GERMAN CONNECTIONS
Further research has revealed a direct German connection with the clumsy ‘Principality of Snake Hill’ deception, which we have demolished, not least with the imprimatur of Ms Brenda Farrell, an official at the Australian Embassy in Dublin, who replied to our Irish associate’s enquiry as follows:

Forwarded message
From: <richardsharpe@eircom.net>
Date: Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 12:25 PM
Subject: Fwd: Principality of Snake Hill [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
To: mrrichardsharpe <mrrichardsharpe@gmail.com>

richardsharpe@eircom.net wrote:
Many thanks for your timely response.

Regards
Richard

“Austremb Dublin” <Austremb.Dublin@dfat.gov.au> wrote:

Dear Mr Sharpe,

Thank you for your email.

There is no principality in Australia.

Kind regards

Australian Embassy
Dublin
Tel: +353 (0) 1 664 5300
Fax: +353 (0) 1 678 5185

richardsharpe@eircom.net

The German connection exposed herewith below, reveals the low calibre of these operatives, whose arrogance and certainty that they will never be exposed, is such that they don’t put much expertise into their deception operations if they can help it. A sane person would have thought that in ‘designing’ the ‘Principality of Snake Hill’ deception, they would have used some common sense and established an actual domain name, rather than using freeware sites.

One of the ‘Snake Hill’ websites
[http://members.multimania.co.uk/snakehill/]
causes computers to display a warning [viewable at: http://safeweb.norton.com/report/show?url=multimania.co.uk].

That warning is really for the entire ‘Multimania.co.uk’ domain, not just the fake ‘/snakehill’ subset. But it is interesting, to put it mildly, to note that the website’s location is: GERMANY. Why would a GERMAN site use a United Kingdom domain identifier?

• ESPECIALLY on a site noted for hosting THOUSANDS of Trojan threats: except that the answer presents itself immediately: it’s a DVD operation.

Yes, the entire website is HOSTED IN GERMANY, so Wanta’s ‘/snakehill’ subdirectory on this domain absolutely emanates from GERMANY as well. The following is the actual Whois Internet registration data (fully available at http://who.is/whois/multimania.co.uk/):

IP: 213.131.252.254
IP Location: Dusseldorf*, Germany

*Note: Wanta’s lawyer, Steve Goodwin, was born in Dusseldorf.

Domain name: multimania.co.uk

Registrant: conversis GmbH

Registrant type: Unknown

Registrant’s address: Patrick Kirchhoff, Erftstrasse 11, Duisburg 47051, Germany

Registrar: InterNetWire Communications GmbH [Tag = INTERNETWIRE-DE]
URL: http://www.internetwire.de

Relevant dates: Registered on: 12-Feb-2009
Renewal date: 12-Feb-2011
Last updated: 23-Apr-2009

Registration status: Registered until renewal date.

Name servers: ns1.conversis.de; ns2.conversis.de

WHOIS lookup made at 02:44:25 27-Feb-2010

As you can now start to see, our original assessment that the United States and Britain are in thrall to the GERMAN enemy that they never defeated, which we have maintained without deviation ever since those ‘gasps’ emitted by eavesdroppers during a telephone call several years ago made by the Editor to Wanta (joined by his former lawyer, Thomas Henry or Heinrich, a.k.a. Mr ‘Nasty’) is being confirmed by more and more evidence that is accumulating all the time.

In addition to using the French as a convenient, permanent front for their continuing hegemony operations, the pan-German Nazi long-range strategic deception heirs of the Abwehr, Deutsche Verteidigungs Dienst (DVD), collaborate with the covert Soviets (Soviet Military Intelligence (GRU), and the KGB/FSB, in formulating, implementing and consolidating their comprehensive, failing revolutionary hegemony operations against the Main Enemy (Britain and the United States).

• That’s quite easy, since the heirs of the Abwehr and of Heinrich Himmler OWN THE CIA.

CIA/DVD PRACTICE OF EXPLOITING AND STEALING OUTSIDE EXPERTISE
Now it is standard CIA ‘tradecraft’ practice to usurp the expertise of outside professional talent if it is not available in-house or by some other means. In this context, the CIA perpetrators needed a US securities expert with impeccable credentials and a securities account. What the CIA does is apply its standard Bush-style ‘bait and switch’ technique, exploiting and maximising the potential of the usurped professional expertise, before rejecting it and stealing the assets associated with it.

Note that Wanta likewise used this Editor’s website and publishing platform in pursuing his own agendas for 15 months, telling Mr Cottrell in October 2007 that ‘we must get rid of Chris Story, but don’t tell him’. Mr Cottrell having formed his own view of Wanta’s unreliability, Teutonic arrogance and duplicity, carefully found a way to warn the Editor of this ‘switch’ in December 2007, without actually revealing what he could not then reveal.

In March 2008, Wanta fired Cottrell by issuing a vituperative three-page ‘Resolution of the Sole Shareholder’ (which is illegal, as corporate resolutions can only legally be issued by the Board at a Board Meeting: the text of this document used language familiar to the Editor of this service as having been written by Thomas Henry (‘Mr Nasty’)).

Relieved, Mr Cottrell then despatched the necessary resignation information to the tax authorities in Richmond, VA, requesting them to send all subsequent paperwork, including tax demands, to Wanta in Wisconsin – where he had long stated that he is not resident and does not run a business. The rest of this sequence can be gleaned from our website: see March 2008.

So what the cynical Intelligence Power routinely does is ‘borrow’ external expertise, before discarding or stealing it. In the Editor’s case, ‘bait and switch’ has worked both ways: it could be argued that we ourselves have done a ‘switch’, taking a leaf out of these deceivers’ book.

Meanwhile, the same happened to Mr Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S. Because the standard CIA procedure of exploiting, then stealing and discarding outside expertise and assets, also explains Wanta’s ‘use’ of Mr Cottrell for his failed AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc. DVD stealing operation – because Michael C. Cottrell has the requisite securities market expertise and securities account facilities, which were (mistakenly) applied for the benefit of Mr Wanta’s AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc. (but which cannot be used without Mr Cottrell’s signature: so we shall see whether it has again been stolen).

[Note: This analysis was written BEFORE the incredible fraud perpetrated via the State of Pennsylvania, subject of our separate report, was known. Quite prophetic, you may think].

Note also that Steven Goodwin, the Wanta Attorney in Richmond, VA, who accepted this Editor’s $35,000, which Wanta stole, was born, as stated previously, in Dusseldorf. Goodwin wrote the shifty loan documents which Leo Wanta demanded that the Editor sign forthwith, as soon as the Editor arrived on 10th June 2005 at his relative’s address in Chippewa Falls.

Wanta took it for granted that the Editor would meet his preremptory demand to sign, and wouldn’t walk out on the spot (which he nearly did).

[INSERTION: The Editor received an email on 9th March from a US correspondent who said he had asked Mr Wanta why he hadn’t paid the Editor’s loan plus interest back on the due date (or at all). Wanta replied that Mr Story had been ‘offered’ the choice of a ‘Biblical’ payment of ten times the orginal loan (no such ‘Biblical norm exists, by the way), or payment of the amount due on the due date. This is a fabrication. No such choice was ever offered: in any case it contains what is known as an ‘illusory promise’: see the securitisation analysis below. Another Wanta fabrication/slither].

THE AMERICAN INTELLIGENCE POWER WHICH HAS USURPED
THE GOVERNMENT DANCES TO THE TUNE OF FOREIGN POWERS
As for the stealing of Mr Cottrell’s contract and the electronic forging of his signature – a specific case of which we have detailed information [see above], which proves the ongoing racketeering collaboration between Bush, Gorbachëv and Kohl from the outset – it has been shown not only that Gorbachëv, Bush Sr., Helmut Kohl and Ackermann are handling stolen accruals (4) (the money that you make from stealing my money, is my money), but also that the US Intelligence Power dances to the tune of the foreign power whom George H. W. Bush represents, namely Germany – whom the Allies were supposed to have defeated in 1945.

Working closely at the intelligence level with the Nazi Continuum is the covert Soviet Continuum – both of which ‘Black’ Revolutionary Forces went underground: the Nazi (pan-German) Continuum went underground well before the defeat of Hitler, and the Soviet Continuum went underground in 1991, remaining under the supervision of ‘former’ President Gorbachëv, who, as indicated above, occupies a large suite of offices inside the Kremlin to this day.

As the Editor of Soviet Analyst, this Editor believes that GORBACHEV calls the shots – as he did from the moment this former Secretary of the CPSU Administrative Department came to power after the ‘festival of three funerals’ of abruptly deceased (murdered) Soviet leaders, in 1985.

We also believe that the concerted offensive to ‘take down’ the ‘Main Enemy’ (Britain and the United States) is the TWIN operation following on from the ‘takedown’ of the Soviet Union – and furthermore, that this massive operation is perpetrated by THE SAME TOP THREE OPERATIVES who ransacked the USSR: Gorbachëv, Bush Senior and Helmut Kohl.

WORLD REVOLUTION RACKETEERING OFFENSIVE
In other words, what we are exposing is a colossal World Revolution programme, from which these three racketeers and handlers of stolen monies have benefited and continue to benefit personally. [Well, they can’t be expected to run the World Revolution for altruistic motives, can they].

The extent to which Metabridge (Mossad, DVD, CIA and MI-6) is implicated in this gigantic anti-nation state World Revolution operation will quite probably be exposed when it transpires whether or not the two high-level MI-6 officers in the United States who were reported to us to be holding The Queen’s signature authority for the Settlements and her hijacked loan funds, may be double-crossing the Monarch. Given that everyone appears to have been double-crossing everyone else, anything is possible and nothing can be taken for granted: the Pennsylvania episode lends support to our suspicions on this score.

The Allies defeated Herr Adolf Schickelgrüber (Hitler), NOT Germany. On the contrary, assisted by the absorption by and penetration of the CIA by multiple ‘rehabilitated’ Nazis thanks to that ‘reverse takeover’ masterminded in the 1940s with treacherous US State Department connivance inter alia by General Reinhard Gehlen – the thuggish Abwehr Nazi intelligence chief who had overseen the repression in the German-occupied areas of the Soviet Union – the CIA became the main ‘active’ component of the Nazi Continuum. This accounts for its hideous Himmlerian abominations over the years, its satanic experimentation operations, its ‘Black’ offensives against the American people and the Rest of the World, its Nazi-type military aggressiveness and its repulsive arrogance, its absolute disdain of and hatred for the Rule of Law, and the reality that it is much more dangerous nowadays than the KGB-GRU ever was.

So what we are actually confronting is indeed the Nazi Continuum, secretly supported as always by (covert) Soviet Communism – the US component of which, at the present time, is headed by Leon Panetta. This Director of Central Intelligence, who controls the White House, was reported to the Editor of this service to be STILL blocking the Settlements as of 5th March 2010.

But even as we were being told this, something interesting happened behind the scenes. Which brings us to the real nub of the matter.

‘WALKING IN A STRAIGHT LINE’ WILL EXPOSE THE DECEPTIONS
The struggle that has been raging behind these scenes within and close to the DC Beltway reflects:

• A corrupt and criminal official determination to frustrate the Bank for International Settlements’ instructions (‘Line Item’) designating the conduct of the necessary and overdue G-7-approved on-balance sheet, fully taxable and transparent PRIVATE SECTOR Refunding of the US Dollar to Mr Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., who, we were informed by US ‘inside’ sources (who will be exposed if this turns out to be false) is regarded by personnel working for The Queen as the only expert who can be trusted with this task.

• If none of this is true, the preceding report, containing a letter from Mr A. Clifton Hodges to the Editor of this service for onward delivery (which was implemented) to Buckingham Palace, was intended to expose the deception and those engaged perpetrating it (whose names we know, if they are so engaged, and who will be exposed along with the other deceivers, should a deception have been perpetrated. In accordance with our policy of ‘walking in a straight line’, we continue to assume that this is not the case: but we shall see).

• What certainly IS known is that the foregoing background has been used – in a similar manner as the Leo Wanta cover involving this Editor was exploited – to provide ‘smokescreen’ cover for an operation which might (in this context) supposedly enable the criminal perpetrators to conduct the Dollar Refunding themselves, for their own illicit profit, using FRNs, not US Treasury dollars.

In other words, the perpetrators have remained hell-bent on blocking the will of the international financial community as expressed via the BIS refunding ‘Line-Item’ instructions, given their horror at the prospect of losing control – and have illegally frustrated the intended use of the $6.2 trillion loan funds provided on 19th-20th July 2007 via the Bank of England under levy to six US money center banks, via the Bank of New York Mellon (as it became, effective July 2007).

COTTRELL THREATENS TO SNATCH AWAY THE RACKETEERS’ COVER,
THROWING THEM INTO A MAD PANIC. THIS WAS NOT ANTICIPATED.
On Friday 5th March, in telephone conversations, including one with the Editor of this service, attended by every despicable intelligence eavesdropper under the sun, Michael Cottrell stated unequivocally that if the $6.2 trillion refunding loan, as pre-agreed, is withheld from Mr Cottrell’s firm, Pennsylvania Investments Inc., he will walk away.

This statement evidently caused panic and a hurried strategic deception rethink inside the Beltway and in the other dark corners of the US criminal universe in question – more or less proving that, as with the Wanta operation which exploited both Mr Cottrell’s securities market expertise and this Editor’s publishing and publicity abilities and qualifications, the perpetrators had been using Mr Cottrell as cover for an intended deviation from the agreed-upon Basel instructions.

• The pending Pennsylvania Fraud exposure will PROVE THAT THIS ASSESSMENT IS CORRECT.

• The intention is for the proceeds of racketeering operations to be channelled inter alia into the hands of the partners of Deutsche AG, St Gallen, Switzerland.

And as indicated above, we know precisely who is behind this typical piece of CIA/DVD duplicity: and if it continues, they will be exposed by name. But, as always happens with these investigations, THIS OPERATION HAS ALREADY BEEN BLOWN. And it has been ‘blown’ because, whereas we have been walking ‘in a straight line’, the snakes are incapable of doing anything but slithering.

THE TWO MI-6 OPERATIVES WITH THE QUEEN’S SIGNATURE:
ARE THEY WORKING FOR, OR ARE THEY DOUBLE-CROSSING THE QUEEN?
It now has to be stated that if the two MI-6 operatives said to be carrying The Queen’s signature authority are or have been double-crossing Her Majesty, we will get to the bottom of that, as well, and will expose them, also. After all, we were able to expose the false assertion by the US ‘inside’ sources that Roy Grantham is a Representative of The Queen, when we asked Grantham to get in touch with us via this website. Although Grantham lives just a couple of miles from the Editor’s office, he saw fit to instruct a firm of ‘heavies’, based in Shreveport, LA, to issue a blatant threat by email against the Editor of this service.

• This ‘investigator’ said that Grantham would not be contacting the Editor of this service in view of his interest in preserving his ‘Stellar’ [note the geomasonic language] reputation.

Beyond this, it now has to be said that if the British Monarchical Power does not INSIST upon the agreed-upon Group of Seven-approved, private sector-based transparent, taxed Dollar Refunding operation proceeding precisely as specified by Basel, and is prepared to put up valuable assets in exchange for worthless Federal Reserve Notes, the Monarchy will self-destruct – WHICH IT IS THE OBJECTIVE OF THE PAN-GERMAN ENEMY TO PROCURE, since the British Monarchy stands in the way of the comprehensive realisation of Germany’s insidious and now collapsing ‘Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals/Vladivostok’ hegemony plans.

WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO THE CHINESE CURRENCY BOXES?
The same applies to the Chinese. What happened to the Chinese currency boxes which were made available SPECIFICALLY to provide backing for the Treasury dollar? Are the Chinese also stupidly risking their assets in exchange for worthless FRNs, as well – notwithstanding their knowledge that the US officials in charge are racketeers, and in spite of the still undischarged lien for $47 trillion against the US Treasury imposed on or about 6th December 2009?

GREEK DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER EQUATES NAZI GERMANY
WITH CHANCELLOR MERKEL’S STASI GERMANY
It is certainly true that the catastrophic (and soon to become even more catastrophic) European project is on the verge of self-destruction, too. In late February 2010, in an interview with the BBC, the Greek Deputy Prime Minister accused NAZI GERMANY – clearly eliding Nazi Germany with the current German STASI régime – of ‘taking away the gold that was in the Bank of Greece, and they never gave it back. They shouldn’t complain so much about stealing and not being very specific about [their] economic dealings’.

• In other words; WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT, FRAU MERKEL?

• The fact that Greece and Germany have since been in discussions, does NOT expunge the Greek Deputy Prime Minister’s pointed observation from the record.

As previously reviewed, Greece’s massive toxic debt was accumulated under the preceding Greek Government as a consequence of Fraudulent Finance and racketeering operations with associates of the Bush/CIA/DVD Crime Syndicate via Citibank Athens, as we originally revealed a long time ago.
Far from being the weak partner, therefore, Greece is in fact in a position to DESTROY the entire poisonous pan-German hegemony operation, and in our opinion may well wind up doing so – as will similar situations waiting to explode among the PIGS (VIZ. Portugal, Italy (Greece) and Spain, which ought to read PIIGS, since Ireland is in the same position. A country with a huge trade surplus and a colossal current account deficit is in SERIOUS TROUBLE.

Uncoincidentally, each of these countries, as well as Iceland and the corrupted United Kingdom itself, has provided Fraudulent Finance ‘counterparty racketeering services’ to elements and associates of the Bush-CIA/DVD Crime Syndicate – with accruals doubtless pouring into Deutsche AG, St Gallen, for the benefit of Bush Senior, Gorbachëv (Orbach), Kohl and Ackermann.

WHAT DO THE FOUR RACKETEERS HAVE IN COMMON
WITH OTHER WELL-KNOWN DECEASED AND LIVING OPERATIVES?
What do these four racketeers have in common with the following deceased and living revolutionary operatives?

Andropov, Yuri (Lieberman)
Barroso, José Manuel
Biden, Joseph
Brown, Gordon
Bush Jr., George W.
Bush Sr., George H. W.
Clinton, Hillary Rodomski
Clinton, William Jefferson (Rockefeller)
Dodd, Senator Christopher
Emanuel, Rahm
Farage, Nigel
Geithner, Timothy
Grossart, Sir Angus
Khrushchev, Nikita (Perlmutter)
Medvedev (Menakhem Aaronovich Mendel)
Panetta, Leon
Paulson, Henry M.
Putin, Vladimir Vladimirovich (Shalomov)
Salmond, Alex
Sarkozy, Nicolas
Schickelgrüber, Adolf (Hitler)
Stalin, Josef (Djiugashvili-Kochba)?

FORECLOSURE ANALYSIS’ PARA-LEGAL SERVICES SPRINGING UP IN THE UNITED STATES
We turn now to the central issue: that securitisation is illegal under US law and indeed in all Common Law jurisdictions. There are NO REDEEMING FEATURES.

Services are now springing up in the United States providing a ‘Foreclosure Autopsy’ assessment in which breaks in the chain of title, missing assignments, unlawful substitution of trustees and blatant fraud and forgery, is typically identified. Such services do not provide actual legal advice: what they do is offer recorded information in support of any planned evidentiary hearing or legal discovery going all the way back to the original creditor/depositor. Every recorded document can be identified and surfaced for distressed homeowners – representing a broad foreclosure analysis resource support system via reliable established networks, local title companies, county recorders and other parties, especially in non-judicial foreclosure states like California, Arizona and Nevada, which appear to be states in the greatest need – given that it has been predicted that some 3.4 million foreclosures are anticipated across the United States over the rest of this calendar year (see Note 5 below for more background to this ‘utter corruption’).

NORTHERN ROCK’S LIES TO A FORMER MORTGAGOR MASKING
THE FACT THAT HER TITLE DEEDS WERE ‘OTHERWISE ENGAGED’
In Britain, we have been engaged with a householder who paid off her mortgage with Northern Rock in June 2004. In exchange, Northern Rock informed the lady that they would be forwarding her Title (Lease) documents, but failed to do so for five years – proffering every excuse under the sun for their gross failure, including the statement that her title documents had been ‘dematerialised’ – before, all of a sudden, forwarding her missing documents under cover of a letter saying that ‘it has come to our notice that we did not return your Title Documents in June 2004. Here they are. Please keep them in a safe place’.

• This occurred in June 2009, after the householder had torn her hair out, metaphorically speaking, for five long years trying to extract her documents from this reprobate lender.

In this instance, it is likely that, given that Northern Rock had had to be taken over by the British Government (since Gordon Brown was terrified at the media coverage of long lines of customers outside Northern Rock branches seeking to retrieve their savings, as in Argentina), the British Government’s lawyers may well have instructed Northern Rock to disgorge the said householder’s documents, which may have been encumbered by incorporation within a securitisation package.

The lady accepted a ‘compensation’ payment of £150 brokered by the Financial Ombudsman (which seems to exist to protect recalcitrant financial institutions operating within the British jurisdiction from determined ladies like this householder who will not take prevarication for an answer), on the basis of blatantly fraudulent information (e.g. that her title documents had been ‘dematerialised’ – a false statement placed in writing by Northern Rock).

We have comprehensively deconstructed this Northern Rock case, with facsimiles of the relevant correspondence, in the forthcoming huge issue of International Currency Review (6), indicating that Northern Rock lied to the householder, who was accordingly subjected to five years of anxiety and was unable to exercise her right to move home at any time during those five years.

• UPDATE: The householder wrote many days ago to Northern Rock asking them to answer her question, YES or NO: were her Title Deeds assigned and incorporated in a securitisation package without her permission? As of this date [11th March], THERE HAS BEEN NO RESPONSE. This is because they can’t answer the question without re-incriminating themselves. They have lied in writing already, so they have a major problem: as does the British Government, as the bank is controlled by the Government. We’ll see where the serpents in question slither and writhe to.

• MORTGAGE DECEPTION IN SPAIN: This morning [11th March], we received an email from a UK correspondent who writes: ‘I have a house in Spain, with a mortgage attached to it from Banco do Valencia’. Three years ago, the lady in question sought specific answers to her questions about prospective changes to the conditions of the mortgage. The bank failed to respond at all.

Moreover even after she complained to the bank’s Head Offfice, enclosing all the correspondence, there was no reply. Some time later the bank branch manager admitted to the lady that the changes that she requested could not be implemented BECAUSE THE MORTGAGE HAD BEEN ‘SOLD’ ON TO ANOTHER COMPANY. But of course the Spanish bank refused to provide any details of the company in question, let alone guidance on how they could be contacted. This revealed that, as in the cited Northern Rock case, Banco do Valencia are hiding something.

Our correspondent states: ‘So I pay my monthly mortgage to Banco do Valencia without having a clue who really owns that debt or who I am ultimately paying. This chimes with your Northern Rock exposure. Keep up the good work’.

• Two points: (1): NEVER DO BUSINESS IN SPAIN. They will always deceive and double-cross you. And: (2): The fact that Britain and Spain are satrap states caught in the European Union Collective entrapment net MAKES NO DIFFERENCE. Sheisters are sheisters, no matter what the regime.

• AND A VERY KNOWLEDGEABLE PROFESSIONAL UK CORRESPONDENT ADDS [11th March]:
‘From my own experience of finance companies’ ‘lawlessness’, they never back down even when shown that their actions are illegal or contracts unenforceable; and the standard ploy is not to answer letters… In psychological terms, this shows that they are extremely afraid, beneath the superficial impression of arrogance that they display. Their power, therefore, is an illusion’.

• Editor’s add-on: With the Northern Rock test case, we can assure you that there will be no let-up as they have been caught lying to the former mortgagor IN WRITING and there’s not a lot they can do to retrieve their situation. No doubt the Government’s lawyers will be forced to intervene.

SECURITISATION IS A KEY ELEMENT OF A REVOLUTIONARY ATTACK ON PRIVATE PROPERTY
When you consider that, as will now be rehearsed, securitisation is completely illegal under US and Common Law, you can see not only that these criminal enterprise financial institutions are well and truly on the wrack, but also WHY there has been such intense and ruthless ongoing RESISTANCE to the exposure of this rampant dirty racketeering activity – which represents nothing less than an intentional, sustained and suitably ‘below the radar’ offensive by the manipulators of the World Revolution against private property – being micromanaged in parallel with the so-called ‘sexual revolution’ and ‘upside down’ outpouring of every form of reprobate behaviour and perverted sex which is aimed at destroying the family, regarded by these long-range geomasonic maniacs as the glue which ‘legitimises’ private property.

Even if a jaded observer has zero knowledge of the progress of the World Revolution, which has reached an advanced (and yet fragile) stage in our era, the relentlessly comprehensive spread and coverage of the racketeering and corruption being perpetrated against private home owners can easily be seen to be ‘no accident’. As with ALL dimensions of the World Revolution, one has to ask oneself: how come that this nefarious, barbaric behaviour appeared suddenly and on such a truly colossal scale in every corner of the world almost simultaneously? None of this is coincidental: people who treat such developments as ‘phenomena’ without enquiring WHY these things are happening, are destined to languish in permanent ignorance of the truth.

YES, A RUTHLESS, SYSTEMATIC ATTACK ON PRIVATE PROPERTY
And the truth IS that what we are exposing is nothing less than a carefully planned, ruthless, determined and systematic revolutionary attack on private property.

• No wonder Gorbachëv sits, to this day, in a huge wing of the Kremlin, as before.

HE COLLABORATED WITH BUSH SENIOR to unleash this scourge on homeowners in the United States, Britain and the White Commonwealth countries – the ‘Main Enemy’, in collaboration with the covert Soviets’ intelligence allies, German ‘Black’ intelligence (DVD, DACHAU), hiding behind the front conveniently provided by the duplicitous French under the Treaty of the Elysée.

The criminal mentality seeks at all costs to entangle its targets in its own corruption, so that if anything goes wrong, the targeted parties are readily identifiable as racketeers, thereby providing the originating perpetrators with cover (so they imagine).

Hence the subversion through corruption of foreign counterparties – in Britain, Iceland, Greece, Italy, the Vatican, Spain, Portugal, Albania, North Korea, India, China, Malaysia, Hong Kong, Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Cyprus and wherever willing trading counterparties may be found.

LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR SCAMS STILL ‘OUT THERE’
That such Fraudulent Finance operations have continued as though there had been no historical discontinuity is of course well known. But a good deal of ‘scraping of the barrel’ is also taking place. Last year we drew attention to certain curious money-lending activities that were being fronted or sponsored by Newsmax.com which we were advised may be borderline financial scams.

The lowest racketeering common denominator we have ever come across, dated 2nd March 2010, from Cyprus – signed off by one Mr Ahmet Z. Altunis, ‘Principal Right Holder. World Wide Funding Trust’ seeks clients inter alia in the United States, to take advantage of their services for all ‘your unconventional funding needs’:

‘We give big opportunity to enter trade (PPP). If your assets SKRs (Safe-Keeping Receipts), Notes, Lease MTNS, Bond(s), IBOS, CMOS, have no available credit line now, we open credit line to your name. You can enter (PPP), your big profit [to] finance your project. We begin New Year contracts 2010: Enter Gateway to unlimited opportunities…. Send LOI + CIS + SKR + Passport. Then we open and activate credit line under YOUR NAME, even [though] the credit line is open on our name… Client have NO RISKS at 100%, all is secured by our and their lawyers, no tricks’.

When this crude solicitation written in barbaric English was sent to us from the United States, we were told that it represents a lowest common denominator fraud serving the Bush Crime Syndicate network. In due course, the client is asked for an up-front fee of between 12,800 and 15,000 Euros to cover ‘due diligence costs’, so it looks like a standard ‘Nigerian-type’ scam: but it isn’t.

Targets are being enticed into securitisation deals, which are illegal as indicated below, under US and Common Law. The solicitation sent to us (above) was being widely disseminated within the United States by US parties (wire fraud).

WHY SECURITISATION IS ILLEGAL UNDER U.S. AND COMMON LAW
Securitisation is illegal under US legislation – primarily because it is fraudulent and causes specific violations of R.I.C.O., usury, Antitrust and bankruptcy laws. And it flies in the face of public policy in numerous ways, as is expounded in extensive detail in an analysis to be published in our journal Economic Intelligence Review 2009Q1 (7) with several pages of book, article and case references.

To begin with, securitisation violates US State usury legislation. Secondly, all ‘true-sale’, ‘disguised loan’ as well as ‘assignment’ securitisations are essentially tax evasion schemes, and the penalties for tax evasion in the United States are excessively severe.

Thirdly, in all ‘true-sale’, ‘disguised loan’ and ‘assignment’ securitisations, the conflict of interest inherent in the sponsor also serving as the servicer constitutes fraud and conversion. In the fourth place, in all ‘true-sale’, ‘disguised loan’ and ‘assignment’ securitisations where the Special Purpose Vehicle [SPV] is a trust, the declaration of trust is void, as it exists for an illegal purpose.

In the fifth place, off-balance sheet treatment of asset-backed securities (both for ‘true-sale’ and for assignment transactions) constitutes fraud.

Sixth, all ‘true-sale’, ‘disguised loan’ and ‘assignment’ securitisations involve blatant fraudulent conveyances. In the seventh place, securitisation usurps United States bankruptcy laws and is accordingly illegal, as well as being also demonstrably contrary to public policy.

SECURITISATION ENTAILS GROSS VIOLATIONS OF R.I.C.O. STATUTES
In ‘true-sale’, ‘disguised loan’ and ‘assignment’ securitisations, there are fraudulent transactions which serve as ‘predicate acts’ under US Federal R.I.C.O. statutes.

The specific R.I.C.O. sections are: Section 1341 (mail fraud); Section 1343 (wire fraud); Section 1344 (financial institution fraud); Section 1957 (engaging in monetary transactions improperly derived from specified unlawful activity) [‘the money you make from the illegal exploitation of my money, is my money’]; and Section 1952 (racketeering).

Furthermore, securitisation constitutes violations of American antitrust statutes through market integration, syndicate collusion, price formation, vertical foreclosure, tying, price-fixing, predatory pricing, and the rigging of allocations.

Securitisation also involves void contracts, given the lack of consideration, illusory promises, the absence of any actual bargain, the absence of mutuality – and finally illegal subject matter and the contravention of public policy.

Securitisation is riddled with Fraudulent Transfer, Fraud in the Inducement, Fraud in Fact by Deceit, Theft by Deception (Fraudulent Concealment) and Fraudulent Conveyance: see the US securities regulations routinely breached in such activity, listed at the foot of this report and of most of these reports for THE PAST THREE YEARS, and other laws also routinely flouted in this context.

NOTWITHSTANDING THAT IT’S ILLEGAL, U.S. AUTHORITIES
CONTINUE TO PROMOTE AND ENCOURAGE SECURITISATION
Yet notwithstanding such crystal-clear indications that securitisation is 100% ILLEGAL under US Law, as well as under Common Law generally (so that these findings are largely applicable in all Common Law countries), US authorities from the highest level downwards, financial institutions, intermediaries, Intelligence Power operatives and others are gearing up for what they doubtless hope will be intensified racketeering and trading activity with (corrupt) foreign counterparties.

This behaviour is being fine-tuned ‘as we speak’, despite the reality that the securitisation activity being planned and implemented violates innumerable US statutes in the manner we summarise above, and notwithstanding that such activity is contrary to public policy.

Indeed, it’s as though the Rule of Law did not exist. From the highest level of the US Treasury, the White House, the US State Department and the Central Intelligence Agency and its subsidiaries such as the lethal Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI), the mindset, intention and perverse primary objective has all along been to resume Fraudulent Finance based on securitisation, as quickly and as seamlessly as possible. No wonder the five criminal Presidents DEMANDED immunity from prosecution from the World Court: did they arrange for key Justices (starting with the American Justice) at the World Court to receive pecuniary reward for granting them their demand?

SUMMARY FORENSIC ANALYSIS PROVING THE ILLEGALITY OF SECURITISATION
From whichever angle securitisation is considered, it is ILLEGAL. For example, the contracts are themselves VOID. This is because the process of securitisation involves several contracts that are either signed simultaneously, or within a short timeframe – many of which are rendered void inter alia because there is no consideration in contracts used in effecting the securitisations.

Many such contracts involve unilateral executory undertakings containing illusory promises. A unilateral executory promise is not a consideration. Such promises typically include a promise made by the Special Purpose Vehicle to pay out periodic interest, whether contingent or non-contingent on whether the collateral pays cash interest.

Collateral-substitution agreements contain a promise whereby the sponsor agrees to substitute impaired collateral. An assignment agreement of future (not yet existing) collateral may well be deemed a unilateral executory promise by the sponsor.

Illusory promises are not valid consideration for a contract. Such promises may be found in the Subscription/Purchase Agreement, whereby an existing asset is being exchanged for a future asset that does not exist as of the date of the subscription/purchase agreement. To make matters worse, none of the agreements typically signed by the investor as part of his/her purchase of the Special Purpose Vehicle’s Asset-Backed Securities expressly incorporates the (typically illusory) promises embodied in the offering prospectus.

OR: The Special Purpose Vehicle’s promise to pay interest and/or dividends on Asset-Backed Securities ‘Interest-Onlys’, Preferreds and ‘Pincipal-Onlys’ are essentially illusory promises because the underlying collateral may not produce any cash flows at all: so there won’t be any interest/dividend payments.

Moreover the lack of mutuality characterising such contracts renders them null and void, by definition. In any such contract, each party must have firm control of the subject matter of the contract and the underlying assets (consideration), and there MUST be a direct contractual relationship between the parties concerned.

But this is not the case, especially as the Special Purpose Vehicle’s corporate documents (trust indentures or bylaws or articles of incorporation) may typically limit the right of each Asset-Back Security investor; while there is typically no mutuality at all between the Special Purpose Vehicle and the sponsor/originator, because both entities are essentially the same, and are controlled by the sponsor before and after the securitisation takes place.

SECURITISATION: A COVER FOR TAX EVASION
In addition to their multiple violations of American State usury laws, all ‘true-sale’, ‘disguised loan’ and ‘assignment securitisations’ are essentially tax evasion arrangements. In the United States, the applicable tax evasion statute is the US Internal Revenue Code Section 7201 7 which reads: “Any person who willfully attempts in any manner to evade or defeat any tax imposed by this title or the payment thereof shall, in addition to other penalties provided by law, be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not more than $100,000 ($500,000 in the case of a corporation), or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both, together with the costs of prosecution”.

Under this statute and related case law, prosecutors must prove three elements beyond any reasonable doubt:

(1): The actus reus (the guilty conduct) – which consists of an affirmative act (not merely an omission or failure to act) that constitutes evasion or an attempt to evade either: (a) the assessment of a tax or (b) the payment of a tax.

(2): The mens rea or “mental” element of willfulness – the specific intent to violate an actually known legal duty. In the case of ‘true sale’ transactions, the tax evasion occurs because:

(a): The sponsor determines the price at which the collateral is transferred to the SPV, and hence, can arbitrarily lower/increase the price to avoid capital gains taxes – it being assumed here that the sponsor is a profit-maximising entity and will always act to minimise its tax liability and to avoid any tax assessment;

(b): The sponsor typically retains a ‘residual’ interest in the SPV in the form of IOs, POs and “junior piece”, which are typically taxed differently and on a different tax-basis compared with the original collateral: hence, the sponsor can lower the price of the collateral upon transfer to the SPV, and convert what would have been capital gains, into a non-taxable basis in the SPV “residual”;

(c): There is typically the requisite “intent” by the sponsor – evidenced by the arrangement of the transaction and the transfer of assets to the Special Purpose Vehicle;

(d): Before securitisation, collateral is typically reported in the sponsors’ financial statements at book value (that is, lower-of-cost-or-market: under both the US and the international accounting standards, loans and accounts receivable are typically not re-valued to market-value unless there has been some major impairment in value) which does not reflect true Market Values, and results in effective tax evasion on transfer of the collateral to the SPV, as any unrealised gain is not taxed;

(e): The actus reus is manifested by the execution of the securitisation transaction and transfer of assets to the SPV;

(f): The mens rea or specific intent is manifested by the elaborate arrangements implicit in securitisation transactions, the method of determination of the price of the collateral to be transferred to the SPV, the aims of securitisation, and the sponsor’s transfer of assets to the SPV;

(g): The unpaid tax liability consists of foregone tax on the capital gains from the collateral (the transaction is structured to avoid recognition of capital gains), and tax on any income from the collateral which is ‘converted’ into basis or other non-taxable forms;

(h): Income (from the collateral) that would have been taxable in the sponsor’s own financial statements, is converted into non-taxable basis in the form of the SPV’s Interest-Only (IO) and Principal-Only (PO) securities: part of the Interest-Spread (the difference between the SPV’s income and what it pays as interest and operating costs) is paid out to PO-holders, and this transforms interest into return-of-capital or just capital repayment, with no tax consequences. [Leaving aside the Ponzi scam dimension here – Ed.].

In cases of ‘disguised loan’ or ‘assignment’ securitisation transactions, tax evasion occurs:
(a): Because the sponsor determines the price at which the collateral is transferred to the SPV, and hence can lower/increase the price of the collateral to avoid capital gains taxes;

(b): Because the sponsor typically retains a ‘residual’ interest in the SPV which is normally taxed differently and on a different tax-basis compared to the original collateral: hence, the sponsor can lower the price upon transfer to the SPV, and convert what would have been capital gains, into non-taxable basis for tax purposes;

(c): Because the transfer of collateral to the SPV and the creation of Interest-Only and Principal-Only securities converts what would have been taxable capital gains into non-taxable basis;

(d): Because gain in the value of the collateral is not recognised for tax purposes, because there has not been any ‘sale’;

(e): Where the ABS is partly amortising, any capital gains are converted into interest payments;

(f): Because actus reus is manifested by the execution of the securitisation transaction and transfer of assets to the SPV;

(g): Because the mens rea or specific intent is manifested by the elaborate arrangements implicit in securitisation transactions, the objectives of securitisation and the sponsor’s transfer of assets to the Special Purpose Vehicle;

(h): Because the unpaid tax liability consists of tax on the capital gains from the transfer of the collateral (the transaction is structured to avoid recognition of a sale, whereas the transfer to the Special Purpose Vehicle is effectively a sale), and tax on any income from the collateral which is ‘converted’ into basis or other non-taxable forms, by securitisation.

SECURITISATION VIOLATES THE U.S BANKRUPTCY CODE
AND THEREFORE ALSO CONTRAVENES PUBLIC POLICY
Any transfer or conveyance of the assets of a debtor that is deemed to be made for the purposes of hindering, delaying or defrauding actual or potential creditors, may be determined by Courts to be a Fraudulent Conveyance under Section 548 of the US Bankruptcy Code or under a relevant theory of Constructive Fraud.

Although each US State has its own laws regarding the appropriate elements of proof of Constructive Fraud, Section 548(a)(2) of the US Bankruptcy Code permits an inference of Constructive Fraud if the following factors exist:

(1): The debtor received less than reasonably equivalent value for the property transferred; and:

(2): The debtor was insolvent or became insolvent as a result of the transfer, or else retained unreasonably small capital after the transfer, or made the transfer with the intent or belief that it would incur debts beyond its ability to pay.

The following theories of Fraudulent Conveyance within the context of securitisation may apply:

• Where the sponsor/originator receives insufficient value for assets transferred.

• Where there is an ‘intent to hinder, delay or defraud’ creditors (representing an implicit pre-petition waiver of one’s right to file for bankruptcy), with regard to the originator’s transfer of assets to the SPV, or the originator’s transfer of assets to the SPV has clearly not been undertaken on an arms’-length basis.

• Where securitisation increases the originator’s bankruptcy risk; and:

• In all instances where securitisation usurps the United States’ bankruptcy laws and is therefore illegal on such a basis alone.

SECURITISATION VIOLATES FEDERAL R.I.C.O. STATUTES
Turning now to the reality that securitisation constitutes a violation of US Federal R.I.C.O. Statutes [see Legal Notes below], we can state without equivocation that the entire securitisation process constitutes violations of Federal R.I.C.O. statutes, because:

(1): There is the requisite criminal or civil ‘enterprise’ – consisting of the sponsor/issuer, the trustees and the intermediary bank. These three parties work closely together to effect the securitisation transaction.

(2): There are ‘predicate acts’ of:

(a): Mail fraud – using the mails for sending out materials among themselves and to investors.

(b): Wire fraud – using wires to engage in fraud by communicating with investors.

( c): Conversion – where there isn’t proper title to collateral.

(d): Deceit: misrepresentation of issues and facts pertaining to the securitisation transaction.

(e): Securities fraud: disclosure issues.

(f): It entails loss of profit opportunity.

(g): It involves the making of false statements and or misleading representations
about the value of the collateral.

(h): It entails stripping the originator/issuer of the ability to pay debt claims or judgment claims in bankruptcy court – a state of affairs that may apply where the sponsor is financially distressed and the cash proceeds of the transaction are significantly less than the value of the collateral.

There is also typically the requisite ‘intent’ by members of the enterprise – evident in knowledge (actual and inferable), acts, omissions, purpose (actual and inferable) and results. Intent can be reasonably inferred from:

(a): The existence of a sponsor that seeks to raise capital – and cannot raise capital on better terms by other means;

(b): The participation of an investment bank that has very strong incentives to consummate the transaction on any agreeable (but not necessarily reasonable) terms.

SECURITISATION ALSO VIOLATES U.S. ANTITRUST LEGISLATION
Securitisation further constitutes violations of US Antitrust laws, because the American Asset-Backed Securities and Mortgage-Backed Securities markets are dominated by relatively few large entities such as FNMA (Fannie Mae), Freddie Mac, the top five investment banks (all of which have conduit programs), and the top five credit card issuers (MBNA, AMEX, Citigroup, etc.), etc.. As a consequence, the top five ABS/MBS issuers control more than 50% of the US ABS/MBS market. This constitutes illegal market concentration under US Antitrust legislation.

THE ‘PHILIPPINES EXCEPTION’ BURIED IN THE CLAYTON ACT
In the Antitrust context, however, observe the following text from the Clayton Act, which specifically EXCLUDES transactions undertaken with The Philippines. Isn’t that interesting?

It provides a blanket rationale for the massive past and ongoing US clandestine focus on The Philippines, the CIA’s need for ‘black hole’ conditions there in connection with successive US operations to relieve Presidents Marcos and Aquino of the stolen and hidden ‘Yamashita’s gold’, the US Fraudulent Finance operations using Philippine institutions and related operations based in that territory, an aborted US operation to convert The Philippines into a new US State (as had been planned under Clinton for Somalia), and the frequent visits of operatives known to ourselves to The Philippines under cover of attending to ‘orphanages’:

§ 1 Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 12 Definitions; short title:
(a) “Antitrust laws”, as used herein, includes the Act entitled:
‘An Act to protect trade and commerce against unlawful restraints and monopolies’, approved July second, eighteen hundred and ninety; sections seventy-three to seventy-seven, inclusive, of an Act entitled ‘An Act to reduce taxation, to provide revenue for the Government, and for other purposes’, of August 27th, eighteen hundred and ninety-four; an Act entitled ‘An Act to amend sections seventy-three and seventy-six of the Act of August twenty-seventh, eighteen hundred and ninetyfour’, entitled ‘An Act to reduce taxation, to provide revenue for the Government, and for other purposes’, approved February twelfth, nineteen hundred and thirteen; and also this Act.

‘Commerce’, as used herein, means trade or commerce among the several States and with foreign nations, or between the District of Columbia or any Territory of the United States and any State, Territory, or foreign nation, or between any insular possessions or other places that are under the jurisdiction of the United States, or between any such possession or place and any US State or Territory of the United States or the District of Columbia or any foreign nation, or within the District of Columbia or any Territory or any insular possession or other place under the jurisdiction of the United States:

Provided, That nothing in this Act contained shall apply to the Philippine Islands. The word ‘person’ or ‘persons’ wherever used in this Act shall be deemed to include corporations and associations existing under or authorized by the laws of either the United States, the laws of any of the Territories, the laws of any State, or the laws of any foreign country.

FANNIE MAE, FREDDIE MAC ENGAGED IN FURTHER ILLEGAL SECURITISATION:
RE-SECURITISING ALREADY SECURITISED ‘DUD’ ASSETS TO DUMP BACK ON THE BANKS
Even so, it became apparent in early March that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, both controlled by the US Government, are preparing to force financial enterprises such as the CIA’s Bank of America Corporation, JP Morgan Chase & Co, Wells Fargo and Citigroup, Inc., to buy back further waves of newly securitised packages of mortgages – i.e., the former Government-Sponsored Enterprises are reportedly engaged again in repackaging mortgage securities already marked down to ‘true’ value.

In other words, they are trying to dump faulty securitised loans, as well as straight loans, back on the participating banks – under cover of such fantasies as the double-minded statement attributed to Sharon McHale, spokes‘person’ for Freddie Mac, located adjacent to the CIA in McLean, Virginia, on 5th March 2010: ‘We are trying to be good stewards of taxpayer dollars and as part of that, it’s important that those dollars not go to loans that should not have been sold to us in the first place’ – throwing the blame for Freddie Mac’s own scandalous racketeering behaviour back at the banks.

• Being interpreted, what this woman was saying was: this:

‘We are covering ourselves with a mantle of rectitude by posing as protectors of the taxpayer’s dollars in order to obfuscate our own ongoing racketeering behaviour, even as we prepare further Fraudulent Finance securitisations in violation of the relevant US legislation: and we couldn’t care less because we are owned by the Government itself, which is up to its neck in such violations’.

And Paul Miller, a former examiner for the Federal Reserve (hardly a guarantee of integrity, given the Fed’s own reputation for Fraudulent Finance), based in Arlington, VA, let the cat out of the bag with: ‘If you want to originate mortgages and keep that pipeline running, you have to deal with the push-backs. It doesn’t matter how much you hate Fannie and Freddie’ – and neither, apparently, does it matter to what extent the Rule of Law is cynically violated ‘in order to keep the pipeline (of Fraudulent Finance) running’.

GARY GENSLER IS NOT AS OPPOSED TO FRAUDULENT FINANCE AS HE SEEMS
The appointment of Gary Gensler as Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission under President Obama was greeted with signs of relief on Wall Street. Here was a hardened former Goldman Sachs trader with 18 years’ experience with that cynical, ruthless money shop, who could be relied upon to act at all times in the interests of Wall Street, not the investor and taxpayer.

But, as has since been reported elsewhere, over a private lunch at the Waldorf Astoria in midtown Manhattan on 6th January 2010, the 52-year-old Gary Gensler caused indigestion among the self-satisfied guests at the luncheon – Timothy O’Hara, head of global credit at Crédit Suisse Holdings USA, Inc.; Robert P. Kelly, CEO at Bank of New York Mellon Corporation; David B. Heller, co-head of the securities division at Goldman Sachs; and Seth Waugh, CEO of Deutsche Bank Americas.

Because when one banker asked Gensler what or whom he saw as the biggest obstacles to reform in the securities and commodities sectors, he replied: ‘You’ (8).

Mr Gensler has been seeking derivatives control legislation that goes beyond current proposals, including what President Obama put forward during the summer of 2009. Notwithstanding the fact that if the derivatives situation is not addressed, the forthcoming crash will be so horrific as to be likely to tip the world into open, rather than covert, warfare, a certain Samuel Hayes, Professor Emeritus of Investment Banking at Harvard Business School, Boston, told Bloomberg in February 2010 that ‘Gensler is going to raise real concerns’ for financial firms.

‘Derivatives are absolutely central to what is Wall Street in the 21st century’ – namely, a casino. ‘Nobody wants the regulations to affect them’ (9).

‘GREATER TRANSPARENCY’ IS EVIDENTLY ALL HE‘S AFTER
On closer examination, Mr Gensler has actually been pushing for ‘more transparency’ in the over-the-counter derivatives market, so as to lower spreads between buyers and sellers and to make it easier for new competitors to enter the market – which the big banks aren’t keen on, as more participants will deprive them of profit.

So, Gary Gensler is not actually in the business of tackling the underlying crisis arising from the determination of financial institutions to continue playing Russian roulette, using the model first developed by the US Intelligence Power as it sought what it thought were foolproof methods of ensuring its financial independence from Congress and the open-ended funding pipelines that it considered appropriate to buttress its usurped status as a recalcitrant ‘State within the State’ impervious to reform and determined to brook no interference with its stolen hegemony.

INVESTORS’ MONEY USED TO REMUNERATE WALL STREET
In any case, the derivatives institutions and their back-up infrastructure have not the slightest intention of adopting any course other than ’business as usual‘ – and on a far larger scale than in the past. This obtuse madness WILL lead to a global collapse, as derivatives products are usually without real value. As a noted article in The New York Times of 7th February 2010 at last stated, investment banks trading derivatives do not own the mortgage bonds, the obligations from home owners, notes signed by home owners or the mortgage deeds of the deeds of trust.

The ‘structured products’, consisting of bundled documents ostensibly relating to the above but having NO RECOURSE to underlying real value, were, however, invested with ‘value’ arising from the name of the institution marketing the ‘asset’ – that is to say, arbitrary ‘value’ arising from the fact that, as a Goldman Sachs compliance officer actually admitted to the Editor of this service: ‘A structured product is worth what someone is prepared to pay for it’ – a penetrating statement which encapsulates the possibility that it may be (is) worthless: which is indeed the case.

‘THE MONEY YOU MAKE BY MISUSING MY MONEY IS MY MONEY’ – I.E., THE HOME OWNER’S
The money sloshing around between investment banks in this dirty market was investors’ money unwittingly advanced into pools of capital which winds up being used primarily to finance the fees, profits, insurance proceeds, insurance premia, and so forth – all for the benefit of Wall Street, paid to the investment banks, and not to investors who stumped up the money in the first place.

These fees and relationships are not and have never been disclosed to the home owner despite, in the United States, clear legislation requiring such transparency, including the Truth in Lending Act, and Deceptive Lending – which require full transparency and disclosure.

• Further legislation applicable to the securities sector in the United States is re-listed below – in the list that we have republished at the foot of our website reports for the past three years.

• The list of applicable securities regulations and laws is augmented by a legal tutorial which, again, we have published for the past three years at the foot of these reports,

It would appear that, notwithstanding such reminders, Wall Street and its compliant infrastructure, as well as its co-conspiring portfolio of dubious foreign trading counterparty institutions, has every intention of continuing to violate the relevant US rules and legislation – while at the same time continuing to abuse, in the mortgage sector, the home owner with the same cynicism as in the past.

Given the legal principle that ‘the money you make from misusing my money is my money’, it is quite clear that undisclosed fees, profits, kickbacks and other financial abuses perpetrated by these big speculative financial entities which produce no real wealth at all, but simply move money around between themselves, are payable to the home owner who signed the ‘loan’ papers in the first place.

A PERVERSE AND ARROGANT OFFICIAL INTENT TO CONTINUE VIOLATING U.S. LAW
But none of these realities – which have been rammed home by the technical work that we have published on this subject in International Currency Review, prepared by Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S. – have had any impact so far on the thinking of derivatives sector participants, analysts and observers, who appear to be hell-bent on continuing to violate US legislation.

On the contrary, these people are concerned exclusively with ensuring that the discontinuity that enveloped their sector and the financial markets as a whole in mid-September 2008 – is reversed, even though a total resumption of derivatives trading at full throttle WILL lead the world, and all engaged in this fraudulent activity, into a black hole

Moreover, since cracks are appearing in the entire structure of sophisticated finance ‘as we speak’, centred on Greece – the previous Government of which incurred, through Fraudulent Finance operations using Citibank, Athens, as counterparty to Bush/Cheney trading activities, an immense portfolio of derivatives obligations estimated at 300 billion Euros off-balance sheet, which can never be honoured – the timing of the collapse need no longer be measured in years.

So the self-centred, myopic speculative institutions are behaving like gun-toting bandits in a department store – determined to have their own way, irrespective of the consequences: one of which is that in the event of default, colossal payouts are due on Credit Default Swap contracts, which in fact amounts to institutionalised blackmail.

THE DEPOSITORY TRUST & CLEARING CORPORATION IS IN OVERDRIVE
For its part, the main component of the derivatives infrastructure supporting this prospectively catastrophic speculative activity is the Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC) – best known for its Cede & Co. partnership nominee facility, which is the holder of almost every physical stock certificate in existence, and boasts of accounting for more than $2.0 quadrillion in (largely fake) securities transactions annually.

On 10th February 2010, the DTCC announced that the Federal Reserve Board had approved its application to establish a DTCC subsidiary which is to be a member of the Federal Reserve System to operate ‘the Trade Information Warehouse (Warehouse) for over-the-counter (OTC) credit derivatives and the ‘legally accepted’ global depository for over-the-counter credit derivatives transactions’. (10).

THE FEDERAL RESERVE HAS BECOME
THE BACK-STOP GUARANTOR OF CREDIT DEFAULT SWAPS
Which means, in practice, that the Federal Reserve is now the GUARANTOR behind all Credit Default Swap (CDS) transactions that clear via DTCC. The new Fed-endorsed organisation will settle CDS obligations in all currencies and process credit events. It will also handle all over-the-counter credit derivatives traded worldwide, will be regulated by the Federal Reserve and the New York State Banking Department, as well as being ‘overseen’ by other American as well as international regulators (via a sort of college of supervisors).

The DTCC’s Trade Information Warehouse will be operated by a Warehouse Trust, beginning its operations ‘once certain organizational conditions have been met, which are expected shortly’. It is understood that the company will have been funded and will have started operations by March.

One observer, commenting on these arrangements, wrote to say: ‘To be sure, the net notional CDS amount, which is what counterparties would be on the hook for in the case of an orderly unwind of the financial system, is materially lower than the gross total. Yet, as systemic unwinds are never orderly, gross tends to become net – as for instance when Lehman bonds went from par to 10 cents in the space of 24 hours. Should systemic risk flare up again’ (think Greece – Ed.), ’and fiat-based market values quickly catch up with ‘fair values’ – which in our Ponzi economy can very easily be calculated: they are ALL ZERO – the Federal Reserve will be on the hook’, with the US taxpayer, for amounts so large that the volume of printed money will reduce the value of a dollar to one cent or less within the space of a few weeks (or less).

So basis spreads can be expected to be severely compressed, once counterparty risk has become a thing of the past and all systemic risk in the biggest derivatives marketplace (excluding interest rate swaps) is fully backstopped (in theory) by the Federal Reserve.

In addition, the DTCC will be guaranteed monopoly status with respect to Credit Default Swap trading, as no-one in this business will wish to transact or clear anywhere else.

• FACT: Monopolies are illegal under US, British and European law.

STAGE SET FOR AN UNIMAGINABLE (AVOIDABLE)
CATASTROPHE: A DEATH-WISH
So the stage is well and truly set for a catastrophe of unimaginable proportions, bearing in mind that under Geithner as President, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York alone accumulated a portfolio of derivatives ‘assets’ commonly cited at $500 trillion, but which is probably much larger. This of course makes a complete nonsense of the formal derivatives data published by the Bank for International Settlements, which excludes double-counting; but none of these numbers can be relied upon, although the Bank for International Settlements’ information possesses the cachet of authority and has to be used for want of better data (11).

The DTCC is also boasting of further innovations, including the expansion of its Global Corporate Actions (GCA) service based on feedback, sourcing scheduled payment announcements from the Federal Reserve Board for US structured and non-structured securities, specifically Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac securities, which are not DTC-eligible; scheduled payments coverage to include international securities that are not DTC-eligible; and distribution information on UK Unit Trusts.

THE DTCC’S OBLIGATIONS WAREHOUSE SERVICE
The January 2010 issue of DTCC News and Information for DTCC customers further discusses how the DTCC’s Obligations Warehouse, to be launched by mid-2010, will quote ‘provide transparency for the industry and regulators while delivering operational efficiencies, cost savings and risk mitigation to financial firms’. The new service will ‘close the chapter on the manual processing of ex-clearing trades by empowering ops. professionals with a real-time automated service that will electronically manage these transactions and communicate a match to each side of the obligation’.

‘The Obligation Warehouse service will also automate the management of non-Continuous Net Settlement (CNS) fails. ’Because these trades exist outside Continuous Net Settlement, the back office faces an accounting nightmare in handling these transactions – not to mention bearing the added costs for maintaining comprehensive records and dedicated personnel to keep track of their status. The Obligation Warehouse will help mitigate this risk by consolidating all ex-clearing and non-CNS fails in a central location and storing them until settlement’.

‘The Obligation Warehouse enhances transparency by fully capturing, for the first time ever, all trading activity in NSCC-eligible securities in a central location from trade date until settlement. As a result, ex-clearing trades will no longer be invisible to all but the direct parties to that particular transaction. Instead, the industry and regulators will have a complete view of all open obligations traded in the US marketplace for equities, corporates, municipals and also unit trust investment securities – and [will] have a central vantage point to monitor and mitigate systemic risk’ (12).

GREATER TRANSPARENCY WON’T ELIMINATE SYSTEMIC RISK,
OR PREVENT A CONFIDENCE CRISIS
But while being able to see systemic risk stresses emerging may be an advantage, it won’t, and cannot, eliminate systemic risk. This is because these trades are fraudulent given the fact that securitisation violates US law (and Common Law in English-speaking countries), while in most contexts anyway, they are bedevilled by a lack of real value and non-recourse characteristics.

As for Credit Default Swaps, whatever the contract provides and whenever the counterparties decide on the basis of the contract that a default has taken place or is about to take place, it is in the interests of the provider to allow the default to take place, given the huge payouts which ensue. In other words, the contract is based on latent blackmail. That alone makes it illegal.

SO, WHERE ARE YOU, MR HOLDER?
Much more seriously, as summarised above, securitisation contracts are ALL ILLEGAL under US and Common Law. Therefore, all US official and ‘private’ sector operations being framed so as to revalidate and rehabilitate securitisation represent a perverse assault on the Rule of Law, and the commission of multiple felonies – accordingly leaving ALL perpetrators, whether holders of public office under the United States or any other level of government or employed by wayard financial institutions, or developing the securitisation infrastructure, vulnerable to criminal investigation, indictment, arrest and prosecution for gross and knowing violations of the law.

Whether the scandalous immunity from prosecution awarded by the World Court on demand to the five self-acknowledged criminal US Presidents protects them from the appropriate legal sanctions, prosecution and punishment within the US jurisdiction itself, isn’t clear: but we doubt it. Ironically, therefore, since the five Presidents have, by demanding immunity from prosecution from the World Court, acknowledged their own criminality, it is open to the US authorities to investigate, indict and arrest these operatives – since they have acknowledged their guilt. Where are you, Mr Holder?

Your job is to administer justice without fear or favour, isn’t it?

APPENDIX:
LORD MYNERS SAYS THERE MUST BE PENALTIES FOR BANK EXCESSES
On 8th March 2010, the UK ‘City Minister’ (Financial Services Secretary), Lord Myners, who in our opinion has been far too laid-back in failing to condemn criminality in the corrupted City of London, said that financial markets must ‘punish’ those who ‘make mistakes’ [sic!]. Without a ‘downside’, it would be impossible to ‘restore’ market discipline.

In all likelihood, Lord Myners didn’t really understand what he was saying – which was that the market system wasn’t functioning properly. And the reason for that is summarised in our report above: securitisation impedes the proper operation of market forces via its opposition to public policy in the bankruptcy context, its antitrust characteristics, and in the other ways described in outline in the present report. Does Myners understand this?

All that Lord Myners actually said, at a meeting in London, was that bankers had been obscenely remunerated even though they had ‘made serious mistakes’ (unspoken), code for ‘behaved like organized criminals’ (even more unspoken): ‘A lot of people lost money in the financial sector over the last few years – bank shareholders in particular suffered massive losses’.

‘But many people have been protected. Creditors have been bailed out. Far too many bankers themselves have enjoyed massive awards during the crisis, even as their firms were rescued’.

Well, we knew all that. When he got down to detail, Myners told the meeting that the Government was determined to ensure that no bank was too complex to fail. ‘We’re serious about removing the safety net that has allowed those with blind faith in market efficiency to ignore the consequences of their lack of discipline’ [sic! Let the word ‘criminality’ NEVER BE MENTIONED].

‘We are also working with G-20 countries and the IMF to access the feasibility of an international levy or fee on financial institutions. This will make sure that any residual insurance that banks are perceived to enjoy after living wills are implemented, will not come for free’.

Lord Myners then redeemed his rather shallow observations by pointing out that the implicit support of the financial industry in the past had probably represented the most expensive public subsidy to any industry in any part of the British economy, ‘vastly exceeding’ that paid to agriculture or the defence industry.

‘There is no reason why the public, taxpayers, should continue to provide a free at the source of delivery subsidy to the cost of capital of the banking system. We need to do everything we can to shrink the subsidy to zero’.

Under the Brown Government’s new Financial Services Bill, consumers would be granted new powers to seek redress through the courts. However the weakness of Lord Myners’ presentation was his complete failure to indicate that he and the Government understand that a colossal volume of the transactions which gave rise to the crisis in the first place were and remain ILLEGAL.

It’s no use trying to reform the ‘framework’ when the transactions being promoted within the framework contravene antimonopoly legislation, bankruptcy legislation and all the other elements of the law identified in outline above. So, laudable though Lord Myners’ objectives appear to be, he is in fact wasting everyone’s time.

He appears not to understand that the transactions which precipitated the crisis were CRIMINAL TRANSACTIONS, and his failure to address the criminality issue – which is really the ONLY issue – indicates that the Government in London is trying to cover up and ignore the criminality: because of the vast tax accruals from the recalcitrant financial sector that the Government needs more than ever, given its colossal subsidies to the criminal financial enterprises whose casino operations have been exposed.

POSTSCRIPT:
STIGLITZ: ‘THE AMERICAN BANKING SYSTEM IS CORRUPT’
The headline above appeared in the British press on 10th March 2010. Eager with anticipation and almost salivering with excitement, your correspondent rushed to read the article in question. Here, at last, he thought, was a fully paid-up member of the Great and the Good coming to his senses and calling a spade a spade at last. Alas, for Nobel Prize-winning Dr Stiglitz, a spade is in fact a fork.

Professor Stiglitz, who teaches at New York’s Columbia University, said that the Federal Reserve System ‘smells bad’. The Editor invoked the smell of the Fed, and of course agreed. But on further reading, it transpired that Dr Stiglitz was merely complaining that the Presidents of the 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks are chosen by commercial bankers.

‘The regional Reserve Banks… have a key role in regulation and in the last crisis [i.e., once again, it’s ‘in the past’: Ed.] of bailing out the banks. But the heads of these organisations are chosen by a committee dominated by the big banks that are being bailed out… so the people bailing out are appointed by the people who they bailed out. It smells bad. It looks bad. It undermines confidence’.

OH DEAR. Is this the best Dr Stiglitz can do? The American banking system is corrupt because the heads of the 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks are chosen by the big banks? Is that really, Dr S., the reason that the system is corrupt? Have we not been exposing rampant racketeering by the same big banks alluded to? Oh sorry, we forgot. He’s a Nobel Prize-winning economist.

The holder of a Nobel Prize can only say what’s considered kosher by the globalist internationalists who use the Nobel Prize system to ‘EMBED’ the ‘PARTY LINE’ in the public’s psyche. So the ‘party line’, as we speak, is to ACKNOWLEDGE that, yes, the US banking system is indeed corrupt, as Mr Story has been reiterating as nauseam, but to attribute this to the way the heads of the regional Feds are chosen. [With the Federal Reserve Board, the number of Feds is a geomasonic 13].

Notes and references:

(1): As previously reported, the Editor visited the veteran author and journalist Gordon Thomas, at his suggestion, in Bath in the fourth quarter of 2004.

During that visit, Mr Thomas indicated that MI-6 had informed the British media that Christopher Story has been a participant in the abortive putsch in Equatorial Guinea, with which Mark Thatcher was associated. Since the Editor of this service has done nothing, literally, since 1963, except run his publishing and print production businesses, the Editor asked why such lies and false witness would be perpetrated – especially against someone such as the Editor of this service whose loyalty to the Crown and the United Kingdom cannot possibly be, and has never been, questioned.

He replied:

‘They think you may be dangerous because you control your own
publications and you have the documents’.

In divulging this, of course, Mr Thomas revealed that MI-6 itself had something to hide. If the Editor was dangerous ‘because you hold the documents’, the documents themselves clearly represented elements of something much bigger. So the consequence of this intervention was that the Editor naturally redoubled his private investigations to establish what MI-6 were so anxious to cover up.

When the Editor protested to Thomas that the lies disseminated to the media about him were rank fabrications, Gordon Thomas uttered the memorable response:

‘It doesn’t matter that it’s not true. What matters is that it’s out there’.

In the course of this meeting, Gordon Thomas made it quite clear to the Editor that he is an agent of influence and acts as an agent for MI-6. He said that his father had been an MI-6 officer.

Given Thomas’s statement ‘It doesn’t matter that it’s not true. What matters is that it’s out there’, everything that Gordon Thomas himself publishes must, by definition, be questioned – since he was quite content to go along with this twisted and nefarious mentality.

• You could say that by revealing this to the Editor, both Thomas and MI-6 exhibited a degree of abject stupidity which perhaps we haven’t emphasised sufficiently.

Furthermore, it became quite obvious that the purpose of this exercise was intimidation. Thomas accompanied his message with a veiled threat, as well. Clearly, these people are accustomed to targets caving in to such pressures, and they have no immediate backstop plans when the target fails to react in accordance with their evil intentions.

As a follow-up to this operation, Thomas badgered the Editor in New York to get in touch with an operative who later turned out to go by the nickname ‘The Visitor’, who used the name Walker as an alias, but who’s real (Ukrainian) name is Demchuk. This operative was said to have Pentagon links. At fist the Editor refused, but Gordon Thomas (as agent for MI-6) persisted, and finally the Editor agreed to meet this fellow, by appointment (arranged via Hushmail) in the fishing tackle area of a sports store on Fifth Avenue. The Editor has no interest in sport and had never been inside a sports store. However at the appointed hour, the Editor appeared, and found this man lurking in the traditional grey raincoat amid the fishing rods. We repaired to the Algonquin Hotel, where the operative proceeded to pump the Editor on one subject alone, namely Lt. Mark Delmart Vreeland.

Subsequently, Demchuk pestered the Editor to reveal all he knew about the Iraqi ‘Sarindar’ WMD removal programme, under which two Soviet ships had sailed from the Iraqi port of Umm Qasr in February 2002, ahead of the illegal invasion. The Editor had obtained information on this from open sources, especially the high-level Romanian defector, Ion Pacepa, and additionally from Soviet Military Intelligence (GRU), some information about which is available on the Internet.

In other words, the information supplied to this ‘US’ operative by the Editor was all obtained from open sources. The operative ordered a number of our publications which he said he would pay for, received them, but later vanished without fulfilling his financial undertaking (par for the course).

In March 2005, the Editor suddenly received a phone call from this Pentagon-linked operative in London, in which he spoke immediately about some operation in Monaco involving the dubious operative Bernie Ecclestone. The US operative appeared to assume that the Editor knew what he was talking about, as he gave the Editor to understand that he (Demchuk) believed that the Editor was involved with whatever operation in Monaco (a key CIA center) he was talking about. When the Editor said: ‘I have no idea what you are talking about. You’d better go back to your source’, there was a very long and stony silence.

He then said: ‘Well, that’s very surprising, in view of where this comes from’. Since the Editor knew from another source that Demchuk had just visited MI-6, it almost immediately became crystal clear that this was yet another attempt by MI-6 to ‘sting’ the Editor of this service.

In view of the fact that a US ‘inside’ source told a contact of the Editor’s in February 2010 that ‘MI-6 intend to take Story out’, because he knows too much about what is going on (and what they are up to), we place the foregoing information on the record again: and we will revisit these sequences with greater, hitherto unpublished, detail, in due course.

If the British intelligence community thinks it can intimidate a private publisher whose sole interest is to expose the racketeering that these people are all trying to cover up, it had better think again. You could argue that what we have done to date has actually assisted the British authorities to get their acts together in the face of this unprecedented crisis: but to be informed, after going through so much, that they intend to ‘take Story down’, is one slap in the face too many: and it reflects very badly on the US source of this disgraceful threat and further intimidation attempt, as well.

For the elimination of all residual doubt, we will persist with these exposures until such time as the necessary remedial measures have been taken. Interestingly, as you will have noted appended to this report (Appendix), Lord Myners, the City (of London) Minister in the Labour Government, has just indicated that the measures taken to discipline the City have been quite inadequate to date – although he fails to use words like ‘criminal’, ‘fraud’, ‘organised crime’, ‘racketeering’, ‘Fraudulent Finance’ etc: so he has a great deal of catching up (with us) to do.

(2): See the following reports on this website [Archive]:

• 9th January 2010: Text of the CMKM/CMKX lawsuit against the S.E.C.: Case Number CV10-00031 JVS (MLGx): Santa Ana, California. Subsequent to our posting the complete text of the Complaint immediately it had been filed, the text was also made available on the following link: http://viewer.zoho.com/docs/paKdda

• 29th January 2010: Service of CMKM/CMKX $3.87 trillion suit vs. S.E.C.

• 07 February 2010: Legal moves to sue those blocking the Settlements

• 02 March 2010: S.E.C. Phantom Shares Fraud: New Intelligence

(3): See text of the letter from Mr A. Clifton Hodges, Attorney for the CMKM/CMKX victims, to the Office of the Attorney General for New York State, Mr Andrew Cuomo: report of 2nd March 2010.

(4): Wanta’s rôle, having served as courier between Bush Sr. and Gorbachëv, has always been to facilitate thefts and diversions of funds to George Bush Sr. (and Gorbachëv, given that the former Communist President is a partner with Bush Sr. in Deutsche AG., as explained in this and recent reports). This helps to explain why from time to time during these investigations, we have been told that ‘Bush Sr. considers the monies to belong to him’.

(5) A ‘Foreclosure Autopsy’ reporting service is available, for instance, from the following analyst:

Charles Wayne Cox
Certified Forensic Loan Analyst
Notary Public
131 Sutphen Street
Santa Cruz
California 95060
Telephone: 831-466 3440
Facsimile: 619-330 2379
Email: mailto:Charles@BayLiving.com
Website: www.ForensicLoanAnalyst.com

Charles Cox is recommended to the Editor personally by a friend of impeccable integrity who is also an expert on these issues, based in San Diego. Cox is a Para-Legal and a noted forensic expert on reading mortgage documents, serving lawyers to help their foreclosure clients. Our friend and correspondent wrote, when introducing Charles Cox: ‘Charles helped a friend of mine here in San Diego by reading his original Note and mortgage documents. Incredibly, the Note to the mortgage was made out to San Diego. Later, a copy from the County Recorder’s office showed that San Diego had been crossed out, and written in was ‘United Republic’.

The mortgage was done by a mortgage company in Colorado (now out of business) but was sold to Aurora which was owned by Lehman Brothers. Aurora is still the servicer on the loan, and my friend is suing them and requested through a qualified letter a copy of the original Note to show that they are the legal owners of the Note’.

(6): ‘Northern Rock’s Line in Excuses: Holding Paid-out Title Deeds for Five Years: A forensic analysis of how Northern Rock managed to hold on to title deeds belonging to a former mortgagor, with details of its conflicting excuses for non-performance’: International Currency Review, World Reports Limited, London and New York, Numbers 1 and 2, pages F-153 to F-172.

(7) ‘Securitization is completely illegal and fraudulent under US law’, Economic Intelligence Review, World Reports Limited, London and New York, pages 5-21.

(8): ‘Gensler Turns Back on Wall Street to Push Derivatives Overhaul’,
Bloomberg, 12th February 2010.

(9): ‘Gensler Turns Back on Wall Street to Push Derivatives Overhaul’,
Bloomberg, op. cit., 12th February 2010.

(10) ‘January 2010 News and Information for DTCC customers’ published
by the Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation’, accessed 13th February 2010.

(11): The derivatives data maintained by the Bank for International Settlements, and reproduced by the International Monetary Fund in successive issues of its literature, are the only ‘reliable’ data available. Because they are issued by the BIS, they are authoritative, but it is not known whether they are accurate. The BIS data, which exclude double counting, showed that in June 2008, total Notional Over-the-Counter derivatives contracts outstanding on that basis reached some $693,814 billion. By December 2008, this total had contracted to $547,371 billion given the discontinuity of September 2008; but by June 2008, the total outstanding had recovered to $604,622 billion.

The Gross Market value of total underlying derivatives contracts outstanding amounted to $20.4 trillion in June 2008. $32.2 trillion in December 2008, and $25.4 trillion in June 2009.

(12): ‘January 2010 News and Information for DTCC customers’ published
by the Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation’, op. cit., accessed 13th February 2010.

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.

• 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 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].

GORBACHEV IMPLICATED IN STEALING COTTRELL’S CONTRACT

story3

THE TOP GANGSTERS EXPOSED: GORBACHEV, KOHL, BUSH SR., ACKERMANN

Thursday 4 February 2010 05:01

WITH DEUTSCHE AG PARTNERS HELMUT KOHL, BUSH SR., AND ACKERMANN, GORBACHEV ALSO BENEFITED FROM THEFT OF THE QUEEN’S GOLD AS A PARTNER IN DEUTSCHE AG

RACKETEERING THROUGH GERMANY BY GORBACHEV, KOHL, AND THE U.S. GANGSTERS
In the following analysis, everything starts coming decisively together. We now prove that former President Mikhail S. Gorbachev, working with former US President George H. W. Bush Sr., former German Chancellor Helmut Kohl and Dr Joseph Ackermann, all partners in Deutsche AG (formerly called Barrington Investment Group), Switzerland, stole a contract using the electronic tag to the securities account owned by Michael C. Cottrell’s Pennsylvania Investments, Inc., with Benchmark Securities, In., New Jersey, at a table-top meeting in Geneva on 7th October 2002 by the means described below, which included the electronic ‘forging’ of Mr Cottrell’s signature. This theft was preceded by seven related thefts from Mr Cottrell’s firm’s securities account, itemised below.

This means that former President Mikhail Gorbachev and former German Chancellor Helmut Kohl are financial criminals like George H. B. Bush Sr. and should be treated accordingly. Mr Gorbachev and Helmut Kohl have, as partners in Deutsche AG, by definition been profiting from the theft of Mr Cottrell’s contract and property, and also, as further revealed below, from proceeds from the theft of The Queen’s gold, which, we were informed at 1.15 am on 4th February 2010, have likewise been channelled through Deutsche AG, Switzerland. As of 2nd February 2010, The Queen’s gold had not been restored. [In view of what we allude to but cannot divulge below, this grim situation may have changed on 3rd February, but we don’t know whether this is the case, yet].

• The proceeds of innumerable corrupt transactions involving these characters have been run through the DVD’s main institutions, Deutsche Bank and Dresdner Bank. So what is being exposed is that George H. W. Bush Sr. (CIA/DVD) and Mikhail Gorbachev (Soviet Military Intelligence (GRU) and KGB/FSB) have been ransacking American and non-American victims alike, and running this colossal open-ended racketeering through Germany, with the assistance of the former STASI of East Germany (who are GESTAPO in relabelled clothing). Hence the presence on the scene of STASI operatives such as Eva Teleki, a Swedish opera singer, and other operatives suspected of being continuing STASI agents, such as Chancellor Angela Merkel (the former Secretary of the Agitation and Propaganda Department of the Young Communists at Marx Lenin University, in East Berlin). This explains why Merkel was earlier fingered by this service as guardian in Germany of George Bush Sr.’s stolen and exploited racketeering assets with German institutions.

• Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, who is a senior Soviet GRU operative, was based in East Germany before he migrated to Leningrad, and is believed to have been responsible for orchestrating, at least from the Soviet side, the clockwork ‘collapsible communism’ operations in Eastern Europe. Gorbachev has been reported to us to operate from a large wing of the Kremlin, as though he never left the place. Which he didn’t. He’s been at the centre of this criminality THROUGHOUT.

• Leo Wanta, who answers the phone in German, was the courier between George H. W. Bush Sr. and Mikhail Gorbachev. Although he says he’s Polish, we think this felon and fraudster (who has stolen this Editor’s loan plus interest) may be a DVD operative/double agent, possibly STASI.

• Note: It is standard CIA ‘tradecraft’ practice to usurp the expertise of outside professional talent if it is not available in-house or by some other means. In this context, the CIA perpetrators needed a US securities expert with impeccable credentials and a securities account. What the CIA does is apply its standard Bush-style ‘bait and switch’ technique, exploiting and maximising the potential of the usurped professional expertise, before rejecting it and stealing the assets associated with it.

That’s what happened to Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S. This procedure also explains Wanta’s ‘use’ of Mr Cottrell for his failed AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc. operation, because Mr Michael C. Cottrell has the requisite securities market expertise and account facilities, which were applied for the benefit of Mr Wanta. Note also that Steven Goodwin, the Wanta Attorney in Richmond, VA, who accepted this Editor’s $35,000, which Wanta stole, was born, as stated previously, in Dusseldorf.

• ‘BLAIR AND BERNANKE REPORTEDLY ARRESTED ON 3RD FEBRUARY’
It was reported to us at 1:00am on 4th February 2010 that the forgoing were both ARRESTED on Wednesday 3rd February 2010: see below for outline details. BREAKING.

• TWO GIANT WHITE HOUSE THEFTS THEY’VE LIVED TO REGRET

• STEALING THE QUEEN’S GOLD, COTTRELL’S CONTRACT (PLUS CMKX)

• MORE ABOUT JEB BUSH’S APPEARANCE AT THE WHITE HOUSE

• WHITE HOUSE THEFTS FROM MICHAEL C. COTTRELL’S FIRM,
AND THE ELECTRONIC FORGING OF HIS SIGNATURE

• GORBACHEV AND KOHL IMPLICATED WITH BUSH SR. AND ACKERMANN

• DEUTSCHE BANK AG A CO-CONSPIRATOR WITH BUSH JR. AND CHENEY

• BLAIR AND BERNANKE REPORTED TO US TO HAVE BEEN ‘ARRESTED’

• THE NOOSE HAS TIGHTENED AND THE TRAPDOOR IS POISED TO FALL

• CRIMINAL OPS. WITHIN A ‘RULE OF LAW’ FRAMEWORK

• SHOCKS PENDING FOR PEOPLE WHO FANCY THEY HAVE ‘STELLAR REPUTATIONS’

• LIES AND DIVERSIONARY PLOYS OVER WORLD COURT JURISDICTION

• THE THEFT OF THE QUEEN’S GOLD AND THE LIEN ON THE U.S. TREASURY

• U.S. TREASURY IS THE DEFENDANT IN THE WORLD COURT ACTION

• ELECTRONIC JAMMING OF GOLD THEFT PHONE CONVERSATION

• GERMANY IS BEING PROGRESSIVELY EXPOSED AS THE ENEMY

• NON MERCI! IL FAUT TOUT D’ABORD QUE VOUS VOUS DEBARRASSEZ DES ALLEMANDS

• SCANDAL OF WALL-TO-WALL U.S. OFFICIAL PSY-OPS AGAINST AMERICANS

• C.I.A. SCAMS INSIDE GOVERNMENT AS WELL AS THE PRIVATE SECTOR

• ‘SORCHA FAAL’ WARMONGERING’ AGITPROP OPERATION
RUN BY AN OFFICE OF NAVAL INTELLIGENCE AGENT FROM VIENNA, VA

• WHY THE EAVESDROPPERS ROUTINELY SHOOT THEMSELVES IN THEIR CLUB FEET

• THE HIDEOUS FINANCIAL AND ECONOMIC ‘SHOCKS’ IN STORE

• THE LATEST AVAILABLE DERIVATIVES NOTIONAL VALUE DATA

• CONGRESS SLAPPED IN THE FACE AS WELL: BY NEIL BAROFSKY

• FOR ‘FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEMS’ READ: RAMPANT CRIMINALITY

• BANKERS AT DAVOS REPORTED TO HAVE BEEN AT LOGGERHEADS

• U.S. CROOKS REPORTED TO BE FLEEING THE COUNTRY

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.

• 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.

• 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 extended Ad. for the INTERNET SECURITY SOLUTION.

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 from this website.

• 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.
The biggest lawsuit in world legal history: The phantom share giga-scandal.

Note: If the current report [4th February 2010] is displayed, access the Archive for immediate display of our CMKM/CMKX report dated 29th January. All preceding reports, at least back to December, are also relevant to the current state of tension brought about by these gangsters.

• And note that this report EXPANDS our understanding for WHO has been involved all along.

NEW REPORT STARTS HERE:

MORE ABOUT JEB BUSH’S APPEARANCE AT THE WHITE HOUSE
In our report dated 31st January, referencing the appearance of Jeb Bush at the White House on Saturday 30th January accompanying Godfather Bush Sr., we stated as follows: ‘Furthermore, the reason Jeb Bush suddenly surfaced was that Jeb Bush was involved when the Delmarva funds were stolen in August 2002. It will be recalled that Jeb was on record earlier as protecting his own interests under the smokescreen of the lie that his father was too gaga to know what he was doing, which has always been baloney. So Jeb has been caught too’.

The underlying facts here, which are central to the state of affairs reached at the end of January 2010 and which explain Jeb Bush’s sudden surfacing at the White House, as well as his sombre appearance when photographed leaving the official residence in a snowstorm, are as follows:

(1): Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S. had served as a Trustee of Delmarva Timber Trust
and remains a Trustee of the Trust.

(2): In 2002, given Mr Cottrell’s status as a Delmarva Timber Trust Trustee and his security and background check credentials, Mr Michael C. Cottrell’s corporation Pennsylvania Investments, Inc.,
had been offered a contract to trade $500 billion by Deutsche Bank AG.

(3): This contract was stolen from Mr Cottrell’s computer, complete with his signature and passport image and details, by specific instructions of Dr Joseph Ackermann’s co-partner in Deutsche AG (formerly Barrington Investment Group), George Bush Sr., and his criminalist associates, Richard B. Cheney and George W. Bush Jr. between 19th August and 7th October 2002, using the National Security Agency (NSA) T-2 program. Mr Cottrell’s signature was ‘forged’ in the sense that it was lifted from his computer and used to seal the consequent illegal transactions accruing for the benefit of Gorbachev, Kohl and Bush. Further details of these thefts, will be found below.

(4): On 19th August 2002, Jeb Bush attended a meeting with Delmarva Timber Trust personnel, the subject matter of that meeting being how Delmarva could make a deal with George H. W. Bush Sr. and with George W. Bush.

(5): In our brief reference above and in our report dated 31st January 2010, the statement that ‘the Delmarva funds were stolen’ contained a misunderstanding by the Editor. It was funds deposited in a securities account belonging to Mr Cottrell’s Pennsylvania Investments, Inc., that were stolen, by means of the electronic ‘forging’ of Michael Cottrell’s signature, on the specific instructions of the Bushes and Cheney, from the White House. Mr Cottrell had been offered the contract by Deutsche Bank given his Delmarva Timber Trust background and his securities credentials.

WHITE HOUSE THEFTS FROM MICHAEL C. COTTRELL’S FIRM,
AND THE ELECTRONIC FORGING OF HIS SIGNATURE
As BREAKING EVENTS are showing, this was a fatal theft too far by the DVD’s Bush Crime Family and their lackey, MK-ULTRA operative Richard B. Cheney.

Deutsche Bank had been more than content to approve the securities market credentials of Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S. a Delmarva Trust Trustee, with rollovers and extensions. His firm’s securities account was held within Benchmark Securities, Inc., New Jersey. Deutsche Bank had concluded that he was the ONLY American they would be prepared to consider for the intended trading purposes; and after they had checked him and his credentials out, they were delighted and so approved him for the $500 billion contract.

Funds had been procured and tagged to Pennslyvania Investments Inc.’s securities account within Benchmark Securities Inc., New Jersey, for the purpose of using the funds with the contract.

Between 19th August 2002 and 7th October 2002, the Bush II White House, using the National Security Agency’s T-2 program, fraudulently ‘pinged’ Michael C. Cottrell’s securities account on seven separate occasions. The perpetrators were consequently able to purchase several billion dollars’ worth of contract paper on each occasion.

At the end of this exercise, at a table-top meeting in Geneva on 7th October 2002, they activated the electronic tag to access the contract enabling them to steal the contract for Deutsche AG and the funds in Pennsylvania Investments Inc.’s securities account within Benchmark Securities Inc.

In order for them to achieve these thefts, Michael C. Cottrell’s signature was electronically copied for the purpose – the electronic equivalent of forgery of the principal’s signature. Therefore, in addition to conspiracy to commit theft, and to the thefts themselves, the criminals concerned, who include Mikhail Gorbachev and Helmut Kohl, perpetrated forgery as well.

GORBACHEV AND KOHL IMPLICATED WITH BUSH SR. AND ACKERMANN
As previously reported, partners in Deutsche AG, formerly Barrington Investment Group, include Dr Joseph Ackermann, the DVD’s main banker, George H. W. Bush Sr., Helmut Kohl, the former Chancellor of Germany, and former President Mikhail Gorbachev, all of whom, therefore, are co-conspirators in perpetrating the theft implemented in Geneva on 7th October 2002.

Former President Mikhail Gorbachev and former German Chancellor Helmut Kohl have shared the proceeds accruing to their partnership in Deutsche AG (formerly Barrington Investment Group), so Gorbachev and Kohl are identified as having STOLEN THE CONTRACT AND FUNDS BELONGING TO MICHAEL C. COTTRELL, B.A., M.S., elaborated above.

DEUTSCHE BANK AG. A CO-CONSPIRATOR WITH BUSH JR. AND CHENEY
Also implicated were George W. Bush (Jr.), Richard B. Cheney and Cheney’s aide, Libby. Since Deutsche Bank had approved Michael C. Cottrell’s credentials as stated above, in allowing these illegal transactions to go through on the basis of an electronically stolen (and therefore forged) version of Mr Cottrell’s signature, Deutsche Bank itself became a co-conspirator, with Deutsche AG and its partners, in these successive thefts and exploitations of the funds which had been placed with Mr Cottrell’s securities account at Benchmark Securities, Inc., New Jersey.

The named highest-level US perpetrators, who erroneously imagined that they are covered by the National Securities Act of 1947 et seq. and are accordingly ‘licensed’ to abuse their high offices by committing theft, fraud and forgery, then intimidated and bore false witness against Mr Cottrell and arranged for the FBI to utter threats against him. Specifically, on 2nd October 2002, FBI Special Agent Jan Trigg and FBI Special Agent O’Grady [telephone number: 718-286 7307] telephoned Mr Cottrell at 3:44pm, accused HIM of conducting fraudulent transactions, and accompanied this lie with threats. In reality, the fraudulent transactions were being conducted by George H. W. Bush Sr., Richard B. Cheney, President George W. Bush and their foreign high-level partners.

BLAIR AND BERNANKE REPORTED TO US TO HAVE BEEN ‘ARRESTED’
At 1.00 am UK time on this date, 4th February 2010, the Editor was informed that the following were arrested on 3rd February 2010:

• Tony Blair, former British Prime Minister.

• Dr Ben Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board

• Please note that the foregoing statement IS ACCURATE. CONSTRUE what has just been stated: The Editor was informed by transatlantic telephone at the time and date stated here, of the above arrests. This, we repeat, is 100% ACCURATE as presented to you. That’s what we’ve been told.

• Note: The possible ‘cover’ for the arrest of Blair may have been the fact that when the respected former British Labour Government Cabinet Minister, Clair Short, testified on 2nd February 2010 at the Chilcot Inquiry into whether Britain’s participation in the Iraq War was illegal, she denounced Blair as a liar, deceiver and con artist. Specifically, Ms. Short stated that Blair lied to his Cabinet and misled Britain’s Parliament over the Iraq War, accusing Blair of personally ‘conning’ her and of ‘deceiving the Cabinet, Parliament and the public’. Ms. Clare Short said that when she tried to question the legal case for war in Cabinet, she was jeered at, and Blair told her to ‘be quiet’. [Sources: Daily Telegraph, 3rd February 2010, page 12; The Times, 3rd February 2010, page 14].

• At 1.15 am UK time on this date, 4th February 2010, the Editor was informed that two top MI-6 personnel travelled to the United States to supervise matters currently in hand.

• The Editor was also informed of travel arrangements to the United States concerning a top personage but chooses to withhold this information at this time.

THE NOOSE HAS TIGHTENED AND THE TRAPDOOR IS POISED TO FALL
Of course what has happened is that due to their criminal greed in general, and as a consequence of this colossal theft in particular, involving the electronic ‘forging’ of Mr Cottrell’s signature, it has been possible to turn the tables on these careless and overconfident gangsters – with the noose being tightened progressively round their necks by stages.

• They are now metaphorically standing on the platform, with the executioner poised beneath them ready to shift the lever to open the trapdoor into which they will be dropped.

You may well ask yet again why have these people not been arrested in front of the TV cameras – as so many furious observers, including ourselves, have understandably been demanding. Among reasons for this not happening, we suppose, are included feeble fears for the future of the dollar system and the Republic; but the most likely generic reason for this not happening to date has been an unwarranted expectation by almost all elements within the US structures involved in the criminality and in covering it up, that they would all get away with everything in the end, given that their criminalist foreign associates are such big names.

• WE DON’T THINK SO…

CRIMINAL OPS. WITHIN A ‘RULE OF LAW’ FRAMEWORK
The real opposition has not crumbled – highlighting the central problem that these organised gangsters face, which can be summarised as follows:

• On the one hand, they have ‘successfully’ and comprehensively subverted the Rule of Law, the financial system, the domestic and world economies, the US intelligence community, many other intelligence communities and governments, the US military, elements of the US judiciary and law enforcement, and Wall Street. You would have thought that this would be more than enough to guarantee these gangsters open-ended ‘success’ for ever more, wouldn’t you.

• Yet on the other hand, since EVERYTHING they do is illegal, criminal or borderline ditto, and since they lie through their teeth and have to continue lying through their teeth because each successive lie has to be propped up with further lies, they recognise that they must operate within what remains of the Rule of Law and the judicial system that they despise. Otherwise they wouldn’t get their lies so entangled, and they wouldn’t go to such lengths (such as citing ‘national security’ as cover for criminal activity) to cover up their endless criminal behaviour.

As was inevitable given their overconfidence and the web of conflicting lies with which they are strangling themselves, the residual Rule of Law and the judicial system have caught up with these inveterate gangsters. We know for a fact that ‘they’ never expected that the lawyers acting for the CMKM/CMKX Plaintiffs [see Archive reports dated 9th January and 29th January] would actually FILE their devastating Complaint requesting monetary payment of $3.87 trillion given the floatation of an estimated 2.0 to 2.25 trillion phantom CMKM/CMKX shares from within the SEC itself.

However the Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, Mary L. Schapiro, has been served with the Summons, and the other defendants have been or are about to be served their Summonses, as well.

SHOCKS PENDING FOR PEOPLE WHO FANCY THEY HAVE ‘STELLAR REPUTATIONS’
Given updated indications of failure hitherto to perform across the board financially, subpoenas are pending against individuals whose careers and ‘stellar reputations’, whether hospitalised or not, will be abruptly terminated as a consequence.

• Ignoring Summonses is not an option. Such behaviour would ensure summary judgment against the defendants, probably associated with jail sentences for contempt of court.

LIES AND DIVERSIONARY PLOYS OVER WORLD COURT JURISDICTION
Meanwhile a routine old lie that is being revived in order to obfuscate the desperate plight facing the gangsters, is that the World Court has no jurisdiction in the United States. This obfuscation has been trotted out for years, and is being irresponsibly promulgated by some disruptive US websites. Like parallel spurious ‘Black’ propaganda with similar cover-up intent, this reiterated assertion is both irrelevant and malicious. Readers are misled by such diversions, perpetrated by operatives who are perfectly well aware of the true situation, and are deliberately instructed to cover it up. In what follows, we have no choice but to mingle geopolitical analysis based on our deep experience, with the necessary financial and gold information. You can extract the financial and gold information from the analysis, and it will stand unaffected as precisely described here.

THE THEFT OF THE QUEEN’S GOLD AND THE LIEN ON THE U.S. TREASURY
Underlying facts associated with the World Court lien against the US Treasury reported by this service include the following, and concern the theft of The Queen’s gold on 29th-30th March 2007. Contrary to what we were led to believe later in 2007, this matter has NOT been rectified, according to the most recent information obtained from US inside (official) sources and passed to this Editor at about 7:00pm UK time on 3rd February.

• Therefore, The Queen’s gold has remained STOLEN now for the best part of TWO years.
[Note: We are not able to discuss this matter beyond what is published here].

This scandalous state of affairs has been deliberately exploited by the large pan-German Nazi Fifth Column in the United States as a wedge to destroy the British Monarchy and to create tension and confusion between the two wings of the ‘Main Enemy’ (as the continuing Nazis and their covert Soviet associates see us), Britain and the United States. The ultimate objective is to destroy what remains of the Anglo-US Alliance – to drive a wedge between the two countries, and this operation which is far advanced. It is now being comprehensively THWARTED.

(1): On 20th-30th March 2007, a highest-level US criminal intelligence operation serving the interests of the pan-German Fifth Column was mounted to steal gold belonging to the British Monarchical Power. As indicated, it is a primary objective of the ongoing pan-German Nazi ‘Black’ counterintelligence apparatus, Deutsche Verteidigungs Dienst (DVD), the heirs of the Abwehr – before whom Chancellor Angela Merkel, genuflects – to destroy the British Monarchy.

The British Monarchy provides national stability and stands in the way of the completion of the pan-German long-range strategy for hegemony in Europe and beyond. Even more to the point here, the British Monarchical Power is the ONLY power standing for the true Rule of Law – the ONLY power standing firm in the face of the ‘Black’ forces bent on thrusting the world into irretrievable chaos, not least by continuing ad infinitum their Fraudulent Finance operations.

• That’s why the Monarchy is targeted as described

(2): On Friday 29th March 2007, British banking system went ‘dead’ – such that the Editor of this service, who attempted a small VISA Credit card transaction in Victoria Street, London SW1, that afternoon, was unable to complete the transaction. When the Editor made some enquiries, it later transpired that Credit Card transactions had failed across the board in the United Kingdom. Further enquiries eventually yielded the following astonishing state of affairs:

(3): The banking ‘blackout’ extending into Saturday 30th March 2007 (separately confirmed to us, incidentally, by top Westminster political sources on 13th December 2008, and on subsequent occasions, the most recent of which, as noted, was 3rd February 2010), was used as ‘Blackout’ cover for the stealing of gold belonging to the British Monarchical Power.

This theft forms part of the basis for the action taken, in collaboration with Chinese parties, by agents for the British Monarchical Power against the US Treasury and the Federal Reserve, resulting in the lien for $47 trillion on the US Treasury referenced in some of our earlier reports. This lien is in force and has not yet been discharged (although this may be ‘in process’).

• As a consequence, the United States is temporarily not sovereign, a state of affairs that will unfortunately remain the case until this matter is resolved.

(4): By early May 2007, research conducted by this service had confirmed that a massive theft of gold directed from the highest levels of the criminal US Government structures (in conformity with the long-range pan-German strategy to destroy the British Monarchical Power) had indeed been secretly perpetrated on 29th-30th March 2007. On 15th May 2007, the Editor happened to mention to a US party that US criminalists had stolen The Queen’s gold. The person retorted that ‘I find that hard to believe’ and the Editor replied: ‘In that case, as you don’t believe what I say, don’t ever contact me again’. This conversation was recorded by the eavesdroppers, disrupting certain operations being conducted against the Editor of this service.

(5): At 1:45pm UK time on Tuesday 2nd February 2010, the Editor was engaged in a transatlantic telephone conversation with Michael C. Cottrell B.A., M.S., in which the Editor had raised the issue of ongoing attempts by controlled websites to obfuscate the jurisdiction of the World Court in the United States (an old diversionary ‘line’). As this matter was being reviewed, Mr Cottrell said:

‘They stole The Queen’s gold in London, not in the United States. Hence she can prosecute them under the British anti-terrorism legislation’.

(6): As soon as Mr Cottrell had said ‘They stole The Queen’s gold’, the transatlantic phone call was heavily jammed electronically by eavesdroppers. [See our observations about the stupidity of the eavesdroppers, below]. Every time they do this, they simply confirm the accuracy of what is being discussed. It was just possible for us to conclude the conversation above the din, and the Editor therefore managed to add that, thanks to this further confirmation (now afforded by the electronic jamming), the matter of the stealing of the gold in 2007 would be revisited by this column.

• The theft of The Queen’s gold was discussed internally in the United States on 3rd February 2010, and as indicated above, the Editor was susbequently informed that this matter remained outstanding and had NOT been resolved.

(7): Two of the actual criminal events which have given rise to this crisis and to the lien, took place in Europe: in London (the stealing of The Queen’s gold) and also in The Netherlands (the operation against ABN Amro). Thus BOTH criminal events afford the British Monarchical Power jurisdiction under British and European anti-terrorism legislation, which embraces ALL financial criminality – providing a further reason why our description of the US high-level operatives and gangsters as Financial Terrorists, is accurate. The relevant British and European anti-terrorism legislation is believed to have been duly invoked.

(8): Proceeds from the trading of The Queen’s gold have been systematically channelled, we now understand, through Deutsche AG (formerly Barrington Investment Group, Switzerland), which of course means that Messrs Gorbachev, Kohl, Bush Sr, Ackermann, et al, HAVE PROFITED FROM THE STEALING OF THE QUEEN’S GOLD. Hence, they are themselves criminal Financial Terrorists.

U.S. TREASURY IS THE DEFENDANT IN THE WORLD COURT ACTION
Since the United States is the defendant in this (and the Chinese) World Court case(s), World Court jurisdiction most definitely applies in the United States, contrary to the mischievous disinformation being recycled for obfuscatory purposes, by US agents of influence who have been so instructed. The World Court is, moreover, an offshoot of the United Nations, arising from the Bretton Woods Agreements. The World Court also has an American Justice; and enforcement, auditing and other relevant personnel associated with this World Court matter were indeed sworn in at the US Justice Department at the beginning of December 2009, as we reported – given that it is necessary under international law for foreign personnel engaged in enforcement of World Court orders to be sworn-in on the soil of the defendant country.

ELECTRONIC JAMMING OF GOLD THEFT PHONE CONVERSATION
It was clear from the electronic jamming which interfered with the foregoing transatlantic telephone conversation that US electronic intelligence services wished this matter to be suppressed. In view of what is transpiring in ‘real time’ as this report is being finalised, their anxiety is understandable. But precisely because of that intervention, we are hereby taking this opportunity to lay out the facts more fully than before, as known to us – bearing in mind that this service exposed the gold theft in 2007, within a matter of weeks after that assault by Germany’s agents within the US structures against the British Monarchical Power.

You may now perhaps understand why, outraged at this development, we then called for the US Ambassador to be recalled from London, for him to be ordered to procure the rectification of this assault within a specified period, and in the absence of any progress within two months, for the US Embassy to be closed and US bases operating on British territory to be evacuated.

Of course, given innumerable other considerations, we did not expect any of this to happen: but strong language needed to be used in order to convey, to those with ears to hear, the extreme gravity of the situation, and to advertise the theft which no-one else (of course) was reporting.

GERMANY IS BEING PROGRESSIVELY EXPOSED AS THE ENEMY
Because Britain is enmeshed in the sterile European Union Collective – the long-range pan-German hegemony collectivisation operation mapped out under Hitler and delineated in the compendium Europäische Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft, published in Berlin in 1942, which we have extensively exposed elsewhere [in particular in The New Underworld Order], it is still taboo to describe Germany as THE ENEMY.

• But there is no doubt whatsoever that this is an accurate statement.

In the European sphere, France covers for Germany under the terms of the Treaty of the Elysée (January 1963), which is of indefinite duration and provides for both sides to reach ‘an analogous position’ in respect of all external matters of common interest.

The indefinite treaty was signed by the duplicitous General Charles de Gaulle, no friend of Britain despite his exile in London during the war, and Dr Konrad Adenauer, the former Hitler-era mayor of Cologne, and friend of Hitler’s favourite German bankers, Drs. Abs and Pferdmenges. New plans to integrate dimensions of the French with the British military structures, reportedly being discussed within the British official circles, appear to overlook these fundamental considerations – given that British policy remains dominated by brainwashed, second-rate people who do not understand, are ignorant of, or refuse to accept, the reality that long-range pan-German DVD strategy is viscerally opposed to the continued existence of Britain as an independent country – just as it is focused on building ‘the Thousand-Year Reich on the ruins of the United States’.

NON MERCI! IL FAUT TOUT D’ABORD QUE VOUS VOUS DEBARRASSEZ DES ALLEMANDS
The current wheeze in London is that a new revival of the Edwardian ‘entente cordiale’ would be appropriate, given Britain’s weakened position following the corruption of elements of the City of London by the DVD-serving Bush-worshipping George Bush Center for Intelligence, Langley, VA.

Such a démarche should not even be contemplated unless and until France denounces and exits from the 1963 Treaty of the Elysée with Germany. Otherwise further entanglement with France will simply mask further lethal entanglement with the long-range subversion strategy implemented by the secret pan-Germans – which the prevailing financial showdown is, at least, destabilising.

The offensive against Britain and the British Monarchy is being directed from three centres: Germany (Dachau) itself; the Germanophile component of the subversive Bush-corrupted US Intelligence Power; and Germany’s wartime ally, Japan, also known to be targeting British power, which is extensively centred within the British Monarchical Power.

A constant campaign of vituperative venom, very typical of familiar old Nazi hate propaganda, is disseminated via several notorious US websites – with no tangible impact other than to confuse Americans who do not possess access to the underlying accurate information, or who want their prejudices reinforced. These cynical CIA/DVD Psy-Ops activities are leading nowhere, given the prevailing ‘evolution of events’ (to cite Lenin); but are cruelly misleading Americans who deserve better than to be constantly lied to by operatives working for the criminalised Intelligence Power which is itself an instrument of foreign interests.

SCANDAL OF WALL-TO-WALL U.S. OFFICIAL PSY-OPS AGAINST AMERICANS
The barrage of disinformation directed at well-meaning Americans by evil elements within the US official structures is, of course, an ongoing scandal of immense proportions which no-one in the United States seems to be interested in addressing. People with influence and contacts that we know well, seem to accept this state of affairs as perfectly normal. It is NOT in any way normal for a Government to deploy crude Psy-Ops specialists and agents of influence whose job is to spew out disinformation and lies 24/7 for the specific purpose of deceiving and misleading its own people.

This abomination has matured from the poisonous Operation Mockingbird, the CIA’s Psy-Ops offensive against, and to subvert, the US media implemented during the Cold War period – with the covert aim of preventing the press from investigating embarrassing and criminal operations by the Intelligence Power itself as it consolidated its control over the US Federal Government structures behind the Cold War smokescreen – becoming far more of a menace than the GRU-KGB ever was.

This monstrous, self-financing, criminalised US ‘State within the State’ – which will tolerate no interference with its criminal operations, is responsible for perpetrating the biggest portfolio of criminal finance scams in history, and has absolutely no intention of reforming itself – is thought to have perpetrated three or more hidden giga-scams that are comparable in size to the incredible CMKM/CMKX phantom shares fraud that we have exposed on this website. We are aware of two comparable scams in the United States, and another in Canada (which has been comprehensively corrupted by the Bush Crime Syndicate operations there, FBI Division Five which sits inside the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the compromised Canadian intelligence community, and a number of well-known Canadian banks). The US Intelligence Power recognises no limitations to its arrogant abuse of the power that it has usurped from the American people and that it deploys to coerce and subjugate the Executive Branch, in particular.

C.I.A. SCAMS INSIDE GOVERNMENT AS WELL AS THE PRIVATE SECTOR
Enron was NOTHING compared to what is emerging as this monstrosity’s financial and related crimes – dancing to the tune of the Bush and Clinton DVD Crime sub-Syndicates of the George Bush Center for Intelligence, Langley (which in turn serves even darker interests identified at the top of this report) – are progressively being exposed.

For the US Intelligence Power has penetrated and subverted not just the Financial Sector, both at home and internationally – exporting its corruption abroad in order to escape the US monopolies and securities legislation, and maximising the potential for perpetrating ever more open-ended fraudulent finance operations at home under cover of the National Security Act of 1947 et seq. (a crooks’ charter) – but has, in parallel, exploited its entrée inside official structures, such as the SEC, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the CIA itself and the Pentagon (the Halliburton scamming operations) to perpetrate unspeakable frauds against targeted constituencies from inside the Government itself. After all, since the White House has for years been doing not a lot else but engage in open-ended corrupt financial operations, what’s the problem?

This abominable US Intelligence Power monstrosity needs to be decapitated, decimated, trampled under foot, and buried in concrete. Furthermore, when that imperative reform finally takes place, as it surely will – given the extreme shocks in store – not a single member of its corrupted staff should be ever eligible for re-employment in a new, slimmed-down US intelligence sector subject to proper checks and balances with very sharp teeth.

If you say this can’t happen, you have already fallen victim to a central ingredient of the cynical CIA Psy-Ops offensive that’s being waged at maximum intensity against the American people – namely, a defeatist mentality. They want you to think like that – because defeatism protects their continued illegitimate hegemony. But everything’s collapsing onto their heads now, we think.

FACT: These people CAN be defeated. Look what immense progress has been made since it ceased to be the case that they always got their own way. Further progress is being made every day, and the pace at which these people are being destabilised is rapidly accelerating. Remember: They never thought there could ever be any real opposition, so they weren’t prepared for it when it materialised: and they have been scared and on the defensive ever since.

The fact is, they don’t have the initiative, although they may kid themselves that they do: all of us who are standing up to these vermin, have the initiative. These CIA marionettes are spinning like tops. Many may wind up spinning in their graves or dangling from George H. W. Bush’s lamp posts. And an awful lot of people are likely to wind up in jail.

‘SORCHA FAAL’ WARMONGERING’ AGITPROP OPERATION
RUN BY AN OFFICE OF NAVAL INTELLIGENCE AGENT FROM VIENNA, VA
One egregious example of the contemporary manifestation of Operation Mockingbird, which we have exposed several times already in this column, is the fake so-called ‘Sorcha Faal’ operation.

These reports typically begin with the weasel phrase ‘Rumours circulating in the Kremlin today’ or else ‘Reports circulating in the Kremlin today’, for the purpose of conning the gullible reader into believing that he or she is reading inside information from Soviet Military Intelligence (GRU) or the successors to the KGB (FSB). As the Editor of Soviet Analyst, the Editor of this service is naturally aware of the fact that, as we have said before, the Kremlin doesn’t ‘DO’ rumours. So it is incredible that such a naïve and uneducated ploy has any traction at all.

As we have stated on several occasions in the past, the ‘Sorcha Faal’ warmongering drivel – much of which agitates for a world war as soon as possible, it seems – is disseminated by an Office of Naval Intelligence operative named J. Forrest Sharpe, working out of Vienna, VA.

The Office of Naval Intelligence is one of the snakepits within the US Intelligence Power that has been most viciously scrabbling, for years, to control the money. Its warmongering agitation and propaganda is associated with the ‘War Party’ who imagine that the financial crisis can be buried beneath the rubble of a World War.

This is an extremely malicious disinformation operation serving the interests of a particularly nasty component of the US Intelligence Power: ONI has a reputation of being much the most ruthless and aggressively dangerous of the various CIA ‘subsidiary’ and competing entities which are often at loggerheads with each other.

On 2nd February 2010, the Editor of this service emailed David M. Dastych, a Polish journalist and ‘former’ intelligence operative based in Warsaw, to inform him of the above facts, given allusions to Sorcha Faal disinformation in one of his reports (although Mr Dastych was not in fact buying the line). At 17:06 UK time (same day), the Editor received this response from Mr Dastych:

Dear Mr Story

I’ve checked about J. Forrest Sharpe and his publications. You’re perfectly right, this ONI officer pretends to be “SORCHA FAAL” and his publications pretend to be from a “rumour mill” of the Kremlin and the Russian Intelligence [services] (GRU, FSB).

My respect.

David Dastych.

WHY THE EAVESDROPPERS ROUTINELY SHOOT THEMSELVES IN THEIR CLUB FEET
The incident at 1:45pm UK time on 2nd February, itemised above, when the mention of the stealing of The Queen’s gold in a transatlantic telephone call was immediately followed by loud electronic jamming (which however was not replicated when the Editor called back a few minutes later), is simply the latest in a long line of such interferences with our communications which have confirmed or reconfirmed elements of research on which we were working.

Of these incidents, the previously most important occasion was a conversation in 2006 between the Editor in London, Mr Wanta in Wisconsin and ‘Mr Nasty’ (Thomas Henry) in Nebraska, in which the Editor mentioned in a few words his analysis of pan-German long-range subversion strategy and its implementation against the ‘Main Enemy’ (Britain and the United States) by the Nazi-DVD.

This ‘unexpected’ observation by the Editor – based, by the way, on documentary evidence, as well as on ongoing research – was immediately greeted not by one, but by no less than THREE gasps – none of which were emitted by parties to the conversation. Bearing in mind that Wanta answers the phone with ‘Guten Tag’, this was ‘quite interesting’.

All our phone calls (domestic as well as international) are listened to, and one can hear the various despicable eavesdroppers clicking in one after the other. These people may not understand that this behaviour is not merely tacky and sordid: it also enables us to inform them what we want them to know. It’s a two-way street. They probably never thought of that.

THE HIDEOUS FINANCIAL AND ECONOMIC ‘SHOCKS’ IN STORE
Finally, as we recently reported, the Barack Obama Administration will have the distinction of having presided over the accumulation of $4.5 trillion of Treasury ‘background’ debt – all of it wholly unnecessary – in the space of just two years. But it took from 1913 to 1994 for the US Treasury to incur Gross Federal Debt (as reported) of $4,643,307 million – and until 2005, if the Office of Management and Budget’s ‘smoke and mirrors’ device, mandated by Statute, whereby the surpluses in the so-called Trust Funds are ‘invested in’ the Federal Funds, is used as the measure.

Now as we have repeatedly stated, incurring this vast accumulation of new US ‘Trashets’ debt is wholly unnecessary, and therefore represents a further form of Financial Terrorism against the American people. Because if the Group of Seven-mandated Dollar Refunding Programme, requiring a regular calendar of fully taxable, transparent, on-the-books trades to take place on a continuing basis, had been implemented, the US Treasury Department would long since have been at the receiving end of a cascade of windfall tax receipts at 35% per trade – and wouldn’t have needed to have incurred much, or any, of this extra garbage debt at all.

Of course, implementation of this scheme would have, and will, knock out clandestine, off-balance sheet, tax-evasive derivatives trading, with the proceeds stashed in offshore bank accounts. But the proceeds from these discredited money laundering operations are basically stuck offshore anyway, and cannot be surfaced onto the balance sheet under Basel II and Basel III, except through crooked banks – making a laughable mockery of the observable persistent intent among bankers generally to try to rehabilitate fully the discredited derivatives mayhem.

THE LATEST AVAILABLE DERIVATIVES NOTIONAL VALUE DATA
To some extent, according to Bank for International Settlements data, the derivatives sector was somewhat restored in the first half of 2009 – given that, after peaking at $683,725 billion in June 2008, the notional derivatives contracts amount outstanding had ‘recovered’ to $604,622 billion by the end of June 2009 (taking account of double-counting) compared with the reported aggregate of $547,371 billion to which this notional figure had slumped by the end of December 2008.

That collapse had represented a notional value wipeout of no less than $136.4 trillion in the space of six months (actually, from mid-September to December 2008). In the first half of 2009, the notional value of derivatives contracts outstanding was clawed back up by $57.3 trillion, a 42% ‘recovery’ – indicating loud and clear that no lessons whatsoever had been learned from what happened, and that the financial community wasn’t inclined, even in the face of the massive slap in the face that it received from mid-September 2008 onwards, to go back to school.

CONGRESS SLAPPED IN THE FACE AS WELL: BY NEIL BAROFSKY
This is not only the view of our soundest advisers, but it is echoed by the only figure other than Paul Volcker within the Obama Firmament who has been talking any sense at all – namely, Mr Neil Barofsky, the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, whom the Obama Administration are obtusely ignoring.

As required by law, Mr Barofsky delivered a 224-page quarterly report to Congress on 30th January 2010, in which he yet again complained that Congress had been fiddling while Washington, DC, burned. US policymakers, he reiterated, had taken NO STEPS SO FAR to address the fundamental problem that triggered the financial crisis.

• Mr Barofsky did, however, reveal the small matter of 40-odd investigations into misappropriation of the $700 billion of TARP money (which was exactly what we had predicted in late 2008 when the criminal financier Paulson was orchestrating that operation). The $700 billion was leveraged to at least $23 trillion – which, by the way, belongs exclusively to the American people, as it’s ALL been stolen. ‘The money you make exploiting my money is my money’.

Specifically, Barofsky berated Congress, saying that ‘it is hard to see how any of the fundamental problems in the system have been addressed to date’. Echoing views expressed to us repeatedly by the securities expert, Michael C. Cottrell, Mr Barofsky elaborated that the bailout ‘will have been for naught if we do nothing to correct the fundamental problems in our financial system and [we will] end up in a similar or even greater crisis in two, or five, or ten years’ time’.

FOR ‘FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEMS’ READ: RAMPANT CRIMINALITY
However the ‘fundamental problems’ embrace rampant criminality inside the highest ranks of the US Federal Government, starting at the White House, the Treasury, the Federal Reserve and, of course, the criminalised Intelligence Power, which controls all three. The only progress that has been made in this connection has resulted from the determined opposition that the serpents have encountered not from within the Government’s own structures – but from beyond.

Like everyone else except this service, Mr Barofsky is unwilling to use straightforward words and phrases like ‘fraud’, scam’, ‘corruption’, ‘criminal finance’ – for fear of offending, in this context, US legislators who are themselves involved in clandestine money-laundering, tax evasion, Fraudulent Finance, and other manifestations of Financial Terrorism. We understand that when Paul Volcker testified before Congress on 3rd February 2010, it was possible to tell, from the questioning, which legislators had been bribed by Bernanke, Panetta, Geithner, or all of the above.

• And yes, as he can’t bring himself to use the appropriate vocabulary, Mr Barofsky naturally ALSO avoids mentioning Financial and Economic Terrorism altogether.

BANKERS AT DAVOS REPORTED TO HAVE BEEN AT LOGGERHEADS
The gravely damaged financial system, rotten to the core, and riddled with cancerworm, cannot be ‘repaired’ until the contemporary preference for Fraudulent Finance is cauterised first. Judging by reports of stand-up rows behind the scenes at bankers’ meetings in Davos, the self-destructing, complacent Wall Street, London, Paris, Zurich and Frankfurt élites, are losing their cool – as they contemplate the wreckage brought about by their own unfettered criminality and greed.

Yet by all accounts, their attitude is that any reforms that belatedly emerge from the US legislative process, and from the confused goings-on in London, they will be able to circumvent.

If that’s their attitude, Neil Barofsky’s two-year timeframe is much too optimistic. When inflation primed by this unprecedented outbreak of monetary waywardness and permissiveness takes off, the nitro-glycerine will be ignited – and the last chance to prevent a global calamity will have been squandered by these greedy money-lending opportunists, who have so far escaped scot-free from the consequences of their financial criminality (give or take their bonuses).

Two generations ago, these people would have been shot at dawn for speculation in time of war. They may fear that a similar fate awaits them ‘down the pike’ – so they may prefer to grab what they can now, before the destruction for which they and their criminalist associates in high places are responsible, drags them down to economic hell along with everyone else.

U.S. CROOKS REPORTED TO BE FLEEING THE COUNTRY
It is reported to us (as has been the case at tense stages of this crisis in the past) that criminal financiers are fleeing the United States – taking some of their loot with them. This time round, however, the reports have an urgency about them that we hadn’t noted on earlier occasions.

Fleeing abroad won’t do them much good, for two reasons. First, if they touch the funds, they will immediately be fingered. Secondly, they are just as likely, if not more so, to be picked up in Europe, than in the United States.

INTERPOL are on worldwide alert for these criminals, and the British and European anti-terrorism legislation has very nasty, sharp teeth. So come on over, folks: our cops will happily pick you up.

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.

• 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 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.

SENIOR AND JEB COMMANDED TO SIGN OFF IN WHITE HOUSE

story2

IT TOOK THEM TEN DAYS TO FIX UP A PHOTO-OP TO ‘DISCREDIT’ OUR REPORT

Sunday 31 January 2010 13:36

• ‘BUSH SENIOR WAS COMMANDED TO COME IN TO THE WHITE HOUSE TO SIGN OFF’

• JEB COMPELLED TO SIGN OFF TOO AS HE WAS INVOLVED IN DELMARVA THEFT

• PHOTO-OP. WAS STAGED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS SHOWDOWN

• MUST HAVE BEEN A NIGHTMARE SETTING UP THE SUDDEN SATURDAY MEETING

• WHAT WE STATED AS FACT IN THE 20TH JANUARY REPORT

• ‘CONGENIAL MEETING IN THE OVAL OFFICE’

• PROBLEMS COORDINATING THE WHITE HOUSE ‘LINE’ FOR PUBLIC CONSUMPTION

• MEANWHILE, AS THE GLOBALIST BRAINWASHING CONTINUES AT DAVOS…

• THE LEAD PANNELIST AT DAVOS? WHY, IT’S THE DVD’S VERY OWN JOSEF ACKERMANN

• THE NEW UNDERWORLD ORDER IN OPERATION IN HAITI

• OVER 200,000 DEAD. ‘THE CITY SMELLS LIKE A CHARNEL HOUSE’.

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.

• 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.

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

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 from this website.

• THIS POSTING will alternate with the report dated 29th January 2010:
CMKM/CMKX CASE DOCUMENTS: Case Number CV10-00031 JVS (MLGx):
SERVICE OF CMKM.CMKX $3.87 TRILLION SUIT VS. S.E.C.
Biggest lawsuit in world legal history: The phantom share giga-scandal.

Note: If the current report [31st January] is displayed, access the Archive for immediate display of our CMKM/CMKX report dated 29th January. All preceding reports, at least back to 28th December, are also relevant to the current state of heightened tension brought about by these gangsters.

• UPDATE, 1st February 2010, 00.25 AM UK: There is an unconfirmed report that a top Federal Reserve official, referred to as ‘the man behind the curtain’, has been arrested in London.

• NEW REPORT STARTS HERE:

‘BUSH SENIOR WAS COMMANDED TO COME IN TO THE WHITE HOUSE TO SIGN OFF’
According to latest special intelligence which followed the earlier publication of this report on Sunday 31st January, Bush Senior was commanded to come into the White House on Saturday,
and to sign off on the accounts. They took the opportunity for a photo-op. as described below, but we now understand that the MAIN purpose was that Sr. and Jeb were ordered to sign off.

Furthermore, the reason Jeb Bush suddenly surfaced was that Jeb Bush was involved when the Delmarva funds were stolen in August 2002. It will be recalled that Jeb was on record earlier as protecting his own interests under the smokescreen of the lie that his father was too gaga to know what he was doing, which has always been baloney. So Jeb has been caught too.

Thus, what REALLY happened was that Bush Senior and Jeb were COMMANDED to appear at the White House to sign off on the accounts so that the funds could be released; and moreover, this was a command handed down from the World Court and imposed on the Bushes by Mr Obama.

It remains the case that what we reported earlier, that the Bush Crime Family was threatening Obama and his family, was accurate. And yet it is ALSO the case, that what we requested in our report dated the 26th January 2010, that Obama should stand up to these snakes, HAS ACTUALLY HAPPENED. Therefore, our ‘treatment’ of Barack Obama and his situation all along, is ENTIRELY JUSTIFIED, on the basis of the intelligence currently to hand.

• FACT: This development is directly related to the CMKM/CMKX lawsuit against S.E.C. officials, past and present, for monetary payment of $3.87 trillion, the Letter of Service for which was BCC’d to Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., as you can see from our 29th January posting [check Archive].

BEFORE we knew the above, we prepared the report that follows. We now understand that the photo-op. was a situation that arose given the prevailing situation, and that the opportunity was therefore taken to take the pictures inter alia so that our report posted ten days earlier could be ‘debunked’ retrospectively. But the real purpose of the Saturday meeting at the White House was as described above. That is the situation as of 9:30pm UK time on Sunday 31st January.

The rest of this report was posted before the above information became available. It still stands:

MUST HAVE BEEN A NIGHTMARE SETTING UP THE SUDDEN SATURDAY MEETING
The White House is ‘losing it’. It took them TEN DAYS to arrange a special photo-op. showing Godfather George Bush Sr., accompanied by Jeb Bush, at the White House, all relaxed and smiles (for the cameras), with President Barack Obama, for the purpose inter alia of trying belatedly to discredit our report that the Bush Crime Family had been threatening the Prez and his family.

The mind boggles at what must have been shouted down phone lines in order to bring this awkward pally-pally get-together to fruition.

It’s what’s known in the trade as a ‘quick shoe-shuffle’. How to deal with Story’s latest annoying revelation? It wasn’t an allegation: it was a revelation, because we were explicitly informed from sources whose integrity cannot be questioned, that what we reported was true. We had indeed already alluded to the fact that the Bush Crime Syndicate was threatening the President earlier. Naturally, if the information hadn’t been correct, we wouldn’t have risked reporting it.

• So what could they do?

WHAT WE STATED AS FACT IN THE 20TH JANUARY REPORT
On 20th January 2010, we published our report, which you can review on the Archive, entitled: ‘BUSH SENIOR HAS THREATENED OBAMA AND HIS FAMILY’.

The report contained the following information, obtained from the impeccable sources:

‘The Rule of Law has collapsed, and the current US President, we are informed, has been THREATENED WITH DEATH or with HAVING HIS CHILDREN HARMED by the ruthless Bush Crime Family now effectively controlled by that deadly female, Mrs Barbara Bush’.

• We have exclusive permission to state this as FACT, as it was confirmed to us with full US authority at about 10:05pm on Tuesday 19th January 2010’.

BUT OBAMA IS HIMSELF OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE
EVERYONE, from the President of the United States to the Bushes, Clintons, Leon Panetta, Dr Ben Bernanke, down to the lowest level of snakehood, Wanta, who interferes with and impedes or tries to modify or complicate, confuse or otherwise compromise or jeopardise the payment Settlements, is engaged in the overt OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE and can be prosecuted accordingly.

Thus, Mr Obama, in deferring to threats and interventions by George H. W. Bush Sr., IS HIMSELF ENGAGED IN OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE, as there are Supreme Court orders, World Court Orders, and goodness knows how many other judicial orders FOR THE PAYMENTS to be made. Therefore, in cow-towing to the mobsters, Mr Barack Obama is laying himself wide open to being impeached for OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, even as he tries to protect himself and his family from the Bush Crime Syndicate’s contract assassins.

• He should call their bluff. Being President of the United States is a dangerous job: the country is in thrall to the mobsters. Mr Obama has to live with this situation.

OBAMA NEED NOT BE AFRAID OF GODFATHER SCHICKELBUSCH
President Obama, why are you afraid of thuggist President George H. W. Bush, Mrs Barbara Pierce-Bush, George W. Bush, Mrs Clinton, William Rockefeller Clinton, Rahm Emanuel, Leon Panetta and their criminalist associates?

Have you not yet been informed that this Editor has, to date, received 34 threats since these investigations started in June 2002…?’.

[Actually, the list has risen to 36 as of this writing. The most recent threat was received from a Mr Rick Turner, of Shreveport, LA, ostensibly on behalf of LONDON-based Mr Roy Grantham, dated 28th January 2010 [received in the UK at 16:25], after we had ‘blown’ the relevant deception in our report dated 26th January 2010].

‘CONGENIAL MEETING IN THE OVAL OFFICE’
Mr Obama hadn’t bothered to put on a tie. It was a Saturday. Photographers were ordered to be on hand, to take congenial piccies of the Head Serpent, his serpentine son Jeb, and the occupant of the Oval Office du jour. This ‘love-in’ hadn’t been pre-announced, and there had certainly been no mention of the unusual surfacing of Jeb.

• On leaving the White House, Bush Sr. shouted, with bravado: ‘Good meeting, good meeting’.

• INSERT: Well, he couldn’t very well tell the press: ‘I’ve just had my butt kicked’.

• By contrast, we wondered at the time why Mr Jeb Bush looked so sombre on leaving the White House in a snow storm while his father was indulging in bravado. We now know that it was because Jeb had been caught out and forced to sign off [see above], according to current intelligence.

Meanwhile, whereas the San Francisco Chronicle reported that ‘it was a social call by the former President, who had family business in the DC area’ [which includes Langley and MacLean, you understand], Associated Press (the controlled US mouthpiece) had a different angle: ‘White House aides said the visit was a social call because the former President was in Washington for a dinner’.

PROBLEMS COORDINATING THE WHITE HOUSE ‘LINE’ FOR PUBLIC CONSUMPTION
Maybe that’s why it took them ten days to try to discredit our report. But then again, they can’t even coordinate the agreed-upon ‘line’ any longer: either the Godfather was in the DC area to attend to ‘family business’, or else he was in the DC area to attend a dinner.

• Family business? Well, since Bush’s and/or Barbara’s signatures are appended to financial documents which INTERPOL have established go down through eleven layers, before reaching a layer labelled ‘Classified’, sure, you could call it ‘family business’.

• The Bush Crime Family’s ‘family business’.

• Memo to the White House ‘correction’ squad:
You need to speed up your responses here! Must have been hard figuring out how to try to dispel the accurate information that Bush Sr. has been threatening Obama and his family. But full marks for adopting the Bold Bolshevik approach: a Kremlinesque photo-op. designed to convey the entirely false impression that everything’s fine and dandy.

MEANWHILE, AS THE GLOBALIST BRAINWASHING CONTINUES AT DAVOS…
Klaus Schwab, the German-Swiss Founder of the colossal industry that has become the World Economic Forum, made sure that the current front man for the long-range pan-German hegemony operation, President Nicolas Sarkozy of France, delivered the opening propaganda spiel at his latest annual revolutionary brainwashing fest.

As previously mentioned, France and Germany are joined at the hip ‘in perpetuity’ under the Treaty of the Elysee dated January 1963, which provides that each signatory to this rigid treaty, which is of indefinite duration, must coordinate all their foreign policy activities at all times, so as to reach ‘an analogous position’ in respect of all external matters that concern them.

France therefore provides permanent cover for Germany, as it secretly dances to the tune of the long-range strategic deception Nazi Continuum, heirs of the Abwehr, Deutsche Verteidigungs Dienst (DVD), Dachau. Chancellor Merkel, the former Secretary of the Agitation and Propaganda Department of the Young Communists at Karl Marx University, East Berlin, is informed of DVD’s operations only when the self-financing Nazi ‘Black’ counterintelligence agency feels like it.

Chief DVD operative in the Western Hemisphere is Godfather Bush, whose handler is/was Dr Henry ‘Heinz’ Kissinger (of whom not a lot has been heard, of late, given still unconfirmed indications from many sources that he may have (been) ‘disappeared’ (but we don’t know: yet)).

So you could also say that when paying his short Saturday visit to the White House, Bush Sr. had ‘other business’ with Obama to attend to: except that, if you’ve ever been in a press room, you’ll know that it takes some time to fix and complete a ‘photo-op.’; and since Bush and Shrublet were reportedly there for only half an hour, the overwhelming probability is that the photo-op. was all about discrediting our report of 20th January.

THE LEAD PANNELIST AT DAVOS? WHY, IT’S THE DVD’S VERY OWN JOSEF ACKERMANN
Prominent among panellists at Davos has been our non-friend Josef Ackermann, Chairman of the Management Board and the Group Executive Committee, Deutsche Bank, the DVD’s main bank, Germany, Member of the Foundation Board of the World Economic Forum and Chairman of the Governors’ Meeting for Financial Services 2010. As you will recall, Ackermann is a partner with George H. D. V. D. Busche Sr. in Deutsche AG, Switzerland, formerly Barrington Investment Group. Other partners in Deutsche AG are their mutual revolutionary global hegemony friends, former President Mikhail Gorbachev, and the ailing Dr Helmut Kohl, former Haupt Hund of Germany.

A flavour of what also goes on at Davos could be garnered from the following segment published in the Court Circular on page 32 of The Daily Telegraph for 29th January 2010:

‘BUCKINGHAM PALACE
January 29th
The Duke of York, Special Representative for International Trade, today attended meetings at the World Economic Forum at Davos, Switzerland, with The President of Mongolia, the Chairman of Unilever, the Indian Minister of Commerce and Industry, with The Crown Prince of the Kingdom of Bahrain, the Chairman of the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation, the Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Thailand and the President of the China Investment Corporation….

The Duke of York this evening attended a Dinner given by the Prime Minister of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam’.

It is encouraging to know that, in the midst of the brainwashing globalism for which this German-Swiss operation exists, our Duke is busily engaged furthering the legitimate interests of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

By making this platform available to the ‘Great and the Good’ at the highest levels, Klaus has also provided a convenient forum for facilitating ‘business bonding’ activities which, er, have nothing in common with Herr Schwab’s priorities whatsoever. GUTEN TAG!

THE NEW UNDERWORLD ORDER IN OPERATION IN HAITI
As the ‘Great and the Good’ performed in Davos and listened to wall-to-wall pontifications from self-appointed experts on globalist prescriptions for re-ordering the world to suit the urgent demands of the pan-German globalists and their ‘Useful Idiot’ foreign accomplices, what this hellish ‘New World Order’ means in practice is vividly reported to us by a rescue worker just back from Haiti.

In the following excerpt, we omit the blatant Clinton operation to replenish his trading coffers by demanding that funds for the Haitians are poured into the receptacles designated by Bush 43 and Clinton, as exposed by this service; and we also omit references to the obvious similarity between the destruction of Port-au-Prince, which is reportedly sitting on top of massive oil reserves, and the devastation inflicted on parts of New Orleans (also inhabited by Blacks) which likewise sits on top of reported oil reserves. Those connections have been, are being and will continue to be made and the perpetrators of this latest New Underworld Order aberration have been identified.

OVER 200,000 DEAD. ‘THE CITY SMELLS LIKE A CHARNEL HOUSE’.
But listen to this report from the aid worker who has had to leave Haiti.

We have edited this only lightly:

‘I just returned from Haiti with X. We flew in at 3am Sunday to the scene of such incredible destruction on one side, and enormous Ineptitude and criminal neglect on the other’.

‘Port-au-Prince is in ruins. The rest of the country is fairly intact. Our team was a rescue team and we carried special equipment that locates people buried under the rubble. There are easily 200,000 dead, the city smells like a charnal house’.

‘The bloody UN was there for 5 years doing apparently nothing but wasting US taxpayers’ money. The UN workers I ran into were either incompetent or outright anti-American. Most are French or French speakers, worthless every damn one of them’.

‘While 1,800 rescuers were ready willing and able to leave the airport and go do our jobs, the UN and USAID (another organization full of little Obamaites and Communists who openly speak against America) [impeded everything we did]’.

‘These two organizations exemplared their parochialism thus:

• USAID, when in control of all inbound flights, had food and water flights stacked up all the way to Miami, yet allowed Geraldo Rivera, Anderson Cooper and other left-wing news puppies to land.

• Pulled all the security off the rescue teams so that Bill Clinton and his wife could have the grand tour, whilst we sat unable to get to people trapped in the rubble [WHO DIED AS A CONSEQUENCE].

• Stacked enough food and water for the relief over at the side of the Airfield, and then put a guard on it while we dehydrated, and wouldn’t release a drop of it to the rescuers’.

• [Provided] No shower facilities to enable us to decontaminate after digging or moving corpses all day, except for the FEMA teams who brought their own shower and Decon equipment, as well as their air conditioned tents.

• [Provided] No latrine facilities. If you dug a hole, everyone was trying to use it.

• I watched a 25 year-old Obamaite with the USAID shrieking hysterically, berating a full-bird colonel in the Air Force, because he had countermanded HER orders, while trying to unscrew the air pattern. “You don’t know what your President wants! The military isn’t in charge here, we are!”

‘If we are a fair and even society, why is it that only white couples are adopting Haitian orphans? Where the hell is that vocal minority that is always screaming about the injustice of US society?’

‘Bad place, bad situation, but a perfect look at the New World Order in Action’.

‘It was New Orleans magnified a thousand times. Haiti doesn’t need democracy, what Haiti needs is another Papa Doc. That’s not just my opinion, that’s what virtually every Haitian we talked with said. The French run the UN, and they treat us the same as when we were a colony’.

‘At least Papa Doc ran the country’.

‘Oh, and as a last slap in the face, the last four of us had to take US AIRWAYS home from Phoenix. They slapped me with a $590 baggage charge for the four of us. The girl at the counter was almost in tears because she couldn’t give us a discount or she would lose her job’. ENDS.

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.

• 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.

STINKING C.I.A. CAULDRON EXPLODES IN THEIR FACES

chrisstory

HEIGHTENED TENSION AS THE RESISTANCE IS BATTERED

Wednesday 13 January 2010 04:30

BELTWAY STAGGERED BY EXPOSURE OF LINE-ITEM PROVISION AND THE $3.87 TRILLION CMKM/CMKX LAWSUIT AGAINST THE S.E.C. FOR ITS HUGE PHANTOM SHARE SCAM

• CHAOS WITHIN THE RANKS OF CIA DISINFORMATION OPERATIVES: Since this report was posted, the CIA lie factory’s obfuscation specialists have got themselves into an even worse mess than was evident prior to this posting. We have demonstrated what was always known, namely that these professional liars and disinformation artists are associates of the criminalised Intelligence Power. The CIA’s Public Sorcerer has failed to answer any of our probing questions, let alone reveal his/their identity(ies), thereby indicating that we must have hit more than one verruca.

And silly people are busily rewriting history, starting with the DC meeting in June 2002 which the Editor attended, where 30 portfolios of the Fed FINs were handed out, the place was pre-packed with operatives who all suddenly wanted to attend, and where Vanity Fair picked up a copy of the documents in question. On top of this, WICKED PEDIA, a controlled outlet which rewrites truth to suit the requirements of the Langley Lie Factory, has fouled a segment on this Editor, which he did not append himself, stating that what the Editor publishes is all false. That’s right: a publisher who has been in business for 40 years peddles deception. In the commercial world, which few of these nutcases inhabit, if you mess up, your business fails. Evidently some of these people have a frail grasp of reality. The good news, however is that our email traffic is laden with kind messages and good wishes, which the Editor greatly appreciates but unfortunately cannot answer individually.

• WHEN READING THIS NEW REPORT, PLEASE REFER TO THE FOLLOWING POSTINGS
ON THIS WEBSITE, all of which can be accessed immediately by pressing ARCHIVE:

• 28 December 2009:
OFFICIAL: MONEY SABOTEURS = ECONOMIC TERRORISTS

• 07 January 2010:
OPERATION STILLPOINT TO DESTROY AMERICA STOPPED

• 09 January 2010:
U.S. INTELLIGENCE POWER ‘STEALS $1.3++ TRILLION’

• 09 January 2010:
TEXT OF THE CMKM/CMKX LAWSUIT FILED AGAINST THE S.E.C.: CASE NUMBER CV10-00031-JVS (MLGx): ‘Money Demanded in Complaint: $3.87 trillion’: THIS IS THE BIGGEST FRAUDULENT FINANCE LAWSUIT IN HISTORY: MASSIVE SCAMMING PLATFORM RUN BY BUSH JR.’s S.E.C.

• 11 January 2010:
‘INTERPOL SEIZES MONEY DISTRIBUTION LAW FIRM DATA’

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.

‘If you think you’re too small to make a difference,
try sleeping in a closed room with a mosquito’. African proverb.

• FOR SEVERAL YEARS WE HAVE CARRIED THIS RUBRIC AT THE FOOT OF EACH REPORT:

• 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.

• 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:

• HOW TO READ THESE REPORTS

• THE LINE-ITEM PAYMENT AND THE $ REFUNDING

• SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS MONITORED ON 11TH AND 12TH JANUARY 2010

• WHAT THE REACTION TO OUR BULL’S-EYES HAS REVEALED

• THE LOUDER THE SCREAMS, THE DEEPER THE WOUND

• WHAT THE CIA’S PONZI SORCERER HAS BEEN SAYING

• HAS HE CONVICTED HIMSELF BY PROTESTING TOO MUCH?

• HOW THE CIA SORCERER CAN MITIGATE TROUBLING DOUBTS

• OPERATION STILLPOINT RUN BY THE SAME GANG THAT RAPED RUSSIA

• THE PUBLIC SORCERER AND HIS APPRENTICES

• IS THE PUBLIC SORCERER ENGAGED IN DECEPTION AND FRAUD?

• SOLUTIONS TO THE U.S. PONZI VICTIMS’ PROBLEM

• MAKING AN INDIVIDUAL COMPLAINT TO THE S.E.C.

• REGULARISATION OF THE PONZI VICTIMS’ STATUS

• AN INADVERTENT SMEAR, AND ANOTHER THREAT

• APPENDIX ONE:
THE FULL TEXT OF THE S.E.C. INSPECTOR GENERAL’S INTERVIEW WITH MADOFF AT THE METROPOLITAN CORRECTIONAL CENTER IN LOWER MANHATTAN ON 17TH JUNE 2009.

•APPENDIX TWO:
EXECUTIVE ORDER: 17th November 2009: ESTABLISHMENT OF THE FINANCIAL FRAUD ENFORCEMENT TASK FORCE

APPENDIX THREE:
President Obama Establishes Interagency Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force: THE US JUSTICE DEPARTMENT’S PRESS RELEASE

HOW TO READ THESE REPORTS
Some people seem to encounter continued difficulty distinguishing between the message and the messenger. That is a familiar problem. Beyond that, some people read carelessly: they appear not to read carefully constructed sentences properly.

For instance, when we state that ‘it was reported to us at 5.30 pm UK time on a stated date that X, Y, Z occurred on such and such a date’, the statement is correct: what we are saying is that the matter in question WAS REPORTED TO US.

The same applies to headline statements in parentheses. When parentheses appear at the beginning and end of a headline, it means that this information is AS REPORTED.

Another problem some people appear to have is that they are impatient for instant corroboration of statements addressing intelligence issues which are by their nature hard to quantify. Since we are having to deal with highly sensitive banking and intelligence information (which, by definition, is supposed to be confidential and can ONLY be confirmed if we find out about it, never divulged by intelligence sources), bits and pieces of such data are typically leaked or obtained in a haphazard manner – the information stream is non-linear, i.e. it is chaotic.

This means that it is always possible that information AS REPORTED TO US was incomplete or slightly off-message for some reason or other – which does NOT invalidate the prior statement that the information was reported to us, which was what we stated. If we state that a matter was reported to us, that statement is by definition accurate.

It now appears that computers and computer data, or just computer data, were seized on the orders of INTERPOL from a prominent US law firm, because as a direct consequence of that development (our earlier report on which has not elicited any corporate response, doubtless because of a fear of stirring the choppy waters up further), and because we publicised the LINE-ITEM PAYMENT due to Michael C. Cottrell, B.A., M.S., as has been mandated by the World Court, the Bank for International Settlements and the British Monarchical Power – prevailing ongoing criminal deceptions, monetary diversion operations, scams and other ongoing abominations appear to have been stopped in their tracks on Monday 11th January 2010.

Instantaneous mass distribution of the $3.87 trillion CMKM/CMKX Court Case via our website caused further consternation inside the Beltway – as it had been thought possible to bury the case quietly somehow in the California Court, by means of the usual dishonest judicial manoeuvring.

THE LINE-ITEM PAYMENT AND THE $ REFUNDING
There is something else you need to know, which should be clear by now (after all, we have been spelling this out for a very long time). It is this. The referenced LINE-ITEM payment represents the necessary payment to trigger the transparent, fully taxable on-balance sheet US Dollar Refunding Operation mandated by the cited authorities.

This is ANATHEMA to the criminalised US Intelligence Power and all its accomplices, including the nasty piece or pieces of work calling himself or themselves Casper, hereinafter the CIA’s Public Sorcerer: because it spells curtains for the corrupted US Intelligence Power’s free-wheeling scamming and Fraudulent Finance operations both domestically and therefore to a considerable extent around the world. The stolen sovereign trillions must be disgorged.

No more Dubais and grandiose desert Towers of Babel can be built with the leveraged proceeds of hypothecation scams derived originally from the principal stolen from US and foreign Ponzi victims. The criminal intent had been to create a duplicate Manhattan in a tax-free zone thousands of miles from the US mainland, from where the Fraudulent Finance could proliferate to infinity.

That scenario is sinking into the sand, like the Burj Khalifa, which has already sunk, we understand, by 2.4 inches since it was erected.

Too bad, Richard B. Cheney. Too bad, you cynical, decayed Bushcrooks. Too bad, William Jefferson Rockefeller-Clinton and your duplicitous higher-level CIA wife, Jezebel. Your wicked game is over and your dirty bluff has been called. What is scandalous is that you and your criminal associates are still at large. You should all be behind bars in the GULAG, along with all your implicated financial enterprise colleagues – given the endless crimes that you have committed against your fellow countrymen and women, and the human lives you have wrecked. You swine.

SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS MONITORED ON 11TH AND 12TH JANUARY 2010
Certain irrevocable steps were taken on Monday 11th and Tuesday 12th January which we will now report on an ‘as reported to us’ basis [SEE ABOVE]. Bear in mind that, as indicated in the foregoing segment, the new information divulged here is presented AS REPORTED TO THIS SERVICE.

Message to people who have nothing better to do than to nit-pick at these reports: Have regard to the precise structure of the following sentences, and resist the knee-jerk temptation, please, to rush around trying to disprove what we say: if we hadn’t been told what we state, we wouldn’t be HELPING YOU at continuing risk to ourselves, by publishing the information:

• At about 8:30 pm on Monday 11th January 2010 it was reported to us that a number of further brutal horizontalisations and ‘disappearances’ had occurred throughout the preceding weekend. It had also separately been reported to us earlier that evening by an intermediary with Chicago-linked connections that such liquidations had in fact been taking placed for the past three weeks or so (as essentially reported earlier by this service).

• At about 8:40 pm on Monday 11th January 2010 it was reported to us that a certain US financial party known to have been involved in certain dubious transactions involving the US Treasury seemed ‘very nervous’, in contrast to his normal behaviour. A day later, the same party was again described to us as appearing to be ‘very nervous’.

• At 4:30 pm UK time on Tuesday 12th January 2010, it was reported to us that on the preceding day ‘there was trouble in Paris, at Paribas’ (where the Bush Crime Family’s associates controlled some 3,000 accounts in the past).

• At 4:30 pm UK time on Tuesday 12th January 2010, it was reported to us that the Chinese Lien Holders and the British Monarchical Power Lien Holder foreclosed on the US Treasury, which implies also the Federal Reserve (as the two are joined at the hip through TARP and TALF). We were told that whereas the Lien was ‘attached’ on or around 6th December 2009, actual foreclosure took place on Monday 11th January.

• At about 9:15 pm UK time on Tuesday 12th January 2010, it was reported to us that the Federal Reserve ‘made a profit’ of between $45 billion and $49 billion which is being transferred to the US Treasury. The figures may be much larger. The transfer reflects the ongoing audits performed by the previously mentioned ‘men in suits’ at the Fed.

• At about 9:20 pm UK time on Tuesday 12th January 2010, it was reported to us by sources that computer media concerning the financial Settlements, containing banking codes and relevant data, were removed from the previously mentioned law firm on INTERPOL’s instructions, either at the weekend, or on Monday.

• At 10:45 pm on Tuesday 12th January 2010 it was reported to us on the basis of intelligence information sourced from Europe that certain irrevocable measures were taken in Europe at 9:00 am London time which we are not permitted to report, requiring the Settlements transfers to be completed as mandated and required, as of Friday 15th January 2010.

• At 10:50 pm on Tuesday 12th January 2010 it was reported to us that the so-called ‘Connecticut Trustee’, Sigué, was sequestered, having again been caught lying and deceiving. Other Bush Sr.-linked payee parties (Trustees) are thought also to have been sequestered but we have been unable to obtain further information.

• At 10:52 pm on Tuesday 12th January 2010 it was reported to us that the consequences of non-compliance with completion and closure of the Settlements payments by the end of this week may be dramatic. We have been advised what the consequences may be but we choose at this juncture to refrain from revealing what we have been told. It’s too sensitive.

• At 1:05 am UK time on Wednesday 13th January 2010, it was reported to us that at 6:37 pm EST, the NBC Brian Williams Show had reported an earthquake measuring 7:0 on the Richter Scale at Port-au-Prince, Haiti. This location serves as a main junction box to undersea transmission cables from the United States mainly to Latin America and African destinations, although some cables go through Port-au-Prince to Europe, we understand.

This was an operation put together under criminal President Clinton, after CIA-instigated instability had resulted in the departure of the Haitian ruler du jour, enabling ‘peacemaker’ Jimmy Carter to be parachuted in to ‘patch things up’ – under cover of which operation the transmission cables and junction box system was installed for Latin American money transfers. It has long been reported to us, and we have publicised this information in our journal The Latin American Times, that Haiti is a key staging point for drug shipments, and represents an operation ‘handled’ by Al Gore.

• Florida-based sources informed us in the early morning of Wednesday 13th January 2010 that earthquakes have not, in their long experience, previously been reported from Haiti. Furthermore, such a strong earthquake would have been felt and registered in the United States itself. The initial impression following this report was that an induced earthquake centred on Port-au-Prince might have been intended to disrupt mandated Settlements payments this week. While discussing this matter with the Florida parties, the Editor’s line was disconnected.

•On further consideration, however, US sources advised the Editor at about 1:15 am UK time on Wednesday 13th January 2010 that it was rather more likely that if this was an induced ‘earthquake incident’, its purpose would have been to PREVENT the stealing and diversion of the Settlement transfers to corrupt recipient central banks and institutions in Latin America (and Africa, such as the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe). In other words, the ‘incident’ was aimed at ensuring that the monies were not stolen and diverted while in transit through Haiti (which is what has been happening, and why this god-forsaken location was set up for the purpose).

• A US TV News programme aired on the evening of Tuesday 12th January 2010 suddenly revealed the existence of an airport having very long runways in Illinois called Mid America Airport located close to Scott Air Force Base, operative since 1997 (Clinton) which, to this day, receives precisely one flight a week – from Colombia. Maintaining this airport costs the local county $7.0 million per annum. Quite why the existence of this airport that handles just one flight a week – from drug-trafficking Colombia – was suddenly revealed at this juncture, was not yet clear to us as this report was being finalised. But we and others felt sure that the timing and substance of this exposure could not have been ‘accidental’.

WHAT THE REACTION TO OUR BULL’S-EYES HAS REVEALED
If what we publish were irrelevant, beside the point, unadulterated drivel or all of the above, responses would be non-existent. But if what we publish is to the point, cuts to the quick, and exposes lies, deception and hypocrisy – and possibly massive ongoing fraud: see below – we need not be surprised if responses are vituperative, explosive, out of control – and highly revealing.

We can dismiss the nutcase on mixed drinks and speed who invents 90% of what he vomits – and imagines, in his fever, that the Editor cites verses from Scripture from time to time because the verses contain secret codes. We imagine that, given the CIA’s years of indoctrinating people in New Age delusions, stupid inventions like that may be thought to ‘have traction’ at the lowest intellectual levels. However according to multiple responses conveyed to us, unfettered mirth commingled with contempt appears to be the flavour ju jour in the face of the relevant mental defective’s latest spate of intemperate outbursts.

THE LOUDER THE SCREAMS, THE DEEPER THE WOUND
It is manifestly the case that one can easily measure the extent to which verrucas and warts have been trodden on and flattened, by the screams of agony emitted by their owners. Take the equally intemperate and incoherent rants of the cowardly anonymous CIA deceiver and sorcerer calling himself Casper – the name of Cheney’s home town in Wyoming, and also traditionally of one of the three ‘wise men’ (Magi, sorcerers) who laid down their gifts at the feet of Jesus Christ at His birth – thereby proclaiming that divination, sorcery, magick and all Works of Darkness defer to the Lord and cannot escape His constraints and framework.

WHAT THE CIA’S PONZI SORCERER HAS BEEN SAYING
Now let’s see what this CIA-underworld sorcerer has been saying on a suitably compliant website in response to our straightforward recently published observations. Apart from his routine excoriation of this Editor without a cause, here’s what he’s been telling you:

• He’s a former securities broker-dealer.

• The securities regulations do not apply to him.

HAS HE CONVICTED HIMSELF BY PROTESTING TOO MUCH?
By making these assertions, the sorcerer has condemned himself and may also have inadvertently exposed another massive fraud linked to the George Bush Center for Intelligence (and Terrorism), Langley. Specifically:

(1): The securities regulations and the relevant legal position have been displayed and listed at the foot of these reports for several years. The relevant securities regulations based in part on the US Securities Acts of 1933 and 1934, apply to EVERYONE IN THE UNITED STATES.

See Legal Notes below.

(2): ‘The securities regulations don’t apply to me/us’. That’s what Madoff used to tell officials from the Securities and Exchange Commission when they scoured his offices for evidence of fraud: see the S.E.C.’s interview with Madoff at the Metropolitan Correctional Center conducted on 17th June 2009: Appendix One below. Madoff is currently serving 150 years at the pleasure of Uncle Sam for having operated a gigantic Ponzi operation whereby the principal investments of his victims were routinely STOLEN.

OK: WHY don’t the US securities regulations apply to Casper and the unfortunate Ponzi ‘packages’ victims/participants? Does he imagine that, for some reason, the anti-terrorism provisions of Patriot Acts I and II somehow do not apply to him?

(3): We wonder whether Casper-sorcerer’s outbreaks of uncontrolled vituperation against the Editor of this service, suggest that he may actually himself be engaged in Ponzi-style Fraudulent Finance operations and/or other variants of securities fraud?

(4): We further wonder whether his reluctance to identify himself might indeed be associated with (3) above. Otherwise, what is he hiding and hiding from?

HOW THE CIA SORCERER CAN MITIGATE TROUBLING DOUBTS
No doubt he will be able to inform everyone whether or not these questions have merit. If he has nothing to hide in this connection, he will presumably finally reveal his own identity and discard his cowardly cloak of anonymity once and for all, so that any troubling doubts on these matters, such as those identified here, can be laid to rest. Let’s see what he does (they do).

You will recall that one of this sorcerer’s favourite refrains is that Christopher Story knows nothing about ‘our business’. In the first place, the sorcerer has no way of knowing what this Editor knows, unless he has been clandestinely rifling through our files.

Secondly, as the whole world knows, we have published several detailed analyses, with charts, prepared by Michael C. Cottrell, acknowledged to be one of the United States’ most talented and proficient securities experts – studies that have been featured in International Currency Review, a financial journal that the Editor has published since 1970 and which is to be found lodged with central banks, institutions, official agencies, in libraries and generally all over the world. After 40 years of such publishing, it stands to reason that this Editor would hardly, professionally, release such material – both on this website and in the journal – if it were not of the highest intellectual and technical standard: which is the case, as our subscribers recognise.

Thirdly, it is not the case that we know ‘nothing’ about ‘his business’. On the contrary, we appear to know a little too much for the sorcerer’s comfort. Specifically:

• As we have pointed out, all these Ponzi schemes form part of the immense criminal intelligence operation to ‘take down’ the United States which we exposed in our report dated 9th January 2010, codenamed ‘OPERATION STILLPOINT’. There are NO EXCEPTIONS.

• Therefore, in contributing to any of these Ponzi schemes (however labelled, whether they are called ‘humanitarian’, to make the underlying fraud look ‘acceptable’ for basic marketing purposes, or whatever), the contributors (investors) were aiding and abetting OPERATION STILLPOINT – a criminal subversion offensive directed from WITHIN THE CRIMINALISED U.S. STRUCTURES to ‘take down’ the United States: the dialectical parallel/‘opposite’ of the ‘takedown’ of the USSR.

OPERATION STILLPOINT RUN BY THE SAME GANG THAT RAPED RUSSIA
Furthermore, THE SAME CRIMINAL CADRES WERE INVOLVED, including Mikhail Gorbachëv – a partner of George H. W. Bush Sr., Dr Joseph Ackermann (CEO of Deutsche Bank), and Helmut Kohl in Deutsche AG, Switzerland, formerly Barrington Investment Group.

• For instance, we know for a fact that the OMEGA programs were/are linked to the US CIA criminal operative and ‘former’ MK-ULTRA chieftain, Richard B. Cheney, one of the very nastiest and most cynical of all the official perpetrators of scams against the American people and the United States.

THE SORCERER AND HIS APPRENTICES
An investor should not only have regard to the Prudent Man Rule at all times, but should do his due diligence so that he is aware of the use to which the funds will be put (‘use of funds’).

FURTHER:

• An investor who, wittingly or unwittingly (because of having been deceived or bamboozled) allows his or her funds to be applied for a criminal use such as that intended under OPERATION STILLPOINT becomes, by definition, a co-conspirator in the criminal activities of the operation. Since such contributed funds were channeled inter alia into the actual revolutionary financing of terrorism (al-Qaeda), these people have all wittingly or unwittingly (overwhelmingly unwittingly) allowed their contributed funds to be used for the criminal financing of terrorism.

• On 11th January 2010, Michael C. Cottrell’s corporate telephone rang off the hook, following the posting of our report dated 10th January. Mr Cottrell had to inform a number of shocked callers (including OMEGA participants) that they themselves have been contributing to the financing of terrorism. This was never their intention but, as indicated, ignorance of the law is no excuse.

• FACT: As stated in the preceding report, the criminal mind entices its targets into a compromised position whereby the target is converted into a co-conspirator. This is STANDARD PROCEDURE.

That way, the criminal mind believes not only that it will be ‘protected’ because the entrapped participant cannot escape, but also that the fraud being perpetrated is ‘foolproof’ (until everything starts to unravel – as is happening now).

• The Casper-sorcerer’s CIA-inspired, convoluted ‘packages’ agitprop operation has served the key purpose of providing cover for the perpetrators of the underlying scams, while at the same time falsely appearing to be serving the interests of the Ponzi victims/participants by disguising from them the reality that they are de facto co-conspirators, while also seeking to ‘keep their spirits up’ by giving them false hope that eventually their payouts will occur.

• On at least one occasion, the sorcerer has suggested that the packages ‘may have been lost’. Sources repeatedly inform us that such ‘packages’ as really did exist were in fact ransacked and their contents were stolen (monetised). We have checked this assertion repeatedly with different sources, and that is what we are told every time. In which case, it would appear that the sorcerer MUST know this, which begs the further question:

• If the Casper-sorcerer knows what we ourselves know from multiple sources, WHY is this anonymous coward withholding such information from ‘his’ readers – and further, WHY has the website platform that has been used for this agitation and propaganda for a prolonged period of time not done its own due diligence to find out the answers to such questions?

Could it be that the website platform is itself involved in any fraudulent securities or other scamming operation that the unnamed Casper-sorcerer, who has stated that he is a former securities broker-dealer, may be involved in?

IS THE PUBLIC SORCERER ENGAGED IN DECEPTION AND FRAUD?
The US securities regulations exist in order to protect the rights and funds of investors. Casper-sorcerer, a former securities broker-dealer by his very own admission, says that the securities regulations do not apply to him and therefore to the Ponzi victims (‘package’ victims) whom he purports to be assisting.

In making these claims, Casper-sorcerer appears already to be engaged in deception and fraud, because the regulations DO APPLY to him and to the participants; and by systematically informing them that the reverse is the case, he is deceiving and lying to them – for which crime alone (the deliberate dissemination of false investment information) he should be investigated, arrested and prosecuted: see the CHANGE OF POLICY at the US Department of Justice, applicable to all officials INCLUDING INTELLIGENCE SECTOR OPERATIVES that we reported on 28th December 2009 which reflected inter alia the Executive Order promulgated by President Obama on 17th November 2009, shown below as Appendix Two; please see also the accompanying US Department of Justice Press Release: Appendix Three.

So, is Casper-sorcerer by any chance using his blatherings on the cooperative New Age website as a front to cover up massive ongoing financial fraud, and has he just exposed himself by yielding to the temptation to libel, insult and excoriate the Editor of this service without a cause, when the much more sensible course that he should have adopted would have been to shut up?

Who is this apparent ‘singular’ criminal, Neil Bush?

SOLUTIONS TO THE U.S. PONZI VICTIMS’ PROBLEM
In order to free themselves from the danger of prospectively being treated as co-conspirators (which on the one hand seems less likely now that the worst US criminal finance cadres are being exposed and on the run, but seems at the same time paradoxically MORE likely given the CHANGE OF POLICY at the Department of Justice), US Ponzi victims who have not done so or who are not covered by prior Court decisions may need to take a leaf out of the CMKM/CMKX book and to SUE the perpetrators of the Ponzi scams in question.

The moment victims do this, they position themselves quite clearly, in the eyes of the law, as victims and not perpetrators. However, judging by the reaction of some scamming victims who spoke to Mr Cottrell on 11th 2009 January following our last report, not all (or perhaps relatively few) have understood or realise the implications of the fix they could be in if they are not protected by Court-recognised victim standing. Because in that case, there is always a latent danger that they could ultimately be classed as perpetrators.

The Farm Program victims obtained Court relief, but their payout was then stolen again, so they were fleeced twice. The other Ponzi victims have likewise been fleeced twice, in that the content of their packages was, we are informed, monetised a long time ago.

MAKING AN INDIVIDUAL COMPLAINT TO THE S.E.C.
Individual victims can regularise their status as victims by making a complaint to the Securities and Exchange Commission, revealing that they made a payment or payments to a given party that sold them the so-called investment program (‘humanitarian’, ‘Freedom’, OMEGA (CIA), or whatever), and – disregarding the ILLEGAL confidentiality document that they were made to sign (which may have kept them from reporting the theft to date) – revealing full details of the payment and the official or private sector fraudsters concerned, and which entities, whether European, US Treasury, US State Department, Federal Reserve, JP Morgan Chase, or whatever, signed the contracts, whether signed in a ‘tax-free zone’ or not, and pointing out that their money has been stolen.

Anyone who pays money to a party by way of an investment contract in the United States is subject to the US securities regulations [see below], as is the party selling the program contract, contrary to false assurances that ‘the regs. don’t apply to us’ (e.g. because the contracts were signed in a ‘tax-free zone’ and are covered by a confidentiality document); and this applies whether it was an agency of the US Government itself selling the package or a private sector enterprise, scamster or institution. Confidentiality agreements are anathema, should never be signed, indicate fraud, are illegal, and are null and void in a Court of Law, and in the US securities sector.

REGULARISATION OF THE PONZI VICTIMS’ STATUS
No doubt the individual Ponzi scheme victims’ affairs could also be regularised by means of a further series of class actions, or perhaps via one class action embracing all individuals and groups concerned. But the foregoing approach (reporting the matter to the S.E.C., which would unravel the Ponzi nexus much more extensively), might be preferable.

Certainly, these US Ponzi victims may need to ensure the elimination of all doubt as to their true status as victims in the prospective eyes of the law. If the scam was perpetrated by an arm of the Government, that is nothing to be frightened of – especially now that the Department of Justice must investigate and prosecute ALL financial criminality, INCLUDING scams perpetrated by US intelligence sector operatives who thought they were protected by the notorious crooks’ charter known as the National Security Act of 1947 et seq. That is no longer the case, if it ever was.

The CMKM/CMKX plaintiffs identified in Case Number CV10-00031 JVS MLGx filed on 8th January 2010 in the United States District Court, Central District of California, and displayed immediately on being filed, on this website [press ARCHIVE], can never be branded as co-conspirators and perpetrators (which may never have been the case: but this statement is factual anyway).

Given the unprecedented allegations that 2.25 trillion phantom shares in CMKM/CMKX were illegally traded from within the Securities and Exchange Commission itself, the plaintiffs are demanding monetary compensation of $3.87 trillion, and settlement of this amount has to be made within 21 days of service. We understand from the lawyer concerned that service will occur during the week beginning 18th January; so settlement will need to be effected some time in February.

As the S.E.C. can hardly contest this case, it is thought that the CMKX/CMKM victims may be paid out by or on that date.

[Remember: We merely REPORT. We do not and are NOT ALLOWED to tender advice. Everyone is responsible for the bed they are lying in, and legal advice must necessarily be sought].

AN INADVERTENT SMEAR, AND ANOTHER THREAT
Separately, whereas the notorious vituperative FBI scamster who accuses the Editor of using verses of Scripture to mask intelligence codes, and suggests that this Editor is an operative engaged nefarious activities, can be disregarded because he’s being laughed at and ignored except by a few gullible people, we take exception to two further responses to our last report:

• First, while kind and complimentary observations were made by the source in question, to say that this Editor is ‘tainted’ by the fact that he is a Brit, is quite ridiculous. In what manner is one ‘tainted’ by one’s nationality? That otherwise generous web ‘blogger’ may not be aware that the Editor has visited the United States approximately 130 times since 1977, and can therefore fairly claim to be among the best informed British observers of the great nation, the United States of America, which he knows well and loves.

• A web report published on 12th January and promoted inter alia on another US website by Benjamin Fulford from Japan gratuitously brackets this Editor with notorious website abusers of both fact and the English language, and then adds: ‘As for me, I am a spokesperson for the Black Dragon Society’ – which, ‘folks’, in case you didn’t know, are JAPANESE ASSASSINS.

This careless comment could therefore rightly be interpreted as another death threat: if aimed at the Editor of this service, it would be his 34th threat since the start of this research in 2002, and his 11th threat of death. The same source completely misreads the central import of the LINE-ITEM PAYMENT issue exposed in our report dated 10th January; but when someone is engaged in issuing threats, one imagines that it is hardly their highest priority to reflect the truth.

• APPENDIX ONE:
THE FULL TEXT OF THE S.E.C. INSPECTOR GENERAL’S INTERVIEW WITH MADOFF AT THE METROPOLITAN CORRECTIONAL CENTER IN LOWER MANHATTAN ON 17TH JUNE 2009.

This interview was published verbatim, after we had obtained the prior written permission of the Office of the Inspector General of the Securities and Exchange Commission, in our financial journal Economic Intelligence Review, Volume 12, Numbers 5 & 6, Fourth Quarter 2009, on pages 15-20.

INTERVIEW OF BERNARD L. MADOFF
At approximately 3:00 pm on June 17, 2009, Inspector General H. David Kotz and Deputy Inspector General Noelle Frangipane interviewed Bernard L. Madoff at the Metropolitan Correctional Center, 150 Park Row, New York, NY. Madoff was accompanied by his attorney, Ira Lee Sorkin of the firm of Dickstein Shapiro, LLP, as well as an associate from that firm, Nicole DeBello.

The interview began with IG Kotz advising Madoff of the general nature of the OIG investigation, and advising that we were investigating interactions the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) had with Mr Madoff and his firm, Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities, LLP (BLM), going back to 1992. At that point, Sorkin advised Madoff that his only obligation was to tell the truth during the interview. The interview began with Madoff stating that the prosecutor and trustee in the criminal case “misunderstood“ things he said during the proffer, and as a result, there is a lot of misinformation being circulated about this scandal.

However, he added, “I’m not saying I’m not guilty”.

THE 2006 EXAMINATION
Madoff recalled that with respect to the 2006 OCIE exam, “two young fellows”, (Lamore and Ostrow) came in “under the guise of doing a routine exam”. He said that during that time period, sweeps were being done of hedge funds that focused on front-running, and that was why he believed that Ostrow and Lamore were at BLM. Madoff recalled that they were there for two months, and that they “spent 90% of their time looking through emails”. He opined that this is “routine for the SEC now, they feel that’s the way they find things”.

Mr Madoff stated that Ostrow and Lamore looked through bank reconciliations, expense accounts, and checks. He stated that he didn’t understand what they were looking for. He said that he had “tons of capital”, and so he “didn’t understand why they were looking at that stuff”.

Madoff stated that Ostrow was “so cryptic” and that he spent a “huge amount of time looking at invoices for expenses”. Madoff stated that he didn’t know what Ostrow was looking for, because he was looking at cancelled checks and phone bills.

He stated that he surmised that Ostrow was looking for wrongdoing pertaining to something that was going on in the industry at that time, namely, people paying independent contractors.

Mr Madoff also stated that during the 2006 exam, Ostrow in particular kept asking for computer runs. He stated that they taxed his computer programmer in that they “kept asking her to do different runs” and to reformat the material. Madoff stated that Ostrow and Lamore asked him: “Do you do a retail business?” to which he replied: No. He stated, however, that: “At this time (2006), I was trying to conceal”. He also told them, “I don’t manage money”.

Madoff stated that “Everything the SEC did prior to 2006 was a waste of time”.

When asked whether he was the one who told NYRO staff about the DC exam just prior to this, he stated, “Yes“, confirming that NYRO didn’t know DC had done an exam. He said that the SEC NYRO staff insisted it was a routine exam, and that “we haven’t been here in ten years”.

To which Madoff replied, “You were just here”. (Referring to DC OCIE staff).

Madoff recounted a conversation with Ostrow:
WO: “So tell me about this article”. (Ostrow referring to the MarHedge article, leaning back with his hands behind his head “like Lieutenant Colombo”.)
BM: “What about it?“ (Madoff stated that Ostrow was “acting as if I didn’t do this business”).
BM: “Lori Richards has a whole file I sent her with this info. They have it”.
WO: “Well, it’s a big organization; we don’t talk to each other”. Madoff stated that he thought Ostrow was pretending that he had not been aware of the other ongoing examination, but Ostrow was acting “as if the left hand didn’t know what the right hand was doing”.

Madoff stated that he “really got annoyed“ with Ostrow for repeatedly asking BLM to generate computer runs. Madoff stated that during this exam, they “never looked at front-running”. He stated that two months after they left, he received a letter citing him for “two ridiculous violations”, which they were wrong about; the violations they cited were incorrect.

He went on to state that when BLM submitted their response to the SEC letter and copied it to FINRA, FINRA responded like, “What the heck? Are you nuts with this nitpicking?“ Mr Madoff stated: “After two months, they found 2-3 nitpicky things, and they were wrong about those things”.

Madoff stated that he did not provide false documents to the OCIE examiners, except the client statements. He stated that he did not provide or make false records for the SEC. He added that they “never asked for DTC records“ or other records that needed to be prepared.

He stated that Ostrow and Lamore “never really got into books and records as related to stock records or DTC records”. Mr Madoff stated that “they never even looked at my stock records” or did a “box count”. He said he was “astonished” that they didn’t ask for DTC records, and stated that only a regulator could get those records from DTC, and the SEC would “have to go to DTC”. He added that the DTC does not have separate accounts for each customer, but rather, provides a global report, but stated that if they went to DTC, they would’ve seen his market-making position, and that it “would’ve been easy for them to see” the Ponzi scheme.

Madoff stated that the SEC could’ve gone to counterparties, and if they had, they “would’ve seen it”, adding, “they didn’t do any of that”. He stated that “it’s the only thing to do”, and clarified: “If you’re looking at a Ponzi scheme, it’s the first thing you do”.

OCIE INQUIRY 2 YEARS PRIOR TO 2006 EXAM:
Mr Madoff recalled that two years before Ostrow and Lamore came to examine BLM, he received a phone call from Lori Richards, which he characterized as an inquiry for a hedge fund sweep. He stated that while in the lobby of his building, his personal cell phone rang:

LR: “Bemie, its Lori”.
BM: “Hi Lori”.
LR: “I need you to help me out.
Can you tell me about your hedge funds?”.
BM: “I don’t have a hedge fund”.
LR: “I didn’t think so”.
BM: “I execute trades for hedge funds”.

Mr Madoff recollected the call lasting about 15 minutes, and stated that John McCarthy may have been on the call, but could not remember for sure. He remembered Richards telling him that he’d probably get a call from McCarthy and that they may need more information from him.

Shortly thereafter, Madoff received a phone call from McCarthy, during which McCarthy told him, “You’ll get a letter after the first of the year”.

Madoff stated that when he got the letter, it was readily apparent to him that they were focused on front-running and thought it was part of a sweep that the SEC was doing on front-running. He then recalled the letter was seeking the names of hedge funds he did business with, a description of his split-strike conversion strategy, copies of “maybe” two years of statements from large hedge funds, and his P&L trading profit in those securities.

ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATION
Madoff said it was “amazing to me“ that he didn’t get caught during the SEC Enforcement investigation, because they specifically asked him: “Are these securities at DTC?” They further pressed: “What is your account number”. He replied: “646”. Madoff stated that it was “obvious they thought that something was amiss”. He went on to say that when they asked for the DTC account number: “I thought it was the end game, over. Monday morning they’ll call DTC and this will be over… and it never happened”.

Madoff stated that when nothing happened, he thought: “After all this, I got away lucky”. But he said he thought it was just “a matter of time”, saying “that was the nightmare I lived with”.

When Enforcement did not follow up with DTC, “I was astonished”. Madoff stated that the Enforcement investigators “asked all the right questions, but it was still focused on front-running”.

He said that the investigators dismissed the allegation of a Ponzi as “inconceivable to them”.

He noted that the SEC never asked him about his accounting firm. He stated, “I used a small accounting firm, but I also used KPMG in London and they were terrible”. Madoff stated that he got the impression through all the exams and investigations that “it never entered the SEC’s mind that it was a Ponzi scheme”.

He noted that there was a DTC Terminal in the cage, but: “They never went in to the cage”.

When questioned as to why he didn’t bring an attorney to the testimony that he gave in the Enforcement investigation, Madoff stated: “I didn’t think I needed one”. He added: “I had good answers for everything. Everything made perfect sense”. He said he did not come to the testimony without an attorney because he was trying to fool the SEC into thinking he had nothing to hide. He also denied that he ever changed course during his testimony. He said, “No, that’s not what I said. Options are not part of the model, that’s what I said”.

When questioned as to whether he was concerned about Mr Frank DiPascali giving testimony, Madoff answered: “No, he didn’t know anything was wrong, either”. Madoff further stated that he was surprised that the Enforcement investigators never asked for options contracts. He stated that he only had a master contract, and also that: “You can’t replicate options records”. When we asked him if he had options contracts ready in case • the SEC asked for it, he answered: “No”. Madoff stated he “was relieved“ when he got the letter from Enforcement indicating the case was over.

He was relieved all he had to do was register.

FAIRFIELD GREENWICH:
Madoff stated that the widely-reported telephone call with Fairfield Greenwich related to an argument that was continuing between BLM and the SEC as to whether BLM had to register as an IA [Investment Adviser]. Madoff stated that the problem was with the Fairfield Greenwich marketing prospectus’s mention of Madoff. He said: “I told my clients I’m not an investment adviser. I wasn’t giving investment advice”.

Madoff stated that this was the crux of his argument with the SEC, that “I’m not giving advice, I’m employing a strategy”. Madoff went on to state that the reason he said what he did during the telephone call with Fairfield Greenwich is that he was trying to impart this view of his rôle, and added: “Look, these guys aren’t rocket scientists. That’s the problem”.

EXAMS AND INVESTIGATIONS GENERALLY
When questioned, did he ever steer exams towards front-running, he answered:

“No. I didn’t have to”. Madoff stated that he didn’t have to tell examiners his rôle in the industry, because they already knew.

Madoff stated that the investigators didn’t ask him questions regarding the Ponzi because “everybody dismissed this aspect”. He didn’t believe from the examinations that there was any focus on a possible Ponzi scheme.

Madoff stated that there were two points at which he thought “the jig was up”:

(1): During the on-site OCIE examination, because he thought it was routine for the SEC to check with an independent third party.

(2): Right after his testimony given during the SEC Enforcement investigation when they asked him “what’s your DTC account number?”

Madoff noted that it was standard operating procedure for the SEC to give two week’s notice to prepare documents, but said he “never prepared records for SEC investigations or examiners”.

He said the only one at fault is Ostrow, because “that’s his job on-site”.

When asked about whether he was concerned the SEC would do an IA exam after he agreed to register, Madoff responded no; and that in general, he understood IA exams to be less rigorous than BD [Broker-Dealer] exams, noted that the cycle for IA exams was different, and had no reason to think that an IA exam would be any different than a BD exam.

Madoff stated that he was “worried every time” he was examined or investigated by the SEC, and that ‘it was a nightmare for me’, because ‘it was very basic stuff”.

He added: “I wish they’d caught me six years ago, eight years ago…”.

Madoff told us that everything that he had told Lamore, Ostrow, and the Enforcement Investigators and his strategy and the computer model was true. But, he added, that “even with artificial intelligence, you still need to have a gut feel”.

He said, “It’s a combination of technology and trader’s feel, and I was a good trader”.

Madoff noted that there are two schools of thought on how to deal with exams:

(1): Make the examiners crazy, make things difficult for the examiners (in connection with this, Mr Madoff noted that every firm keeps its books and records differently, and that having an examination is “like getting a tax audit; it’s a pain in the ass”).

(2): Cooperate with the examiners, make it easy (which Madoff stated is what “we always did”).

Madoff stated that SEC examiners didn’t always look at the big picture issues; rather, they focused on minutiae. He stated that he didn’t have any suggestions as to how to fix that problem. However, he stated that he believed the problem with SEC examiners is a combination of the “experience they have and the procedure they use”. He said: “It all comes down to budgets, I guess”.

Madoff indicated that it lent to the credibility of his firm that he’d passed examinations by the SEC. He stated that some clients would ask him when he’d last had an exam; he’d give them the date.

[The next segment addresses Madoff’s
responses to named personnel as follows]:

LORI RICHARDS:
Madoff stated that “he had known Lori for a number of years”. He stated that he sent Lori Richards a copy of his strategy (likely referring to documents he provided to the SEC in 2004).

He stated that he doesn’t know Lori really well, but he’s on a first-name basis with her. He stated that she’s a “tough regulator”. He said she’s ‘not a pals-y wals-y, let’s go for drinks type of person’.

OSTROW:
Madoff indicated that Ostrow was an “obnoxious guy”, and noted that Ostrow wore an SEC jacket with the word ‘Enforcement’ emblazoned across the back.

Madoff stated that Ostrow wore this jacket in the BLM offices, as well as while going in and out of the building. Madoff also stated that this jacket ‘caused an uproar’ in the BLM Offices, and that it did not look good to have someone walking through the building with a jacket such as that. Madoff asked Ostrow if he was in the Division of Enforcement with the SEC, which Ostrow indicated he was not. Madoff stated that Ostrow “was very cryptic”.

Madoff stated that Ostrow was “doing things that made no sense to us at all”. He added that Ostrow was a “total asshole” [sic]. He said Ostrow “was an idiot”, citing Ostrow’s repeated requests for computer runs, which would take eight hours to run off.

Madoff stated: “I almost came to blows with him”.

Madoff characterized Ostrow as a “blowhard” who acted aggressively and was not intimidated by Madoff. He fiurther noted that Ostrow “talked tough, but didn’t look at anything”.

LAMORE:
Madoff said he thought Lamore understood options.

MARK DONOHUE:
Madoff stated that Mark Donohue looked at the right things for front-running, but only would have discovered it was a Ponzi scheme if he had gone to DTC.

Madoff stated that communications from Donohue “just dropped off”. He stated that during the examination, he called Donohue:
BM: “Is there something going on here I should know about?“
MD: “No, we’re just trying to understand the business. Sunlight is the best disinfectant”.

DTC:
He stated that reconciling records with the DTC was something they “should’ve done in ‘06”. When questioned as to whether the Ponzi scheme would have been uncovered by the SEC if it had gone to DTC, he stated: “Yes. It’s very easy to do”.

He stated that in 2006, it was clear they asked about front-running because there were sweeps of the industry at that time for front-running. But in trying to discover a Ponzi scheme, he stated: “It’s very easy if you want. You must do a third party check. It’s absolutely a must”.

He went on to add that “It’s Accounting 101 to look at DTC, do a box count” if you are looking for a Ponzi scheme. When asked if his accounts were segregated at DTC to see if there was trading, he replied: “Yes, of course”.

Madoff stated that in the very beginning, he was buying stock. However, later on, if the Securities and Exchange Commission asked for DTC records, there would have been no way of duplicating a DTC record.

When asked, “Did you ever have fake DTC records ready in case the SEC asked for them?”

Madoff answered: “No”.

THE EXAMINATION IN 1992:
Regarding the 1992 Investigation and Examination of Avellino and Bienes, Madoff stated that the DTC records he provided during the OCIE exam were good. He said: “I returned the money immediately”.

Madoff stated that Dick Walker (who was then head of NYRO) said: “I told the examiners that if Bernie Madoff is handling these accounts, you have no problem”.

Mr Madoff stated that “I had no idea these guys (Avellino and Bienes) had thousands of clients”.
He said the SEC saw that the trades were real in 1992. When asked if the SEC did in later exams what they did in 1992, would they have uncovered the Ponzi scheme?…

Madoff answered: “Absolutely”. He added: “There is no way they can avoid being criticized for not doing that in 2006”. Madoff said that in 1992, the SEC came for the examination and he recalled that John Gentile was the supervisor. Madoff described Gentile as an “Italian guy who was wearing a short sleeve shirt”, and called him a “no bullshit” guy. Mr Madoff stated that Gentile came to BLM and wanted to see the stock record, the DTC records, and the blotters.

Madoff said that Gentile “knew what he was looking at and that was it”. (Madoff also contrasted this experience with Ostrow who “comes in like he’s Colombo”).

ON DEALING WITH THE S.E.C.:
Madoff stated that he was the only representative from BLM that dealt with SEC staff because that was the way he “always“ handled the exams. He said: “I always dealt with the exams. My brother handled the market making exams”.

Madoff stated that 2003 was the first time that he could’ve been caught by the SEC.

Madoff said that when the MarHedge and Barrons articles came out, he expected the SEC to come to him, and that he was surprised the SEC didn’t follow up with him. He also mentioned that Erin Arvedlund (“That idiot woman from Barrons“) didn’t know what she was talking about, and that it was obvious she was not familiar with the industry.

Madoff stated that he was “kidding“ when he said he was on the “short list“ to become SEC Chairman. He didn’t remember telling anyone that Cox would be Chairman before he was named.

Madoff stated that when comparing the SEC and NASD (FINRA), “the level of skill of the staff is pretty much the same”. However, he noted that people in the industry are more concerned about an SEC exam than a FINRA exam in general. Madoff denied that he ever acted as a reference for an SEC employee who was seeking a job. He also stated that he never called anyone at the SEC or Congress to influence an examination of his firm.

ON BEGINNING THE PONZI SCHEME:
Madoff stated that the “problem occurred when I made commitments for too much money and then I couldn’t put the strategy to work”.

He stated: “I had a European bank, I was doing forward conversion, they were doing reverse conversion”. He stated that the returns he typically generated, “I thought I was going to be able to do”. He explained that when that didn’t happen, he thought: “Fine, I’ll just generate these trades and then the market will come back and I’11 make it back… and it never happened”. He added: “It was my mistake not to just be out a couple hundred million dollars and get out of it”.

MARY SHAPIRO:
Madoff stated that Mary Shapiro was a “dear friend”, and that she “probably thinks I wish I never knew this guy”. Madoff stated that Shapiro was a Commissioner and signed the order in respect of the 1992 Avellino and Bienes matter.

ANNETTE NAZARETH:
Madoff stated that he knows Nazareth better than he knows Lori Richards. He said that he knew Nazareth “very well”, and mentioned that she also knew his brother and two sons.

He also indicated that he was Chairman of the Market Structure Committee when she was the head of Market Regulation.

ARTHUR LEVITT:
Madoff stated that he knew Levitt at Amex, before he was at the SEC, and stated that he knew Levitt “very well”. Madoff stated that he went to lunch with Levitt once, to complain to Levitt that he “had to do something about Internet stocks”. Madoff stated that Levitt subsequently “went on TV and gave a warning about it”.

CHRISTOPHER COX:
Madoff never met Cox.

WILLIAM DONALDSON:
Madoff stated that he and Donaldson were “sort of like competitors”, and noted that they had “mutual respect for each other”.

ELISSE WALTER:
Madoff stated that he knows Walter “pretty well”, and characterized her as a “terrific lady”.

LINDA THOMSEN:
Madoff stated that he met Thomsen at SIA meetings, but did not know her well.

OTHER S.E.C. STAFF:
Madoff stated he does not know SEC Commissioners Paredes, Aguilar, or Casey. He stated that he knew economists working at the Securities and Exchange Commission, but just as part of working in the industry.

HARRY MARKOPOLOS:
Madoff expressed disdain for Markopolos and the fact that Markopolos has received a lot of press, stating that Mr Markopolos calls himself a “seer”. He called Markopolos a “joke in the industry”. He went on to state that “this was a guy who was just jealous” of his business. He stated that “hedge fund guys are just marketers”.

ON ERIC SWANSON AND SHANA MADOFF:
Madoff denied that he ever dealt with Swanson, and denied knowledge of the romance. He stated that he “found out after the fact”. He said that his brother was afraid to mention it to him. Madoff stated that he “didn’t even know she was going with him until a couple of years afterwards”, and estimated he found out six months before the wedding. He said his brother said to him: “Shana is dating Eric Swanson”.

Madoff replied: “Who?“ Peter said: “He works for Lori Richards”.

Madoff described Eric as a “straight sort of guy”. Madoff stated that the relationship between the two “never gave him any comfort” about being examined by the SEC, and denied ever asking Shana to go get information or otherwise influence an examination.

SIMONA SUH AND MEGHAN CHEUNG:
Madoff stated that Suh and Cheung “acted professional“ and that they were “knowledgeable as much as attorneys can be”.

However, he noted that they were not as knowledgeable as an industry insider.

REPUTATION, STRATEGY, AND INDUSTRY:
Madoff noted that he was in the securities industry for 50 years prior to his arrest and that he “wrote a good portion of the rules when it comes to trading”.

Madoff stated: “I’m very proud of the rôle I played in the industry… of course I destroyed that now”.

Madoff stated that he served on the committee as to who should register as Investment Advisers. He said that they were trying to get hedge funds to register, and stated that “nobody wants to register“ because then, they would be subject to prosecution for fraud.

He noted that Investment Advisers (IAs) start as small operations, as opposed to Broker-Dealers (BDs) which are generally formed from large businesses.

He noted that there is a general feeling in the industry that Broker-Dealers have a harder time in exams than Investment Advisers. Mr Madoff stated that he wasn’t concerned about registering because there would be a more thorough IA exam, because there was the understanding that IA exams were easier than BD exams, and also, the IA exam cycle is different. He further stated that he had the understanding that the first IA exam that a newly registered entity got was actually less rigorous than a BD exam.

Madoff said that he took the position that he was not required to be registered as an IA. Madoff stated that when dealing with the SEC, there was “never any hint” that the SEC was looking for signs of a Ponzi scheme or that they were looking at his trading. He stated that this was “primarily because of the reputation I had”. He had not been aware of the specificity of the complaints brought to the SEC’s attention.

Madoff stated that OCIE was looking for front-running, and even if somebody said he was doing a Ponzi scheme, they’d “probably discount this accusation“ because they’d think: “Why would he do a Ponzi scheme?“ He added: “Of course they’d be shocked it’s a Ponzi”. He stated that they would be “astonished”.

Madoff stated that he’d heard that Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, and Crédit Suisse wouldn’t do business with him; however, he indicated that David Kamansky (Merrill Lynch’s CEO), Dan Tully (former Chairman and CEO, Merrill Lynch), and the Chairman of Morgan Stanley (he did not name John Mack) were clients of his.

He stated that these people did business with him and did not think the returns of 10-12% were unusual. He stated that if you look at his strategy day-to-day, it would tend to be “extremely volatile, however, month-to-month it would show low volatility. He stated he would hold on to a loss until it became viable again, and that the strategy itself was real, “not that exotic”, and “not that unusual”. He noted that he sent Lori Richards a copy of his strategy.

Madoff stated that the SEC focused only on front-running in exams, noting the “returns weren’t that spectacular”. He insisted that “credible people knew it could be done or else they wouldn’t be clients”. He stressed that the strategy made sense, and that stories of 300% returns were “total nonsense”. He stated that “All you have to do is look at the types of people I was doing this for to know it was a credible strategy”.

He added that “They knew that the strategy was doable”, and that they “Knew a lot more than this guy Harry [Markopolos]”.

Madoff noted that the industry is growing incredibly complicated. He gave the example of when his firm put up a credit default swap and didn’t know how to put it on the books. Madoff said he didn’t know, and it wasn’t in [the] manuals, so he called [REDACTED: Personal Privacy].

He said [REDACTED] didn’t know, but conferenced in another industry person, who told him to put it in his London office books.

He said he called Merrill Lynch, Lehman Bros, five firms total, all of which didn’t know. He said the NASD had no clue. Madoff stated that today, lots of trades are done off the books because people don’t know what to do with them.

Madoff stated that the only problem with SEC Headquarters is that he had “too much credibility with them and they dismissed the Ponzi”.

Madoff said: “You can’t have the transparency the regulators want you to have because it’s proprietary and detrimental”.

He stated, “By and large the industry is honest”.

He added: “I got myself in a terrible situation; it’s a nightmare… The thing I feel worst about besides the people losing money is that I set the industry back”.

Madoff noted that he “did work in the industry long before I did anything wrong”. Madoff spoke of the situation: “It’s a tragedy; it’s a nightmare”.

Madoff insisted that his market making business was totally walled off from the financial side. ENDS.

APPENDIX TWO:

THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary For Immediate Release November 17, 2009:

EXECUTIVE ORDER
ESTABLISHMENT OF THE FINANCIAL FRAUD ENFORCEMENT TASK FORCE

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to strengthen the efforts of the Department of Justice, in conjunction with Federal, State, tribal, territorial, and local agencies, to investigate and prosecute significant financial crimes and other violations relating to the current financial crisis and economic recovery efforts, recover the proceeds of such crimes and violations, and ensure just and effective punishment of those who perpetrate financial crimes and violations, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1: Establishment. There is hereby established an interagency Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force (Task Force)led by the Department of Justice.

Section 2: Membership and Operation. The Task Force shall be chaired by the Attorney General and consist of senior-level officials from the following departments, agencies, and offices, selected by the heads of the respective departments, agencies, and offices in consultation with the Attorney General:

The Department of Justice;

The Department of the Treasury;

The Department of Commerce;

The Department of Labor;

The Department of Housing and Urban Development;

The Department of Education;

The Department of Homeland Security;

The Securities and Exchange Commission;

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission;

The Federal Trade Commission;

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation;

The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System;

The Federal Housing Finance Agency;

The Office of Thrift Supervision;

(The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency;

The Small Business Administration;

The Federal Bureau of Investigation;

The Social Security Administration;

The Internal Revenue Service, Criminal Investigations;

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network [FINCEN]’

The United States Postal Inspection Service;

The United States Secret Service;

The United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement;

Relevant Offices of Inspectors General and related Federal entities, including without limitation the Office of the Inspector General for the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board, and the Office of the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program; and

Such other Executive Branch departments, agencies, or offices as the President may, from time to time, designate or that the Attorney General may invite.

The Attorney General shall convene and, through the Deputy Attorney General, direct the work of the Task Force in fulfilling all its functions under this order. The Attorney General shall convene the first meeting of the Task Force within 30 days of the date of this order and shall thereafter convene the Task Force at such times as he deems appropriate. At the direction of the Attorney General, the Task Force may establish subgroups consisting exclusively of Task Force members or their designees under this section, including but not limited to a Steering Committee chaired by the Deputy Attorney General, and subcommittees addressing enforcement efforts, training and information sharing, and victims’ rights, as the Attorney General deems appropriate.

Section 3: Mission and Functions. Consistent with the authorities assigned to the Attorney General by law, and other applicable law, the Task Force shall:

(a) Provide advice to the Attorney General for the investigation and prosecution of cases of bank, mortgage, loan, and lending fraud; securities and commodities fraud; retirement plan fraud;
mail and wire fraud; tax crimes; money laundering; False Claims Act violations; unfair competition; discrimination; and other financial crimes and violations (hereinafter financial crimes and violations), when such cases are determined by the Attorney General, for purposes of this
order, to be significant;

(b) Make recommendations to the Attorney General, from time to time, for action to enhance cooperation among Federal, State, local, tribal, and territorial authorities responsible for the investigation and prosecution of significant financial crimes and violations; and:

(c) Coordinate law enforcement operations with representatives of State, local, tribal, and territorial law enforcement.

Section 4: Coordination with State, Local, Tribal, and Territorial Law Enforcement. Consistent with the objectives set out in this order, and to the extent permitted by law, the Attorney General is encouraged to invite the following representatives of State, local, tribal, and territorial law enforcement to participate in the Task Force’s subcommittee addressing enforcement efforts in the subcommittee’s performance of the functions set forth in section 3(c) of this order relating to the coordination of Federal, State, local, tribal, and territorial law enforcement operations involving financial crimes and violations:

(a) The National Association of Attorneys General;

(b) The National District Attorneys Association; and

(c) Such other representatives of State, local, tribal, and territorial law enforcement as the Attorney General deems appropriate.

Section 5: Outreach: Consistent with the law enforcement objectives set out in this order, the Task Force, in accordance with applicable law, in addition to regular meetings, shall conduct outreach with representatives of financial institutions, corporate entities, non-profit organizations, State, local, tribal, and territorial governments and agencies, and other interested persons to foster greater coordination and participation in the detection and prosecution of financial fraud and financial crimes, and in the enforcement of antitrust and antidiscrimination laws.

Section 6: Administration. The Department of Justice, to the extent permitted by law and subject to the availability of appropriations, shall provide administrative support/funding for the Task Force.

Section 7: General Provisions:
(a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) Authority granted by law to an executive department, agency, or the head thereof, or the status of that department or agency within the Federal Government; or:

(ii) Functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This Task Force shall replace, and continue the work of, the Corporate Fraud Task Force created by Executive Order 13271 of July 9, 2002. Executive Order 13271 is hereby terminated pursuant to section 6 of that order.

(c) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(d) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

Section 8: Termination: The Task Force shall terminate when directed by the President or, with the approval of the President, by the Attorney General.

BARACK OBAMA
THE WHITE HOUSE, November 17, 2009.

APPENDIX THREE:
President Obama Establishes Interagency Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force:

Press Release issued by the US Department of Justice on 17th November 2009, which called for the establishment of the Task force within 30 days – thus explaining, in part, the timing of the CHANGE OF POLICY at the Justice Department highlighted earlier by this service.

The other crucial factor behind the CHANGE OF POLICY was President Obama’s Executive Order dated 16th December extending de facto diplomatic immunity to INTERPOL and de facto suspending habeas corpus in respect of the necessary operations of INTERPOL given the magnitude of this crisis of corruption perpetrated from within the bowels of the US federal Government itself.

Given what we know about corruption at the highest levels of the US Government and structures, the text below will stick in most readers’ throats. But recall the double-mindedness dimension, the dialectic. On the one hand they are rifling the Treasury, conducting Fraudulent Finance operations, and abusing their public offices; while at the same time, on the other hand, they promulgate ‘sound’ measures to help ‘give Americans peace of mind’ and freedom from fraudsters.

The reality is that they use the public consumption image as cover for their endless criminality.

WASHINGTON: Attorney General Eric Holder, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Shaun Donovan, and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chairwoman Mary Schapiro today announced that President Barack Obama has established by Executive Order an interagency Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force to strengthen efforts to combat financial crime. The Department of Justice will lead the Task Force and the Department of Treasury, HUD and the SEC will serve on the steering committee.

The Task Force’s leadership, along with representatives from a broad range of federal agencies, regulatory authorities and inspectors general, will work with state and local partners to investigate and prosecute significant financial crimes, ensure just and effective punishment for those who perpetrate financial crimes, address discrimination in the lending and financial markets and recover proceeds for victims.

The Task Force, which replaces the Corporate Fraud Task Force established in 2002, will build upon efforts already underway to combat mortgage, securities and corporate fraud by increasing coordination and fully utilizing the resources and expertise of the government’s law enforcement and regulatory apparatus.

The attorney general will convene the first meeting of the Task Force in the next 30 days.

“This Task Force’s mission is not just to hold accountable those who helped bring about the last financial meltdown, but to prevent another meltdown from happening,” Attorney General Eric Holder said. “We will be relentless in our investigation of corporate and financial wrongdoing, and will not hesitate to bring charges, where appropriate, for criminal misconduct on the part of businesses and business executives.”

“Through the Financial Fraud Task Force, we are making clear that the Obama Administration is going to act aggressively and proactively in a coordinated effort to combat financial fraud,” said Treasury Secretary Geithner. “It’s not enough to prosecute fraud only after it’s become widespread. We can’t to wait for problems to peak before we respond. We’re seeking comprehensive financial reform to create a more stable, safer financial system and stepping up our enforcement strategy. Doing so will help to stop emerging trends in financial fraud before they’re able to cause extensive, system-wide damage to our economy”.

“To give American families the protection and peace-of-mind they need, it’s clear the federal response must be as interconnected and multi-dimensional as the challenges we face,” said HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan. “No one agency is going to be able to stop financial fraud. This Task force will build upon many of the inter-agency collaborations already underway to protect consumers and restore confidence.”

“Many financial frauds are complicated puzzles that require painstaking efforts to piece together. By formally coordinating our efforts, we will be better able to identify the pieces, assemble the puzzle and put an end to the fraud,” said SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro [Editor: who is named as a Defendant in the $3.87 trillion CMKM/CMKX Complaint filed on 8th January, posted on this website].

The Task Force is composed of senior-level officials from the following departments,
agencies and offices:

The Department of Justice;
The Department of the Treasury;
The Department of Commerce;
The Department of Labor;
The Department of Housing and Urban Development;
The Department of Education;
The Department of Homeland Security;
The Securities and Exchange Commission;
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission;
The Federal Trade Commission;
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation;
The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System;
The Federal Housing Finance Agency;
The Office of Thrift Supervision;
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency;
The Small Business Administration;
The Federal Bureau of Investigation;
The Social Security Administration;
The Internal Revenue Service, Criminal Investigations;
The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network;
The United States Postal Inspection Service;
The United States Secret Service;
The United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement;
Relevant Offices of Inspectors General and related Federal entities, including without limitation the Office of the Inspector General for the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board and the Office of the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program; and:

Such other executive branch departments, agencies, or offices as the President may, from time to time, designate or that the Attorney General may invite.

In addition, the attorney general will invite representatives of the National Association of Attorneys General, the National District Attorneys Association and other state, local, tribal and territorial representatives to participate in the Task Force through its Enforcement Committee.

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.

U.S. INTELLIGENCE POWER ‘STEALS $1.3++ TRILLION’

cropped-chrisstory

COLLECTIVE AMNESIA OVERWHELMS U.S. SOURCES ‘SEEKING RESOLUTION’

Saturday 9 January 2010 01:00

THE SITUATION REEKS TO HIGH HEAVEN OF GRAFT, COMPROMISE, BLACKMAIL, BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION MASTERMINDED BY PANETTA, MRS CLINTON, GEITHNER AND OBAMA

• WE MONITOR ANOTHER GIGA-SLITHER OF THE SERPENT IN REAL-TIME

• KEEP READING THE ‘OPERATION STILLPOINT’ REPORT DATED 7TH JANUARY 2010.
IT EXPLAINS, ACCURATELY, WHAT HAS BEEN HAPPENING SINCE EARLY REAGAN.

• Press ARCHIVE for immediate access to the crucial OPERATION STILLPOINT report.

• THE CMKM/CMKX CLASS ACTION FOR $3.87 TRILLION: SEE REPORT DATED 7TH JANUARY:
FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER WE ARE POSTING TWO REPORTS WITH THE SAME DATE. WE HAVE OBTAINED THE TEXT OF THE CMKM/CMKX CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT AGAINST THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [S.E.C.] REQUESTING MONETARY COMPENSATION OF $3.87 TRILLION, AS FLAGGED IN OUR REPORT DATED 7TH JANUARY 2010. NOW FILED IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, THE CASE # IS: CV10-00031-JVS (MLG-x). THIS TEXT IS NOW LIVE ON THIS WEBSITE.

• PRESS ARCHIVE AND YOU WILL SEE IT IS THE FIRST REPORT LISTED.

• MEMORANDUM TO MI-6 ET AL:
MAY THE RELEVANT PARTY HAVE CONFIRMATION OF THE LINE-ITEM PAYMENT PLEASE. CONSTANT SHILLY-SHALLYING BY STATESIDE SOURCES ON THIS SUBJECT HAS BEEN EXPERIENCED. WE HAVE BEEN ASKED TO SAY THAT THIS IS A DEMAND, NOT A REQUEST.

Before we go any further, here are two emails we’d like you to read:

(1): From a respected and very well-connected source in the United States:
8th January 2010 at 20:35 UK time:

‘Hi Chris. Just heard from a good source and he’s saying that your latest Update’
[7th January 2010] ‘is right on’.

(2)*: From A. Clifton Hodges, of Hodges and Associates, the firm of lawyers filing the CMKM/CMKX class action lawsuit against the Securities and Exchange Commission and its Commissioners joint and severally, referenced in our report dated 7th January 2010, in response to a ‘belt and braces’ request from the Editor for written confirmation that he was content for us, as we had been advised earlier, to ‘trailer’ the class action suit in our report dated 7th January. This email was received by us at 19:56 on 04 January 2010 UK time:

Mr Story
Thank you for your carefulness. For the record, you have my authorization to publish the CMKX trailer, and any other additional information that may illuminate it. I believe in what is being done and am anxious to assist in any reasonable way possible….

Sincerely, A Clifton Hodges
PS: Please keep up the fine job you and your associates are performing, I am happy to lend a hand if I can be useful.

* This is appended in order to ‘correct’ those, including an arrogant fellow in Paris who told the Editor to do his ‘due diligence’, who have purported to ‘correct’ the Editor’s information on the CMKM/CMKX exposure.

* Quite apart from the stupidity of that, it stands to reason (if such critics are capable of logic) that we would not publish information of such far-reaching significance, if it were not accurate and properly provenanced. We’ve being doing this stuff for NEARLY FOUR DECADES.

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.

‘If you think you’re too small to make a difference,
try sleeping in a closed room with a mosquito’. African proverb.

• FOR SEVERAL YEARS WE HAVE CARRIED THIS RUBRIC AT THE FOOT OF EACH REPORT:

• 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.

• 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:

DEVELOPMENTS SINCE OUR REPORT DATED 7TH JANUARY 2010
We will now deal with developments that have transpired since we reported on 7th January 2010: that report should be borne in mind in absorbing what follows.

It can be accessed by pressing ARCHIVE.

Two over-arching developments have been observed:

• First, $1.3++ trillion was transferred on 7th January 2010 to ‘Alexandria’ [see below], that is to say to the Central Intelligence Agency. Ostensibly these funds were for ‘taxes’, but in reality they would appear to have been STOLEN by the White House and the US Intelligence Power (at 10:20pm EST].

• All of a sudden, on 8th January, NOBODY KNOWS ANYTHING. Contacts who have been veritable fountains of detailed information for years have miraculously NO INFORMATION, and haven’t a clue what is happening. This applies to Gold Badges and others who should know better.

• Now, we were’nt born yesterday, so we begin by asking the following question:

• How is it possible that, immediately following the transfer of $1.3++ trillion – a development WHICH WAS TRACKED IN REAL-TIME BY OUR CONTACTS AND HAS BEEN DEFINITIVELY VERIFIED – that THE FOLLOWING DAY, nobody has any idea why the releases have not been completed? This reeks of a typical White House/ C.I.A. stitch-up ORDERED FROM THE TOP.

COLLECTIVE AMNESIA FOLLOWS THE C.I.A.’S LATEST MASSIVE THEFT
This sudden outbreak of COLLECTIVE AMNESIA affects all sources of intelligence RIGHT ACROSS THE BOARD. What are we to assume? That these sources ALL CAUGHT SWINE ’FLU (remember it??) simultaneously? That, all of a sudden, they’re ALL suffering from Alzheimer’s?

Hardly. No, what we DO ASSUME, as we were’nt born last week, is that, ARMED WITH THIS NEWLY STOLEN MONEY, the Intelligence Power under Mr Leon Panetta has ‘made it worth their while’ for these intelligence and Trustee sources to suffer from amnesia simultaneously.

WE ACCUSE LEON PANETTA OF STEALING $1.3++ TRILLION
We therefore accuse Leon Panetta POINT BLANK of stealing $1.3++ trillion on the instructions of George Bush Sr. and Barbara Bush and of making arrangements to pay off all who are supposed to know better, and who purport to have been manoeuvring to clear up this mess – including Gold Badges and others who will be named, if this matter deteriorates any further.

WHY HAVENT ANY OF THE TOP LEVEL CRIMINALS BEEN REMOVED?
And WHO is Leon Panetta’s boss? Stand up, Barack Hussein Obama, the elected official who is responsible for getting this done. Mr Obama, here are our questions to you, Sir:

(1): Why have you not fired Leon Panetta?

(2): Why have you not fired Mrs Hillary Clinton?

(3): Why have you not fired that liar, Timothy Geithner?

(4): What double game are you playing, and why do you imagine for one moment that you are going to get away with further duplicity with impunity?

In this connection, we would like to point out that knee-jerk responses on certain websites to our reference in the report dated 7th January to Mr Obama, and the rôle of Republicans, were ignorant fantasies. Mr Obama is, whether you or anyone else likes it or not, a central figure in this crisis. We don’t care whether he’s Father Christmas, Brigitte Bardot or Frankenstein. It doesn’t matter what his politics are for THIS PURPOSE, either; and neither are sterile partisan politics RELEVANT IN THE FOCUSED CONTEXT that we are addressing.

• Get real, you knee-jerkers.

Now, if Mr Obama, an operative, is playing dirty double games, you can be certain of one thing: it will ALL come out in the wash. Or rather, the dirty linen will be revealed for all to see, and smell.

And do not be surprised if this latest abomination escalates further, as the desperate, cornered, terminally corrupt Intelligence Power seeks to cling on to its usurped and illegitimate hegemony over the Executive Branch of the US Federal Government, and virtually everything else.

This crisis will not ‘go away’, we are now being informed, until every single one of these rats has been taken out and given the treatment due to traitors in time of war.

• POSSIBLE EXPLANATION FOR OBAMA’S APPARENT CONDUCT:
It is likely that the three penetrations of the White House event for the Indian delegation that was featured in our report dated 7th January 2010, in which we indicated that these penetrations were almost certainly intended to send Mr Obama a message along the lines of ‘DO WHAT WE WANT, OR YOU’LL CEASE TO BE VERTICAL’, scared the President to such an extent that he caved in to the will of the snakes, serpents and rats in his putrid criminalist entourage. VERY LIKELY INDEED.

EVENTS MONITORED ON 7TH AND 8TH JANUARY

On 7th January, we learned as follows:

• INTERPOL brought in more personnel in planes over last weekend (2nd-3rd January) to handle the arrests and enforcement operations, in the face of the feckless, institutionalised weakness and double-dealing of dupicitous American colleagues.

•Mrs Barbara Bush, who has signatures controlling accounts and documentation even though the Bush Crime Family have reportedly been ‘cleaned out’ financially, has been interfering BIG TIME. Is there a problem, by any chance, just because this perpetrator is FEMALE? Surely not, in an era that has taken leave of its senses because of the mania for ‘equality’, to such an extent that it places women in the military front line?

• Several senior bankers were ELIMINATED. We were informed that these horizontalisations took place in the United States, London (where the corruption can be smelled from 60 miles away, where the Editor is sitting) and Paris.

• On making further enquiries, the Editor was informed that, at least in the US context, a CENTRAL BANKER or bankers suffered this fate. When we probed even further and learned of the parallel INTERPOL operation in London, we deduced that this may have referred to a horizontalisation at the Bank of England: however that, for the time being, is unconfirmed speculation on our part.

• The following countries were reportedly NOT PAID [see preceding report]: Greece, Iceland, Italy and Spain. What do these countries have in common? Answer: They were/are all Bush Crime Family laundry hidey-holes. They are being suitably punished by the enforcers.

• The Bush Sr.-linked Trustee named Doug Glascow in Texas, who was required to attend at a bank in Dallas, was reported to us first of all to have informed contacts that he could not attend at the bank because he was sick. However separately, we were told, he informed another party or parties that he had been involved in a car crash. BAD MOVE.

According to our sources, INTERPOL then obtained the police records for the location of the purported car wreck; and as no such car crash incident had been reported, the Trustee was accused of lying and was arrested.

The price of such antics at this late stage includes the penalty applicable to Economic Terrorists in time of war – plus, en route, the forfeiting of all assets.

It was on the basis of THIS EVENT, that all the usually well-informed sources bamboozled us and everyone else all day on 8th January with their collective amnesia – the pretext being that since Glascow had been ‘removed’ (as reported), ‘how could we know what was happening, as he was responsible for signing off for the subsequent payments’.

• The only problem with that alibi was that the law firm behind him had/has power to ‘sign off’ in Glascow’s absence (as reported to us). But see below when we come to that issue.

• The so-called ‘Connecticut Trustee’ (see report dated 28th December 2009) was reported to us to have been distorting information for public consumption, and had been advised that if he didn’t finish his work in accordance with his responsibilities, he will, like Glascow, forfeit everything he owns – not to mention suffering investigation and prosecution which, under the CHANGE OF POLICY at the US Department of Justice, has dire implications, as we have reported.

• On 8th January, we learned as follows:

• Friday 8th January was repeatedly described to us as being ‘AN ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL DAY’.

• It was reconfirmed that Mrs Barbara Bush has been interfering.

• It was elaborated to us that Mr Glascow had attempted to divert monies to Mrs Barbara Bush.

• The Dallas Trustee, Glascow, was supposed (despite the information about what happened on 7th January) to have signed off at 7:00am on 8th January. But he couldn’t, as he had been removed from the scene, according to the preceding day’s information. As indicated, that then provided the various informants with a pretext for suddenly ‘knowing nothing’.

• An unknown number of US Treasury officials were arrested on the morning of 8th January.

• A well-informed US source told us:
‘A lot of people won’t be around on Monday if it hasn’t been done today’. Later the same source elaborated: ‘They are going to have to take down a lot of people’.

• An unconfirmed report to us stated that Dr Joseph Ackermann, CEO of the DVD’s favourite banker, Deutsche Bank, had been confronted and ‘dealt with’. We cannot confirm this at this time. But it’s certainly imperative. He’s holding the world to ransom: see: OPERATION STILLPOINT.

• We were informed that our report exposing OPERATION STILLPOINT quote ‘didn’t just hit a nerve, it severed it’. Specifically, we were informed that people hadn’t realised that Stage 1 of OPERATION STILLPOINT embraced the myriad Ponzi schemes, of which Madoff, Stanford and CMKM/CMKX are the primary examples, and all the scams from which many of our readers have suffered so badly. This includes ALL the Ponzi programs specialising in stealing the principal.

• FACT: Notwithstanding that ‘today [Friday, 8th January] is the crucial day’, the releases did not take place. How do we know this? Because certain parties who would have been appropriately informed received no information, under the blanket cover provided by the sudden epidemic of convenient collective amnesia.

THE TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP DIMENSION
In the preceding reports we referenced the Atlanta-based firm of Troutman Sanders LLP as having been instructed to break down and make disbursals, according to our sources. This has not been denied. The Administrative leadership of this firm is as follows:

Braykovich, Mark: Atlanta
Chen, Jane: Shanghai
Chrovat, Laura M,: Chicago
Clifton, Sherl A.: Orange County
Conover, Cindy A.: Washington, DC
Daniel, Sallie A.: Atlanta
Engel, Claire A.: Atlanta
Fan, Janet: Hong Kong
Field, Marina L: San Diego
Fulk, Judy A: Atlanta
Gilbert, Marta D.: Atlanta
Goold, Kimberly: Virginia Beach, Norfolk
Hinnant, Amy: Raleigh
Kunkel, Barbara: Atlanta
Murphy, Janet: Tysons Corner
Neary, Timothy R: Washington, DC
Newcomb, Robert W.: Richmond
Ramsey, William R: Atlanta
Roath, Clare Martin: Atlanta
Ruberti, Catherine I.: Atlanta
Williams, Lee Tremlett, Chief Financial Officer, Atlanta
Zimbaro, Raffaela: New York.

On both 7th and 8th January 2010, it was emphasised to us by several sources that if a single penny were misrouted or misappropriated, then (a) the key personnel would be arrested and (b) the firm’s doors would have to be closed and it would cease to be in business come next week.

• Will this firm be in business next week?

• Is INTERPOL doing it’s job adequately?

• Is President Obama protecting Panetta, Mrs Clinton, Geithner, and the other scumbags, as would appear to be the case as NONE OF THESE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN SACKED despite the fact that this is by far the worst crisis to face the United States of America for decades, and probably – if matters continue in prevailing mode – in the whole of its tawdry history?

• If Obama is protecting these people, is he not then quite plainly a co-conspirator, so that he cannot be exempted from arrest and takedown, as we were advised he was warned on his return from his vacation in Hawaii?

• Is INTERPOL vigorously addressing the theft by the CIA of $1.3++ trillion and:

• Is it not high time that INTERPOL took on the task of distributing the funds directly itself, as none of these corrupt US bankers, office holders and operatives can be trusted?

• FACT: The arrival of $1.3++ trillion in ‘Alexandria’ on 7th January may have been routed through the Tysons Corner office of the firm of lawyers mentioned above. It’s located within what London property agents call ‘a stone’s throw’ of the Central Intelligence Agency’s Langley base (sorry, we mean: the George Bush Center for Intelligence).

• As no doubt you all know, the following characters are rushing, all of a sudden, for the exits – having ‘considered their options’ over the holiday period: Senator Christopher Dodd (Stalin’s Grandson); Senator Bryan Dorgan; Bill Ritter, Governor of Colorado; and John Cherry (who has abandoned his campaign for the Governorship of Michigan).

The words ‘heat’ and ‘kitchen’ spring to mind here.

• FACT: We are informed [see above] that certain people have been quote ‘taken out and shot’ on both sides of the Atlantic. Some days ago, sources with somewhat unsavoury connections said: ‘It’s going to get bloodier’. IT IS GETTING BLOODIER.

• That’s the way it looks from London tonight.

• PERSONAL NOTE: The Editor and his wife will be attending their second grandchild’s christening in Cambridge this weekend, so the Editor will be out of his private office from 2:00pm on Saturday 9th January until late on Sunday evening 10th January. The christening’s more important.

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.

TREASURY SECRETARY ‘READ HIS RIGHTS’ AND TAGGED

cropped-chrisstory

FORMER TREASURY SECRETARY PAULSON FORCIBLY TAKEN BY MI-6 TO BERMUDA

Wednesday 16 December 2009 07:00

PLUS: THE NOTORIOUS ‘BOX GANG’ HAS BEEN DESTROYED

NOTE: This is to be read in the context of the report dated 14th December [Archive]

TIMOTHY GEITHNER CONFRONTED, PASSPORT AND DRIVER’S LICENSE REMOVED

GEITHNER HAD FAILED TO LISTEN TO THE ENFORCEMENT WARNINGS AND INSTRUCTIONS DELIVERED TO HIM ON SUNDAY. HE THOUGHT HE WAS ABOVE INTERNATIONAL LAW

U.S. TREASURY SECRETARY: ‘YOU CAN’T DO THIS TO ME’: ‘YES WE CAN’

CRIMINAL FINANCIER PAULSON HAD BEEN PULLING GEITHNER’S STRINGS

MI-6 AND INTERPOL REMOVE PAULSON TO BERMUDA

CURRENCY BOXES SEIZED FROM THE ‘BOX GANG’

NONE OF ‘BOX GANG’ MEMBERS WILL RECEIVE A PENNY

CONTENTS OF THEIR BOXES DESTROYED AS CONTRABAND

TREASURY ASKED FOR MORE CHINESE CURRENCY BOXES ‘ON LOAN’.
THE CHINESE REFUSAL – AND WHY: FUNDS WERE BEING SWITCHED TO ACKERMANN

CORRUPT LEGISLATORS AND ANOTHER: NOT BEING PAID EITHER.

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:

TIMOTHY GEITHNER CONFRONTED, PASSPORT AND DRIVER’S LICENSE REMOVED
At about 3.00pm New York time on Tuesday 15th December 2009, the Secretary of the United States Treasury, Mr Timothy Geithner, was again confronted by enforcement personnel – from among the large and heavily armed contingent of Chinese police, Interpol officers, MI-6 operatives and Swiss enforcers acting for the injured plaintiffs, the Chinese parties and the British Monarchical Power, who are engaged in enforcing the World Court’s Writ of Execution and Lien(s) on the US Treasury and the Federal Reserve System.

The Lien against the Treasury in the sum of $47 trillion was proceeded with (as we reported here on 14th December 2009) on or about 6th December, after further obstruction of the Settlements and intransigence on the part of recalcitrant US authorities.

Specifically, Timothy Geithner had his rights read to him, his passport and driving license were confiscated, and he was placed under a form of house arrest and required to wear a monitoring device at all times. This device records every word he utters and all his conversations, and identifies his whereabouts. He can go about his duties, but at the same time he is under arrest.

If he removes the monitoring device he will be re-arrested and incarcerated immediately.

GEITHNER HAD FAILED TO LISTEN TO THE ENFORCEMENT WARNINGS AND INSTRUCTIONS DELIVERED TO HIM ON SUNDAY. HE THOUGHT HE WAS ABOVE INTERNATIONAL LAW
This state of affairs arose because at the previously reported meeting to which Mr Geithner was summoned, inter alia by the same enforcement personnel, at 8.00pm on Sunday 13th December, the US Treasury Secretary was instructed to divulge information, hand over certain banking codes, and to cease and desist all obstruction of the Settlements payouts.

It is also believed that the meeting dealt with controversy surrounding payments to Saudi Arabia and the Central Intelligence Agency (the Intelligence Power).

Whether Geithner gave any pertinent undertakings at the Sunday meeting is unknown, but what IS known is that the processing of payments to the countries and Trustees was stalled on Monday and Tuesday – and that Geithner was responsible for this further idiotic interference.

Clearly, he assumed – as all of these people have done HITHERTO [but see below] – that he was above the law, and certainly above international law, which is what matters given that the Chinese and British injured parties are in the driving seat, assisted by the Swiss personnel and Interpol by virtue of the exercised Lien over the Treasury.

They therefore in law OWN the United States at the present time (until the Lien(s) has/have been satisfied), and are emphatically in the unsought-after position to tell all members of the American Administration what to do. All top US officials, from President Obama down, are SUBORDINATE to the ‘Lien Powers’ and to the World Court’s enforcers, sworn in at the US Department of Justice following their arrival aboard the eight aircraft that landed in America on 2nd December 2009.

GEITHNER: ‘YOU CAN’T DO THIS TO ME’: ‘YES WE CAN’
In summary, Mr Geithner had been required to take certain actions consistent with bringing these payment issues to an immediate conclusion, and he failed to fulfill his obligations. So at 3.00pm on Tuesday, therefore, he was confronted, arrested, humiliated, forced to wear monitoring equipment at all times, and suffered the indignity of having his passport and driver’s license confiscated.

Our sources informed us that Geithner’s response to this overdue enforcement action was to huff and puff and to complain: ‘You can’t do this to me’, to which the emphatic response was: ‘Oh yes, we can: and we ARE’. Apparently this all came as a terrible shock to the Treasury Secretary, wiping from his face the smirk of self-satisfied complacency that was widely observed as he sat behind the President at the televised opening of the White House meeting with bankers on Monday.

CRIMINAL FINANCIER PAULSON HAD BEEN PULLING GEITHNER’S STRINGS
For some time, we have realised that Mr Geithner’s predecessor, the criminal financier Henry M. Paulson, has been manipulating, advising and instructing Geithner behind the scenes to continue the sterile and indeed catastrophic economic and financial terrorism policies espoused by Paulson when he was US Treasury Secretary – policies that have wantonly saddled American taxpayers with colossal extra official debts that have to be serviced down the years through tax revenues.

This new US official debt is ALL unnecessary, given that if the fully transparent, private sector taxable Dollar Refunding Programme had been implemented as signed off by the Group of Seven Financial Powers in 2006 and 2007, none of the permissive Obamadebt would have been incurred.

We have repeatedly explained why this is the case: a government, by definition, can only generate debt, as it can not tax itself; whereas the private sector creates profits that the government can tax to finance its operations. Elementary economics.

MI-6 AND INTERPOL REMOVE PAULSON TO BERMUDA
Anyway, we now understand that, as of Monday 14th December, Mr Henry M. Paulson Jr. was no longer present in the United States. This is because he had been physically transported by MI-6 plus appropriately armed international enforcement personnel to Bermuda – a British Overseas Territory, where the former US Treasury Secretary is being held under British law within British jurisdiction and therefore within the overall power of Her Majesty the Queen, whom Paulson has defrauded of her $6.2 trillion LOAN extended in June 2007 pro bono publico to the United States.

To sum up, therefore, the two hands-on characters who have been blocking the Settlements have been confronted and either physically removed from the United States, or placed under extreme constraints that preclude further interference with the requirements of the ‘Lien Powers’ and the international community. This should facilitate completion of the payments process at last.

CURRENCY BOXES SEIZED FROM THE ‘BOX GANG’, WHICH HAS BEEN DESTROYED
Paulson, it now transpires, was a de facto member of the ‘Box Gang’ – now understood to have consisted of ELEVEN operatives, including of course Bush 41, Clinton 42, Bush 43, Mrs Hillary Clinton, Dr Henry Kissinger, and Dr Alan Greenspan.

We can now report that this notorious ‘Box Gang’ has effectively been destroyed – a development that requires some explanation. The members of the ‘Box Gang’ had custody of a quantity of boxes measuring 2ft by 2ft by about 8 inches deep, containing old US currency notes bagged and wrapped in ‘continuous’ plastic bags (like a string of sausages), plus some gold and miscellaneous precious materials. These boxes are NOT to be confused with the previously referenced currency boxes, including the Chinese boxes rescued with US military assistance from Fort Hood.

NONE OF ‘BOX GANG’ MEMBERS WILL RECEIVE A PENNY
The Bushes and other ‘Box Gang’ members had intended and expected to be paid a fee of 2% for redemption of the value of these boxes (which was where the previously reported 2% fee comes from). Since the ‘Box Gang’ members continued interfering with the Settlements process, as we have laboriously had to report ad nauseam, they were sharply warned by the international Writ and Lien enforcers that if they continued with their sabotage operations – each blaming other members of the gang, according to the familiar criminal ‘pass the parcel’ method – then their boxes would be seized, they would lose their lucrative 2% of the value of the boxes, and they would be prosecuted.

CONTENTS OF THEIR BOXES DESTROYED AS CONTRABAND
Since, as we have learned by tiresome experience, these people thought they were above the law, they maintained this arrogant attitude even when the law that mattered became international law.

As a consequence, their boxes have been removed from their custody and grasp and, after any gold and other treasure were extracted, the boxes and their contents have been DESTROYED.

Under US legislation passed in 2000 and ironically signed into law by President Clinton, all such materials are CONTRABAND.

Their value (or a fraction thereof) could ONLY be redeemed, if at all, with the Federal Reserve, although in practice the boxes would be confiscated on the spot (as contraband).

The ‘Box Gang’ had negotiated a contract for 2% of the boxes’ face value, which they have now lost, along with the boxes themselves: so the Bushes, Clintons, Kissinger, Paulson, Greenspan et al. will not be receiving a penny. THE ‘BOX GANG’ BITES THE DUST AT LONG LAST.

With the boxes having been confiscated, the ‘Box Gang’ members cannot prove that they ever possessed them; so they have been dispossessed: or rather, their extreme greed, arrogance and stupidity has left them with no payment (thank goodness) and facing pending or actual prosecution.

We are advised that any such prosecutions would proceed, more likely than not, in camera at the Old Bailey, London. Certainly, such prosecutions will take place behind the scenes.

TREASURY ASKED FOR MORE CHINESE CURRENCY BOXES ‘ON LOAN’.
THE CHINESE REFUSAL – AND WHY: FUNDS WERE BEING SWITCHED TO ACKERMANN
Concerning the entirely separate ‘Chinese boxes’ rescued inter alia from Fort Hood in dramatic and bloody circumstances in November, some of these, we now understand, were placed ON LOAN with the Treasury – a foolish arrangement on the part of the Chinese parties, who should by that stage have understood that one cannot reach agreements with serpents.

We understand that after further sabotage and intransigence by the Geithner Treasury and other US obstructionists, China’s enforcement personnel assisted by Interpol may have arrived at the relevant Treasury location and taken some of the currency boxes back. Last week, the Treasury asked for more boxes to be deposited on its site(s), but the Chinese authorities refused. (They were also stated on CNN on 15th December to have refused to purchase any more US treasuries).

In addition to the general sabotage operations that were continuing, the primary reason that the Chinese authorities refused this Treasury request for more boxes was that Mr Geithner had been removing the cash from the boxes and siphoning it electronically to the ‘Box Gang’s’ primary bank companion-in-crime, Dr Joseph Ackermann, CEO of Deutsche Bank, the leading DVD institution.
CORRUPT LEGISLATORS, PLUS ANOTHER: NOT BEING PAID EITHER
We have also been informed that NONE of the corrupt US Legislators will be receiving any payments. Mr Lieberman is reported to us to have allegedly been paid a large sum of money to block President Obama’s healthcare legislation: but that’s a separate corrupt deal that is not connected with the foregoing statement.

Finally, the Swiss have determined that a certain well-known character will not be paid either – resolving that issue from the equation, too.

So, we’re getting there.

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.

SIGNS OF AN END-GAME SHOWDOWN WITH WASHINGTON

story4

PLANELOADS OF FOREIGN AUTHORITIES DESCEND ON THE UNITED STATES

Thursday 3 December 2009 03:00

• 4TH/5TH DECEMBER:
SEE VERY IMPORTANT UPDATE AT TOP OF THIS REPORT, BELOW.

• THE REST OF THE WORLD ISSUES A DIRE WARNING TO THE UNITED STATES:
CHINA WILL PROCEED WITH EXECUTION OF ITS LIEN ETC., AND WILL BE BACKED
BY THE WHOLE OF HUMANITY: SETTLE NOW OR SUFFER IRREPARABLE CONSEQUENCES

• EARLIER BLOCKAGES CAUSED BY THE RATS IN THE PLUMBING

• SPECULATIVE INSTITUTIONS WILL NEED SOMETHING ELSE TO DO

• A BANKING OPERATIVE IS SHOT IN THE FOOT [‘RATNERED’*]

• DR HEINRICH KISSINGER, BUSH SR.’S HANDLER-C0NTROLLER

• A POWER STRUGGLE AND FIGHTING BEHIND THE SCENES?

• ‘IT WILL BE DONE, OR THERE WILL BE BLOOD ON THE FLOOR’

• RECENT PUBLIC SIGHTINGS OF ADOLF SHICKELBUSCH

• OUR PUBLISHED INFORMATION ON BUSH CRIME FAMILY CORRUPTION

• TONY BLIAR BEING EXPOSED AND SET UP AS PREDICTED

• THREE SUSPICIOUS BRITISH HORIZONTALISATIONS

• A RESPECTED BRITISH GENERAL FINGERS BLAIR, TOO

• THE POST-WAR RECONSTRUCTION SHAMBLES IN IRAQ

• THE CHAOS IS DELIBERATE: IT FACILITATES ‘BUSINESS AS USUAL’

• FACTORS IN THE BACKGROUND OF THE CHILCOT INQUIRY

• THE BRITISH PEOPLE ‘CANNOT BE TOLD’ THAT THE MILITARY
HAS BEEN HIJACKED TO SERVE CORRUPT INTERNATIONALIST AGENDAS

• CORRUPT U.S. INTELLIGENCE POWER WORSHIPS MAMMON

• CHANCELLOR MERKEL: ‘WE ARE IN A VERY CRITICAL SITUATION’

• COLOSSAL CONTRACTION OF EXPORTS WORLDWIDE

• ORIGINS OF THE U.S. INTELLIGENCE POWER’S MAMMON-WORSHIP

• SOME FAMILIAR NAMES IN THE WITCHES’ CAULDRON

• GERMAN BANKS’ ‘TOXIC ASSETS’ TIME-BOMB PRIMED

• THE DUBAI DEBACLE AND THE DODGY STATE OF BRITISH FINANCES

• ‘BRITAIN MAY LOSE ITS AAA CREDIT RATING’

• HAVE YOU RATNERED YOURSELF LATELY*?

• APPENDIX: A NEW WORLD BANK REPORT REVIEWS THE IMPOVERISHMENT ARISING FROM
THE CRISIS AROUND THE WORLD: A CRISIS THAT HAS BEEN PROLONGED BY U.S. OBSTINACY.
THE REPORT REFERS TO QUOTE ‘THE RAPIDLY DETERIORATING ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT’.

• 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.

• VERY IMPORTANT UPDATE: 4TH/5TH DECEMBER 2009:
At 2:35pm UK time on 3rd December the Editor established that President Obama DID sign papers on Thursday evening. This has since been re-reconfirmed by very reliable ‘connected’ sources.

According to these sources, Bush 41 again attempted to interfere and threatened various parties, including, it is believed, Mr Obama himself. However as you will recall from our report dated 26th November, Mr Rahm Emanuel was exposed as having withheld information from the eyes of the President of the United States. Deceiving the Head of State is a treasonous act, not least because the Head of State cannot function if his or her advisers withhold vital information or deceive their employer. Since our exposure, Rahm Emanuel has been unable to continue his devious sabotage operations. Reconstructing events, it can be seen that with such information in the public domain, Mr Obama was equipped with the necessary ‘gibbet’ on which Mr Emanuel could be metaphorically hanged should he be so stupid as to persist with his familiar obstructive operations.

He didn’t, and Obama was therefore, we surmise, better informed, and was able to round on the poisonous serpent George Bush Sr. and to tell him in so many words: ‘Keep your filthy threats to yourself. Enough is enough’. Specifically, Mr, Obama stood up to Bush Sr., at long last. It is further believed that obstruction by other snakes, such as Leon Panetta, has been ‘defanged’. Anyone so foolish as to stand in the way at this very late stage will certainly, we are told, become the fountain of ‘blood on the floor’, as previously advised. Trustees and others involved in the Settlements are reported to be performing their duties in the full knowledge that there is now ZERO tolerance, both domestically and within the international community, for obstruction, delaying tactics or any other of the notorious devices that have been deployed by bankers, operatives and the snakes generally.

President Barack Obama had made it plain that he would only sign the necessary Settlements release documents provided that he would be the LAST signatory required.

He wasn’t prepared to be messed around having appended his signature only to be torpedoed by the failure of another party to sign. The President’s will prevailed.

THE SEVEN AIRCRAFT FROM ABROAD WERE FOLLOWED BY AN EIGHTH PLANE
Further crucial information has arrived about the seven aircraft which, as we reported (below) when this analysis was first posted, flew into the United States this week. The planes contained inter alia representatives of the payee countries and World Court Justices, officials, reliable IT specialists and bankers. The country payee representatives were flown in accompanied by this entourage in the following circumstances:

• The World Court Justices and personnel were on hand to swear all concerned in on US soil. Under international law, the swearing-in of those concerned has to take place on the soil of the country against which the Writ of Execution, liens and other powers have been handed down.

• It is understood that this swearing-in process took place at the US Department of Justice.

• The EIGHTH PLANE that we have now learned about, contained INTERPOL OFFICERS, who were required to be on high alert in case of any further sabotage and obstruction, in which case the full rigours attending legal implementation of the Writ(s) of Execution and the Chinese Lien on the US Treasury, the Federal Reserve etc., would proceed without further ado.

That would have resulted, for starters, in the immediate de facto freezing of the US dollar system, followed by consequences such as those outlined in general terms below.

THE DOLLAR RISES: AND THE ‘MAINSTREAM’ MEDIA HAVE NO IDEA WHY
On Friday, following the President’s signature of the documents on the Thursday evening, the US dollar leapt on the foreign exchange market. It is quite clear from Saturday’s media reports that the UK ‘mainstream’ press has ABSOLUTELY NO CLUE WHY THIS HAPPENED.

For instance, the Times waffled: ‘The dollar leapt yesterday after a surprise fall in November’s unemployment rate to 10 per cent, raised hopes that the US jobs market had bottomed out. US employers cut 11,000 jobs in November, far fewer than the 125,000 losses economists had feared. The Bureau of Labor Statistics revised down the number of jobs lost in October from 190,000 to 111,000. The dollar surged as investors bet that slowing job losses would prompt the Federal Reserve to increase interest rates, making the currency more attractive’.

THIS IS ALL COMPLETE MAKE-BELIEVE AND BALONEY. That’s not WHY the dollar rose. The dollar rose AFTER THE PRESIDENT SIGNED OFF because, as a consequence, the necessary previously blocked funding TOOK PLACE [see above]. But of course, the ‘mainstream’, HAVING FAILED TO FOLLOW THIS STORY ALL ALONG, has absolutely NO CLUE WHAT’S HAPPENED.

This fact was further revealed (not that we need any confirmation) in an article by the respected financial correspondent for The Daily Telegraph, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, published on the 3rd December, in which he made the following statement: ‘No other coherent narrative of the crisis has been put forward’. We rest our case. The ‘mainstream’ has had its head in the sand, has ignored the biggest financial corruption story in world history, and is floundering pathetically as a consequence.

We shall now be watching with interest as the ‘mainstream’ starts to wonder why on earth, all of a sudden, come the New Year, the overall outlook appears to have been transformed. On the basis of observed experience to date, it won’t have a clue why that will be happening, either.

Secondary matters [4th December]:
Concerning the exposure of 9/11 which, as a correspondent on another website kindly pointed out on 3rd December, we have repeatedly stated will occur, this is IN PROCESS and will materialise in various ways. It is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY, as the United States cannot ‘move on’ without total disclosure of that gross abomination, which will definitively strangle the Octopus and its Works of Darkness as it proceeds. The American people NEED THIS CATHARSIS, and they will get it.

Finally, on a minor note, it has been asserted that ‘rogue FBI agents’ are ‘feeding the Editor with disinformation’. We have no FBI contacts and would not trust them if we had, as the FBI is known to be effectively a component and subsidiary of the corrupted Intelligence Power: so we wouldn’t rate ANY information from such a source even if we were receiving it, which we aren’t.

• ‘Stimulus money’ note: There wasn’t any money. It was all ‘smoke and mirrors’. There couldn’t be any ‘stimulus money’ prior to the Settlements, as the funds have reportedly been taken from them.

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 for details of our latest distributed intelligence publications. This has its own Archive, giving details of earlier 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.

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:

PLANELOADS OF FOREIGN AUTHORITIES DESCEND ON THE UNITED STATES
At 9:30pm UK time on Wednesday 2nd December, we established as follows:

• Seven aircraft arrived in the pariah United States on this date packed with foreign dignitaries, officials, enforcement personnel, banking and IT experts and World Court officers, for the purpose of reading the riot act to the criminals holding high office in Washington, demanding immediate compliance with the justified release requirements of the international community, and enforcing compliance and procuring immediate release of the Settlement funds.

(A separate confirming report mentioned five such aircraft arriving on this date).

• It was made known to the pariah United States at the highest level on this date that in the event of any further obstruction, China would finally exercise its full rights under the Writ of Execution and its lien on US assets at the Treasury, the Federal Reserve and the White House, and that any such move by China would be supported by the entire international community. This would result in a global crisis of unprecedented proportions, with world financial transactions and trade subjected to immediate and drastic constraints, including the likely imposition of exchange controls and the irretrievable winding-up of globalisation.

• George H. W. Bush (Sr.) and George W. Bush (Jr.) have indeed been explicitly threatened (it was reported to us again on this date) with horizontalisation; and if this is deemed necessary because of their further interference [see below], there will be no hesitation in performing this task.

One report advises that former President Clinton has received a similar direct warning that he will be liquidated if he stands in the way.

It is also believed that Dr Henry (‘Heinz’) Kissinger was put on notice to similar effect.

THE REST OF THE WORLD ISSUES A DIRE WARNING TO THE UNITED STATES:
CHINA WILL PROCEED WITH EXECUTION OF ITS LIEN ETC., AND WILL BE BACKED
BY THE WHOLE OF HUMANITY: SETTLE NOW OR SUFFER IRREPARABLE CONSEQUENCES
The following well informed elaborations and deductions flow from the above, within which the NESARA information has been passed to us by usually reliable ‘connected’ sources [however we cannot at this time elaborate on or confirm ANY of the NESARA data, and neither will we enter into ANY correspondence on the subject, especially given the fluidity of the situation overall]:

• The White House and relevant US authorities have been informed (and it has been confirmed to us) that if there is any further US resistance and impediments to the releases, the Rest of the World will enforce the releases (by technical means) and will ‘implement NESARA’ (the National Economic Security and Reformation Act (X)’ signed by President W. J. Clinton in 1996 which comes into effect when announced). This will mean the bypassing of the Electoral College, the immediate removal from office of the US Cabinet and most legislators, the standing down of officials whose positions are dependent upon the continuation of President Obama in office (such as Leon Panetta), the removal of the President and Vice President Biden from office, and implementation of the special interim arrangements under which the United States is restored to Constitutional rule and an election is arranged six months after NESARA takes effect. The international ramifications of NESARA will be comprehensively complied with by the international community.

• (X) The correct title of what we are referencing is: National Economic Security and Reformation Act. This dimension is now global and implies Global Economic Security and Reformation Action, proxy for the cleaning up of the colossal unholy mess consequent upon the corrupt dealings of successive American postwar Presidents, arguably beginning with President Truman when he and Alan Dulles procured the fudging of the Japanese Settlement which let Japanese war criminals off the hook, and specifically with Nixon when he financed what became the LDP Establishment via a corrupt transaction in exchange for election funding in his lust to become President. And as the stepfather of Ferdinand Marcos was Chinese, it is no surprise that the Yamashita/Marcos gold over which such strife has been perpetuated (Golden Lily ops.) underlies the Fraudulent Finance that is the source of the contemporary crisis. This has the immediate potential to backfire even beyond the extent suggested in the summary outlined above. As of about 5:00pm on 3rd December, Obama had NOT signed off on the documents said to have been presented for his urgent signature. BUT SEE UPDATE AT THE TOP OF THIS REPORT. THE SITUATION CHANGED ‘OVERNIGHT (UK)’

• In such circumstances, all implicated holders of high office, officials, justices and legislators go to jail, and the corrupt Presidents will cease to exist (see ‘blood on the floor’ warning below).

• It is understood that the situation at time of posting was that the US authorities have been or were being advised that this represents the international community’s final position in this US-prolonged crisis; and that the relevant personnel have been offered a choice between immediate compliance and release of the hijacked Settlements, and the upheaval specified in general terms above, which will entail ‘blood on the carpet’ and will have devastating global consequences that will of course take the compromised and somnolent ‘mainstream’ media wholly by surprise.

• Concerning ‘news management’, the strong impression we have gained on this score is that no arrangements are to be made to manage the international fall-out if the obstruction persists, as all multilateral cooperative arrangements will become meaningless and useless in practice, the world community’s residual patience is beyond exhausted and the mood is that the world will have been tipped into a state of unfettered economic warfare, with all extant transborder arrangements and international institutions immobilised, and the international banking system disintegrated back into its national components behind tariff barriers and exchange controls.

• Corollaries to this state of affairs would undoubtedly include the collapse of the European Union Collective and its institutionally corrupt European Commission, with its unapproved accounts stretching back 14 years. European structures are in any case threatened by the imminent possible implosion of one or more German banks [see below].

• By definition, in such circumstances, all offshore and off-balance sheet bank balances become worthless overnight (or rather, ‘more worthless’ than is already the case to a considerable extent, in practice). This puts paid to the notion that the Fascist criminalist clique could wind up in a position to buy up the world’s main assets at firesale prices.

• All 800+ US military bases outside the United States will have to be abandoned or mothballed as 100% of US troops operating abroad will be repatriated under NESARA, bringing an abrupt end to the scandalous drug-protection operation in Afghanistan (which will no longer be ‘necessary’ as the transborder interbank market will have collapsed, so it won’t need further lubrication with drug-trafficking proceeds); while the US occupation of Iraq, and all US military operations and presence in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, The Philippines, Japan, the British Indian Ocean Territory and elsewhere, will be terminated in short order.

• The criminalised US Intelligence Power would in such circumstances cease to be viable, as it will no longer be able to finance its globally reckless intermeddling and destructive ‘Black Operations’ with fraudulent finance scams, or to fund itself as a malevolent and corrupt ‘State within the State’ independently of Congress (which will in any case no longer be there, to begin with), so that it will cease to be ‘necessary’ and will be obliged to downsize and recall all its operatives from foreign stations. The US State Department will likewise encounter serious continuing problems with the running of its Embassies, many of which will be forced to downsize or close down altogether.

• Things have been allowed to drift out of control to such an extent, that informed circles around the world will not be dismayed at most of these consequences of US official intransigence that we have been partially describing – many of which will be secretly welcomed with relief.

So unpopular and disliked has the United States now become as a consequence of the unfettered arrogance of its criminal controllers, that, in accordance with the prevailing international mood, as explained to us, the view is that nothing short of a shake-up of the colossal proportions indicated, will purge the world of the menace of US official criminal banditry and decadence. This shake-up, with ‘unintended consequences’, of course, will materialise absent immediate compliance with the United States’ responsibilities and the justified demands of the international community.

Outline details of recent developments beyond this point in the present narrative occurred and were written up PRIOR to our obtaining the information summarised above.

EARLIER BLOCKAGES CAUSED BY THE RATS IN THE PLUMBING
On the Wednesday before Thanksgiving, Timothy Geithner, the US Treasury Secretary, again blocked all Settlements progress, according to our sources.

As explained in our report dated 26th November, the US Treasury had embarked upon a fraudulent operation to provide (cashable) US Treasury guarantees against vast accumulations of Federal Reserve trash-debt, incurred as a consequence of PRIVATE SECTOR transactions.

The retrieved currency boxes brought to the Treasury from Fort Hood and China [see preceding reports] are being used to underpin these duplicitous guarantees, in an operation that appears to have involved a double-cross of Chinese parties, although that is still speculative. The Federal Reserve is a PRIVATE SECTOR entity and the accumulated debt other than US Government debt that it holds is PRIVATE SECTOR-generated.

The fraud consists of a ‘smoke and mirrors’ operation whereby such debt is ‘guaranteed’ with US Treasury guarantees which, as previously stated, are encashable. What this means in practice is that the ‘guaranteed’ ‘private’ debt with the Fed is fraudulently converted into PUBLIC SECTOR DEBT that will have to be paid down by generations of Americans into the future.

This fraud represents a further treasonous act for which the perpetrators should be arrested and put on trial for treason in time of war. During the Second World War, traitors were shot at dawn.

SPECULATIVE INSTITUTIONS WILL NEED SOMETHING ELSE TO DO
Under overt Communism, and in places like Iraq and Iran, speculators used to be/ still are hanged repulsively in public. The inflated US and foreign financial institutions that have grown obese from marketing both US Government debt – including of course the trillions of official Obamadebt that are 100% UNNECESSARY, as Refunding of the Dollar on the books by means of transparent private sector trading operations would have yielded an ongoing cascade of on-the-books tax accruals – have systematically and persistently resisted the Settlements, which will trigger the Refunding, because in that case, after a while, THEY WILL NEED TO FIND SOMETHING ELSE TO DO.

A BANKING OPERATIVE IS SHOT IN THE FOOT [‘RATNERED’*]
On Saturday 28th November, sources informed us that two banking sector individuals had been identified subsequent to the preceding Wednesday as having interfered with the resolution. The exact timing of the following events is slightly unclear, but the intelligence is as follows:

• One of the bankers concerned, based in London, had the requisite codes and was believed to have ‘cooperated’ and not tried to impede settlement. He didn’t need to because:

• The second of the two fingered bankers failed to show up at the relevant paying bank, on the orders of DR HENRY ‘HEINZ’ KISSINGER, the triple agent with the heavy guttural German accent. (Not sure whether he says ‘TELEFON’ in lieu of ‘telephone’, but you get the drift here).

• Following an intensive search for this character, sources inform that he was traced, we believe, to a restaurant. He escaped from his table to the restroom, and escaped from the restroom out into the darkness, but was apprehended AND SHOT IN THE FOOT by enforcement elements.

• As these enforcement personnel were of course heavily armed, he then faced having (as it was put to us) ‘his head blown off’, if he didn’t release the codes that he should have activated earlier in the day. Sources indicated that he did so. He was then apprehended.

DR HEINRICH KISSINGER, BUSH SR.’S HANDLER-C0NTROLLER
In our reports we have not hitherto given sufficient prominence to Kissinger (Soviet codename: BOR). This notorious German serpent of Jewish extraction who slithered seamlessly into the US Establishment, where he was welcomed of course by fellow snakes, prevailed upon President Gerald Ford [real name: Leslie Lynch King Jr.] to sack William Colby (who was horizontalised on Bush Sr.’s orders probably because of his old involvement in, and detailed knowledge of, the Nugan Hand ‘Golden Triangle’ drug-trafficking and laundering operations) as Director of Central Intelligence, in favour of the criminal operative George Herbert Walker Bush, as a result of which the CIA was penetrated at the top by the pan-German long-range strategic deception apparat.

It seems clear that Kissinger is actually Bush Sr.’s superior in this Hall of Death, directing him and operating as the elder Bush’s ‘handler’ (every intelligence operative has one or more ‘handlers’). Given his German Jewish background, Kissinger qualifies as a top Megawatt operative (Mossad-CIA), and possibly as a Metabridge deceiver (Mossad-CIA-MI6-DVD), which may be a problem now that the Germanophile Sir John Scarlett is no longer in charge of MI-6 and Tony Blair is indeed, as we predicted, getting his come-uppance at the ongoing Chilcot Inquiry [see below].

On Tuesday 1st December, we were informed that the releases scheduled for that date had been explicitly blocked by George Bush Sr. This was reconfirmed by separate informed sources. When the Editor pointed out that Kissinger had been doing the ‘blocking’ a few days earlier, the voice at the other end commented: ‘Kissinger and Bush Sr. are one and the same’. Precisely.

A POWER STRUGGLE AND FIGHTING BEHIND THE SCENES?
On Wednesday 2nd December it was reported to us [but see above] that there was a question as to whether Barack Obama had signed off on the latest revision of the necessary Settlements release documents. If he had signed off, that would have indicated that the Bush-Kissinger gangsters were continuing with their interference ops. However we discovered that, according to our sources, Mr Obama had NOT signed off the revised release papers, which in turn signalled that Barack Hussein Obama may remain directly involved in this criminality. [On the other hand, this delay may well have been connected with the stand-off reported at the top of this commentary].

The question has to be asked:
WHAT WAS STOPPING MR OBAMA SIGNING OFF THE REVISED RELEASE DOCUMENTS?

With the former Vice President Cheney reportedly making provocative statements apparently criticising those who question the underlying purposes of US involvement in Afghanistan, his real intention being to try to protect himself from prospective war crimes indictments as exposure of the drug-trafficking imperative behind this war (as with Vietnam) progresses, Barack Obama, who has ordered a surge in Afghanistan, should surely understand that he, too, might be vulnerable to such an indictment in due course – especially as Mrs Hillary Clinton is placing statements on the record before the National Security Grand Jury that has been investigating many aspects of these matters, including those that we have been exposing in these reports. In this connection there may be a split between former President Clinton and his CIA-wife, Hillary.

Why would Mr Obama add to his problems by continuing to block the Settlements – especially as Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s Chief of Staff, was reportedly told that if he continued to stand in the way, he would ‘cease to exist’? Sources now inform us that, behind Barack Obama, the Settlements are being blocked in real-time by Mr Leon Panetta, the Director of Central Intelligence, in a desperate stand to prevent the termination of the CIA’s free-wheeling Fraudulent Finance operations that have made it the most dangerous criminal enterprise in the world.

‘IT WILL BE DONE, OR THERE WILL BE BLOOD ON THE FLOOR’
From several sources came the message [2nd December 2009] – and this is a direct quote that we have been AUTHORISED to use NOW:

‘It will be done, or there will be blood on the floor’.

In the foregoing context, we have also received several indications of ‘infighting’, or a power struggle, going on behind the scenes. When we asked sources whether this meant verbal and internal strife within the structures, we were told: no, probably physical as well.

That is also the impression gained from various separate reports received in this office from close observers in the Washington DC area, and elsewhere.

RECENT PUBLIC SIGHTINGS OF ADOLF SHICKELBUSCH
In the report dated 26th November, we noted that a correspondent had reported that a friend in Houston had taken his wife out for an anniversary dinner at a restaurant where he observed a party which included George H. W. Bush Sr. and Barbara (Pearce) Bush, who was ‘calling the shots’ and issuing directions to all present.

On 30th November, a long-standing subscriber and correspondent indicated to us, separately from another report, that he observed Bush Sr. ‘in the owner’s box at the Reliant Stadium in Houston at the Houston-Indianapolis pro-football game played in Houston’ that Sunday afternoon. The source said that Bush Sr. ‘looked a little ragged but he was next to a young woman not his wife’ [no need to get excited: she was probably a security detail].

OUR PUBLISHED INFORMATION ON BUSH CRIME FAMILY CORRUPTION
In our report dated 26th November we released certain intelligence implicating inter alia both Bush Presidents in grotesque corruption, and we were subsequently informed cryptically that ‘this has been used’ (i.e. appropriate use had been made of the intelligence). It is understood that, since the information (and the accompanying further data) could not be ignored, the effect was to accelerate events while at the same time sharply raising the temperature behind the scenes.

In addition to the reference to Bush Sr.’s Caribbean accounts, you will of course have noted that $12.5 billion of monies awarded consequent to legal process for disbursal to CMKX DIAMONDS INC (CMKX:OTC) were stolen on the instructions of President George W Bush by Executive Order on the Sunday before he left office, from the DTC suspense account in which they were held ready for disbursement. This incredible finding has shocked many observers, we understand.

You will also have taken note of the heading to our report dated 26th November: ‘The financing of Al-Qaeda by US intelligence‘ – a title which we were informed after the posting was ‘absolutely, specifically accurate’. As for the rest of the ‘hard’ information we published, its relevance to ‘the interested’ goes without saying: and has been confirmed.

Concerning Marvelous Investments Limited, the following information first published in the three reports exposing the Wanta ‘Principality of Snake Hill’ deception [20th September, 22nd October and 17th November 2009] is re-appended for the record:

THE ‘MARVELOUS INVESTMENTS LIMITED’ DIMENSION
At incorporation, the officers of Marvelous Investments were shown under Article VIII of the incorporation documents to be:

• Lee (not Leo) E. Wanta (President and Director) of (Residential address): 4000 Steeles Avenue West, Suite #221, Woodbridge, Ontario, Canada L4L 4VS;

• Charles Crowninshield (Treasurer and Director) of (Residential address):
400 Main Street, Boxford, MA 01921, USA; and:

• John (a.k.a. Giovanni) Ferro (Director) of (Residential address):
16 Madill Street, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M9P 2PS.

BANKING ARRANGEMENTS FOR MARVELOUS INVESTMENTS LIMITED
Banking arrangements for Marvelous Investments Limited were encapsulated in a document, a genuine copy of which is held by this service, which reads in toto as follows:

CORPORATION ACCOUNT: (SECURITY CASH ACCOUNTS ONLY: FULL AUTHORITY)

BANK OF AMERICA
231 NORTH LaSALLE STREET
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, USA 60697-0000

THE UNDERSIGNED CORPORATION, BY LEE E. WANTA, ITS PRESIDENT, PURSUANT TO THE RESOLUTIONS, A COPY OF WHICH AUTHORIZES YOU TO OPEN AN ACCOUNT IN THE NAME OF THE SAID CORPORATION, AND THE UNDERSIGNED REPRESENTS [sic] THAT NO ONE OTHER THAN THE UNDERSIGNED HAS ANY INTEREST IN SUCH ACCOUNT.

THIS AUTHORIZATION SHALL CONTINUE IN FORCE UNTIL REVOKED BY THE UNDERSIGNED CORPORATION BY A WRITTEN NOTICE, ADDRESSED TO YOU AND DELIVERED AT YOUR OFFICE IN CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, USA.

BY THIS DOCUMENT, WE, MARVELOUS INVESTMENTS LIMITED, AUTHORIZES [sic] THE BELOW-MENTIONED PERSON TO OPEN SAID BANK OF AMERICA-CHICAGO ACCOUNT IN FAVOUR OF SAID CORPORATION:

MR THOMAS G. HENEGHAN
2405 FREY AVENUE
VENICE, CALIFORNIA, USA
TELEFON [sic]: 310 305 9606

CALIFORNIA DRIVER’S LICENSE – C-204-6914, EXP: 3.17.04

Dated: ……………

YOURS VERY TRULY
MARVELOUS INVESTMENTS LIMITED
BY: LEE E. WANTA, PRESIDENT.

TONY BLIAR BEING EXPOSED AND SET UP AS PREDICTED
The ‘takedown’ of Anthony Charles Linton Blair, predicted by this service, has accelerated since we last reported. This is highly significant generally, because it represents a further dimension of the unravelling of the operations of the Octopus, revealing that ‘the worm is indeed turning’ and that a blinding spotlight is being shone into the Bush-Abwehr-Kissinger-CIA pitch Blackness, which is an indication that we are indeed observing further signals of an historic discontinuity.

Some of the language used in recent days to describe the enormity of the crimes committed by Bliar (proxy for the Bush-CIA-DVD Hell Machine) has been much sharper than we are used to in the laid-back United Kingdom (although those using such language should have done so much earlier).

For instance:

• On 30th November, George Pitcher, a columnist with The Daily Telegraph, wrote:

‘Tony Blair, with a truly toxic mixture of sanctimoniousness and wealth-enhancing chutzpah, has always maintained that his Iraq invasion was a just war. He has held firm to this shibboleth with trembling lip and quasi-religious conviction. But the letter to him from Lord Goldsmith, which emerged at the weekend, changes everything’. [Goldsmith was the Attorney General at the time].

‘Dated July 29, 2002, a full eight months before Blair launched his grotesque Middle Eastern misadventure, the then Attorney General wrote to tell him that such an invasion would be illegal under international law. It is in the bundle of documents at the Chilcot Inquiry, to be addressed when the former Prime Minister, abortive President of Europe and putative Middle East peace envoy, gives evidence to it in the New Year’.

Blair’s line has always been that he was “guided” by the Attorney General. It turns out that this guidance was unequivocal and in writing from the outset, and was not what he wanted to hear.

Blair had to despatch a couple of his heavies, in the shape of Lord Falconer and Baroness Morgan, verbally to duff up Lord Goldsmith and to bully him into toeing the line, so that Blair could honour his private pledge to follow George W. Bush into the valley of death’.

[Recall our repeated reminder that the ONLY product these people generate and have on offer is, precisely: DEATH (spiritual as well as physical)]…. ‘Blair’s actions were not only illegal, as now conclusively demonstrated by Lord Goldsmith’s evidence: they were also immoral’.

THREE SUSPICIOUS BRITISH HORIZONTALISATIONS
And what about the sudden horizontalisations of Dr David Kelly and the former Blair Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook, who died way before his time from a ‘sudden’ heart attack, like Blair’s predecessor as leader of the Labour Party, John Smith?

This ‘dirty linen’ is inserted here just to remind ‘the interested’ that these horizontalisations won’t be brushed under the British Government’s filthy dirty carpet, should by any chance it have been assumed that this has already been satisfactorily accomplished.

A RESPECTED BRITISH GENERAL FINGERS BLAIR, TOO
Nor is the aforementioned newspaper columnist alone in pointing fingers at Blair. On the contrary, Mr Pitcher’s pointing finger has been joined by the right forefinger belonging to the distinguished General Sir Michael Rose, who has bluntly called for Tony Bliar to be prosecuted for war crimes following the illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq.

Writing in ‘The Mail on Sunday’ on 30th November 2009, Sir Michael stated that the Chilcot Inquiry on the origins of the war should be the first step in a judicial process that brings those responsible for the disasters of the Iraq War before the Courts, ‘and could, as I shall explain, ultimately result in Tony Blair being indicted for war crimes’.

Sir Michael then reviewed the past week’s evidence to the Chilcot Inquiry which proved that Mr Blair lied blatantly to the House of Commons and the public about Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The article reconfirmed that the evidence spelled out how Mr Blair ‘AND OTHER SENIOR GOVERNMENT FIGURES’ [our emphasis – Ed.] had been told that there were ‘no WMDs, no missiles, no atom bombs and that there was no legal basis to pursue a war against Iraq’.

‘Despite these compelling accounts of what happened, the truth is that we already know the main lessons of Iraq: Britain was taken unprepared into war on false grounds, and the inevitable result was the destruction of Iraq, enormous loss of life’ [THE DEATH PRODUCT] ‘and continuing political turmoil in the Middle East. Worse, the Iraq War has radicalised Muslim opinion against the West throughout the world, even spawning terrorism on the streets of London’, Sir Michael wrote.

The General elaborated that Britain has a tradition of holding its leaders to account when they lead the country into a disaster. He pointed out that when the British Army was defeated at Yorktown in 1781 at the end of the American War of Independence, the entire British Cabinet resigned. When Winston Churchill, who, as First Sea Lord, had been the main architect of the Empire’s Gallipoli campaign against the Turks, saw the scale of the disaster that occurred in 1915, he immediately volunteered for the trenches in France where it is believed he hoped either to find death or to be able to redeem his honour.

[The Editor’s father somehow survived the entire duration of the First World War in the trenches].

By contrast, General Sir Michael Rose added, Blair swans around the world today making millions from business contacts and lectures. And to make matters still worse, a large proportion of these earnings are only possible because of his US and Middle Western contacts arising out of his unconditional support for the Bush War and Death Machine.

THE POST-WAR RECONSTRUCTION SHAMBLES IN IRAQ
On 1st December, the Chilcot Inquiry heard from Sir Peter Ricketts, former Director-General of the political section of the Foreign Office, who said that attempts by British officials to persuade the Americans to delay the invasion of Iraq so that post-invasion reconstruction preparations could be properly finalised instead of being rushed, met with the usual arrogant brush-off from Washington – accompanied by boasts that the coalition forces would be welcomed as ‘liberators’.

This represented a piece of naïve US military ignorance, which failed to take account of the obvious psychology that ANY invading power will be loathed by the population being invaded, IRRESPECTIVE of the malodorous characteristics of the national government under which the population has been languishing.

Sir Peter told the Inquiry that the so-called Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance (ORHA) set up by the Pentagon had been very poorly prepared with ‘very little time and very little expertise’ and ‘very few people’ for this ‘huge undertaking’.

He added that ORHA was ‘a shambles’. Edward Chaplin, the former head of the Middle East section of the Foreign Office, told the Inquiry that post-war planning had been ‘dire’, hampered by a belief in the United States that there would be ‘dancing in the streets’ when the troops entered Baghdad. He added that there was ‘a touching belief [in Washington] that we shouldn’t worry so much about the aftermath, because it was all going to be sweetness and light’.

Thus, not only has the US Intelligence Power systematically provoked the universal corruption of the banking sector with its open-ended Fraudulent Finance operations designed to perpetuate and finance both its own usurpation of supreme power and hegemony in the United States itself, as well as to fund its rampaging ‘Black Operations’ around the world; but its chronically brainwashed and penetrated co-conspiring, rampant partner in crime, the US Military Power, cannot even be relied upon to conduct an invasion and occupation in a disciplined manner without ‘messing up’ – thanks to its insufferable, coruscating arrogance and self-belief. Wherever the American military goes, mayhem follows, in conformity with the norm that its sole product is DEATH.

THE CHAOS IS DELIBERATE: IT FACILITATES ‘BUSINESS AS USUAL’
HOWEVER, what needs to be understood is that this chaos is to an extent DELIBERATE. As in the case of The New Underworld Order operation known as the European Commission, the accounts of which have not been approved by the EU’s Court of Auditors for the past 14 years, IRREGULARITY PROVIDES ADDED SCOPE FOR CORRUPTION.

After all, the chaos which followed the US-led invasion provided cover not only for the ransacking of the Central Bank of Iraq (and the subsequent mass murder cover-up of the 100++ operatives involved in that operation), but also for the Bush-controlled ‘misdirection’ of those preprinted banknotes destined for Iraq that wound up in the collaborating custody of the Central Bank of Jordan, whence the huge consignment could subsequently be stolen ‘with impunity’.

Contrived chaos, then, is good for ‘corrupt business as usual’. Hence the protestations of the British officials at the Chilcot Inquiry betray their profound and incompetent failure to understand how the corrupted and criminalised US Intelligence Power thinks and works.

FACTORS IN THE BACKGROUND OF THE CHILCOT INQUIRY
Concerning the Chilcot Inquiry’s deliberations, we would like to point out additionally, as follows:

(1): In the first of these analyses [dated 12th October 2005: see Archive], it was reported that Blair was at the receiving end of 75 million Euros as a payola pay-off from a DVD Swiss bank slush fund for ‘facilitating’ the European Union’s Collective Treaty du jour – equivalent to about $100 million, which was placed first with the Central Bank of Belize (and showed up in Belize’s official foreign exchange reserves in March 2006). It is believed that the Belizean authorities seized these illicit funds. None of this has ever been denied: and it’s all been ‘out there’ for more than four years.

(2): It was reported at the time of the Iraq War that $134 million had been paid into an Abu Dhabi bank account with Blair as ultimate beneficiary, by the Bush-Baker-Cheney Crime Syndicate as a payoff for dragooning Britain’s Armed Forces into the illegal Iraq War on a false pretext, and lying about the background to the House of Commons.

(3): As can be seen from the above, British officials knew perfectly well that the Iraqi régime did not possess Weapons of Mass Destruction. But what is being covered up here, as we noted earlier, is that the WMD were removed from Iraq under its version of the Romanian-Soviet ‘Sarindar’ WMD dismantling programme, exposed retrospectively by the former head of Romanian intelligence, Ion Mihail Pacepa in the third quarter of 2003 [in The New York Times], and promulgated inter alia via our newsletter Arab-Asian Affairs. The Iraqi WMD were removed on board two Soviet vessels that sailed from the Iraqi port of Umm Qasr in February 2003. [Note: Further details on how the Soviets themselves actually dismantled the Iraqi WMD and transported it away in a fleet of trucks, has been made available to us and will be elaborated upon as soon as time permits].

• The Editor was badgered by a Pentagon-linked operative named Demchuk (‘The Visitor’) to reveal what he knew about all this, even though the Pentagon must have known perfectly well that Ion Pacepa’s revelations (published retrospectively in September 2003) were accurate. Demchuk’s concern, we believe, was not to establish the facts of the Soviet involvement, but rather to make sure that the Editor was not about to blow the reality that the Soviets had removed the WMD, which would have destroyed the US pretence, echoed by Mr Blair, that the Iraqi régime possessed WMD, used as the pretext for the invasion – which was really all about completing the ‘switch’ component of the Bush Crime Family’s ‘bait and switch’ operation against Saddam Hussein, Bush Sr.’s former trading partner, so that the Central Bank of Iraq could be seized, its assets, gold and currency stolen, and access gained to the Rafidain Bank sub-accounts in London, thought to have held a colossal volume of funny money based on hypothecated trading operations.

• So far, there has been no hint in the Chilcot Inquiry hearings that any of the British officials concerned knew about the Iraqi ‘Sarindar programme’. This either means that these mandarins were and are incompetent, or else that they are being typically disingenuous and duplicitous, or rather ‘economical with the truth’ – or all of the above. It was known as early as 1991 that the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office had thrown away its Library on Communism and the Soviets, as we ourselves bought some of their discarded volumes, which clearly indicated that the Foreign Office truly believed that the Soviet Union and Communism were ‘dead’. That may explain why the words Russian or Soviet have not so far been noted at the Chilcot Inquiry.

• Finally, like all senior UK military, General Sir Michael Rose himself appears not to understand that military power in The New Underworld Order has been collectivised. In other words, Britain’s military power has been and continues to be hijacked and diverted in pursuit of an internationalist agenda, the surreptitious nature and purposes of which CANNOT BE REVEALED to the general public, which pays for these abuses through its high taxes.

THE BRITISH PEOPLE ‘CANNOT BE TOLD’ THAT THE MILITARY
HAS BEEN HIJACKED TO SERVE CORRUPT INTERNATIONALIST AGENDAS
The underlying point here is that in order for Britain to continue to wield military power, it is ‘necessary’ for the population to remain under the illusion that our military exists to defend the British people and its assets and interests. That is not the case. Britain’s military power has been collectivised and is therefore being exploited for purposes that are alien to the interests and priorities of the British people.

• And it gets worse: because not only has Britain’s military power been hijacked in pursuit of an internationalist agenda, but that agenda has itself been hijacked a second time round, to conform with the priorities of the (now cornered) criminalist cadres within the manipulating elements of the controlling US Intelligence and Military Powers – namely, in the case of Iraq, to seize the assets of the Central Bank of Iraq, gain access to the Rafidain Bank sub-accounts, and seize the Iraqi energy assets so as to meet the imperative of never having to fall back on reliance upon US domestic oil production. As previously explained, domestic price-fixing is illegal: hence the external dual cartel structure – with OPEC covering for the price-rigging perpetrated by the energy corporations.

CORRUPT U.S. INTELLIGENCE POWER WORSHIPS MAMMON
The US Intelligence Power is fixated upon illicit financial operations to the virtual exclusion of everything else, except murder and the maintenance of an intense barrage of disinformation, diversionary New Age claptrap, lies and fabrications perpetrated by all means at its disposal – via the ‘mainstream’ media (Operation Mockingbird), and nowadays through its immense sponsorship and control of a vast array of websites which specialise in maximising the potential for the ongoing intensification of the fog of confusion – the objective being to mask, and divert attention from, the criminality of the US Intelligence and Military Powers, and to procure that the crimes and Ponzi frauds perpetrated by their operatives never see the light of day.

That colossal agitation and propaganda offensive is now failing, which explains why there is much concern at our routine posting, at the top of these reports, of the text of the Misprision of Felony Statute. This places EVERY AMERICAN with knowledge of criminal activity ON THE SPOT, making many (we know for a fact) feel decidedly uncomfortable.

At an earlier stage of this research, we identified operatives located in remote parts of the United States who had been equipped with Haliburton cases containing the equipment necessary for the operatives to be able to access the military ‘grey screen’ for illicit financial trading and monitoring purposes. One source spoke of CIA having had special satellite equipment erected on the family home which was ‘never understood’.

ORIGINS OF THE U.S. INTELLIGENCE POWER’S MAMMON-WORSHIP
The US Intelligence Power’s obsession with illicit and clandestine financial operations can be traced historically to the Black Eagle Trust or Fund and the Philippine Golden Lily sequence – the obsessive ransacking by US ‘freelance’ teams of ‘former’ operatives, impeded by characters such as General Singlaub (who spent millions digging for stored gold in the Philippines in all the wrong places), of the hoards of gold ingots amassed and stolen by the Japanese during the Second World War, and buried in ‘holes’ primarily in The Philippines under the (incorrectly alleged) direction of General Tomoyuki Yamashita. This gold included ‘royal gold’ exported from the United Kingdom to Asia when the British assumed that Hitler might overrun the whole of Europe, including the British Isles. A sizeable number of these ‘gold holes’ are located within the territory of the US-leased Clark Air Base, explaining the real reason for US plotting to retain this base.

Among the cast of characters following Henry L. Stimson and Bill Donovan who shaped the CIA’s obsessive orientation towards Mammon from the outset were William Casey, whose legacy at the US Export Import Bank has ensured that this institution has remained heavily involved in dubious intelligence community financial operations ever since; Allen Dulles (ditto: Bank of New York, now BoNY Mellon); General Olmsted (International Bank of Washington; Financial General Bancshares and the criminal money-laundering Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI) CIA bank); Paul Helliwell and William Colby (Castle Bank, HouseHold Bank, Mercantile Bank; and the Nugan Hand International Bank, used for laundering drugs from the ‘Golden Triangle’ founded in Sydney in 1973 by the Australian lawyer Frank Nugan (thought to have been a Mafia operative) and the former US Green Beret Michael Jon Hand, who had operated as an assassin, controlling multiple assassination squads in Northern Laos under Operation Phoenix); General Earl Cocke (Black Eagle Trust, or Fund; Driscoll Trust; Synergy Trust; Pilgrim Investments (George H. W. Bush); Martwell Investments (Marc Rich, a.k.a. the long-range DVD operative Hans Brand); and Project Hammer – the operation to bring down the Soviet Union so that the Soviet oil and gas resources could be brought under the control of US and Western investors); Henry Morgan and Spencer Morgan (Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan Chase: Chase Manhattan); and George B. Moore (First National City Bank: Citibank, which wound up with over 116,000 tonnes of the stolen Yamashita/Marcos gold).

SOME FAMILIAR NAMES IN THE WITCHES’ CAULDRON
Any investigation of these linkages will pull up names such as Adnan Kashoggi, J. Keswick, Henry Keswick (of the British connection: Jardine Mathieson); Richard Armitage, the notorious, foul-mouthed drug-trafficking expert; William Colby; Lucky Luciano, Carlos Marcello, Santos Trafficante, Meyer Lansky, heads of US Mafia families, hired for ‘special tasks’ and ‘delivery protection’ by the CIA; David Kimche (the Head of the Israeli Foreign Office, whose British brother Jon Kimche sold the newsletter Arab-Asian Affairs to the Editor of this service many years ago, and then proceeded deliberately thereafter to furnish us with detailed information about the SOVIET involvement in Iraq which completely blotted out any hint of nefarious US intelligence operations there); the CIA’s professional assassin, Ted Shackley; Robert Gates, the former Director of Central Intelligence, now in charge at the Pentagon; Oliver North, of Iran-Contra notoriety; Richard Secord; General Singlaub; Bin Mahfouz [see In Memoriam and Horizontalisation News]; Richard B. Cheney; Leo or Lee Wanta; Donald Rumsfeld; Colin Powell; Paul Wolfowitz; Miss Condoleeza Rice (whose codename is: Velvet Mushroom); and of course George Herbert Walker Bush and Dr Henry (‘Heinz’) Kissinger.

CHANCELLOR MERKEL: ‘WE ARE IN A VERY CRITICAL SITUATION’
Given the evils inflicted on the world as a consequence of the traitorous clandestine activities of the US Intelligence Power (and its Mossad, DVD and MI-6 associates in any Metabridge context), a moment of schadenfreude is appropriate as we contemplate the unexpected statement, reported on 1st December 2009, by Bush Sr.’s duplicitous agent and STASI operative, Frau Angela Merkel, the former Secretary of the Agitation and Propaganda Department of the Kommunist Yugend at Karl-Marx University in East Berlin, now functioning as the German Chancellor:

‘We are in a very critical situation. We are going to discuss with leaders of the financial institutions what can be done to head off a credit crunch’.

What ON EARTH can Frau(d) Merkel have meant by THAT?

The German Government is reported to be rushing out a new emergency package of measures for consideration by the Bundestag, to buttress ‘ailing banks’ and to prevent a ‘second wave’ of the debt crisis suffocating a large swathe of the grossly over-extended German manufacturing sector. The Bundesbank recently revealed that German banks are contemplating some 90 billion Euros’ worth of probable write-downs over the next year. The package of measures reportedly includes a scheme under which 10 billion Euros would be allocated for the purchase of ‘toxic’ (i.e. fraudulent) securities from the banks, at a colossal discount.

At the end of November, a survey by the IFO institute of Munich revealed that lending conditions in the German economy tightened sharply in October, with 53% of German manufacturing firms having encountered problems in obtaining credit. The President of IFO, Hans-Werner Sinn, commented that ‘the financing situation of firms remains critical and poses a real risk to economic recovery’. Volcker Trier, the Chief Economist for the German Chamber of Industry and Commerce (DIHK), is reported to have added that the Middelstand (middle-ranking) family firms are in difficulties: ‘The real test has yet to come: the drastic decline in sales has not yet shown up in balance sheets’.

COLOSSAL CONTRACTION OF EXPORTS WORLDWIDE
As we have recently pointed out, immense declines in exports (and therefore of imports) have been reported from all over the world. For instance, the volume of exports by Italy over the 12 months to July 2009 collapsed by 68.7%.

Data for selected countries: Australia (August 2009), – 30.2%; Austria, – 37.0%; Belgium, – 28.5%; Canada, – 40.7%; Czech Republic, – 30.8%; Denmark, – 24.8%; Finland, – 44.8%; France, – 26.0%; Germany, – 28.3%; Greece, – 28.1%; Hungary, – 26.1%; Japan, – 26.8%; South Korea, – 21.0%;
Mexico, – 26.3%; Netherlands, – 28.3%; New Zealand, – 26.4%; Norway, – 34.5%; Poland, – 32.9%; Portugal, – 29.3%; Slovak Republic, – 32.7%; Spain, – 16.6%; Sweden, – 24.9%; Turkey, – 29.3%;
United Kingdom, – 33.5%; and United States, – 26.0%.

Within the area of developed countries covered by the OECD membership, the average year-on-year contraction of export volume to June 2009 was 29.9%, with the contraction of exports by the major seven OECD economies averaging 33.2%; and within the European Union Collective as a whole, the average decline was 29.0%.

GERMAN BANKS’ ‘TOXIC ASSETS’ TIME-BOMB PRIMED
But WHAT prompted the normally cool Frau Merkel to allow such panicky comments of hers to be widely reported? Not, surely, her concern about the problems facing German manufacturing firms (which have displaced, for instance, much of the British manufacturing sector, thanks to ‘free trade’ within the EU’s ‘internal market’, in accordance with the original aggressive pan-German blueprint set out in the Nazi compendium Europäische Wirtschaftsgemeinshaft of 1942).

No. There’s a much more immediate, and ghastly, nightmare that has been keeping this STASI operative awake at night on her estate east of Berlin. It is this:

• Deutsche Bank, Dresdner Bank, and reportedly also Commerzbank, are stuffed to the gills with worthless ‘toxic’ trading junk ‘assets’ which threaten to destroy the big German banks as the US-attempted clandestine operation to reignite the derivatives trading bonanza fails, so that the counterparty ‘assets’ held by the German banks are being exposed as worthless, given that off-balance sheet ‘assets’ cannot legally these days be brought onto the balance sheet.

• Viewed conventionally by analysts who have largely ignored the criminal finance dimension, there are ‘fears’ that a cascade of corporate downgrades by rating agencies will compel banks to place more equity capital aside, thereby compounding the existing contraction of credit, at a time when lending to the private sector in Germany contracted by 0.8% over the 12 months to October 2009, while key money supply measures have also been contracting when adjusted for inflation.

• But viewed ‘unconventionally’ and therefore accurately, so as to take account of the ‘cover-up’ dimension associated with the exposure of Fraudulent Finance, the German Chancellor’s quite uncharacteristically anguished public observation indicates loud and clear that the game is almost up for the criminal financial enterprises in Germany that have been corrupted by the Bush-DVD Criminal Finance carousel: as we shall doubtless observe in the weeks and months ahead.

It will be recalled that we recently indicated earlier that a huge overhang of Fraudulent Finance positions mature during December 2009.

It is unprecedented for the usually buttoned-up Chancellor Merkel to let her guard down with such a public indication of how worried she is. And with good reason. She forgot to bring a long spoon when supping with Adolf Shickelbusch.

THE DUBAI DEBACLE AND THE DODGY STATE OF BRITISH FINANCES
As has been well understood internationally, of course, the ownership of 28% of the London Stock Exchange by interests in beleaguered Dubai has obvious implications for the City of London.

The crass stupidity of this example of ‘globalisation’ is now staring the LSE in the face. In the final week of October, Dubai World requested a ‘standstill’ debt agreement from its creditors which shocked investors who had wrongly assumed that the Central Bank of the United Arab Emirates would stand behind Dubai World’s extrenal debt. Payments on this debt fall due within the next two weeks. Shortly thereafter the Central Bank announced that it would be providing liquidity support on favourable terms for local and foreign banks.

But the Chief Economist with Banque Saudi Fransi in Riyadh, John Sfakianakis, warned on 1st December: ‘The [decision by the UAE Central Bank] is a step in the right direction, but a bare minimum. This only deals with the domestic banking system. They have not yet made any announcement dealing with the debt of Dubai’.

That may reflect the possibility that a significant number of accounts in the United Arab Emirates may have been frozen by order of the World Court, according to an unconfirmed report received by this service – as part of the enforcement procedures surrounding the stealing and diversion of sovereign assets that we have repeatedly referenced in earlier reports. In this connection there was recently a curiously brief UK press mention of the fact that a senior Ruler from the United Arab Emirates was in the presence of Her Majesty The Queen in London, even as the Dubai crisis was exploding in the faces of the criminal finance fraternity in recent days.

‘BRITAIN MAY LOSE ITS AAA CREDIT RATING’
Meanwhile, the European investment team at Morgan Stanley, of all sources, published a report featured on 1st December entitled ‘Tougher Times in 2010’ which included the following assertions:

‘Growing fears over a hung parliament [in Britain, which goes to the polls in 2010] would likely weigh on both the [British] currency and gilt yields, as it would represent something of a leap into the unknown, and would increase the probability that some of the rating agencies [may] remove the United Kingdom’s AAA status’ as a sovereign borrower.

‘In an extreme situation, a fiscal crisis could lead to some domestic capital flight, severe pound weakness and a sell-off in UK Government bonds. The Bank of England may feel forced to hike [interest] rates to shore up confidence in monetary policy and stabilise the currency, threatening the fragile economic recovery’.

However in Britain, there has been NO ECONOMIC RECOVERY, with the economy shrinking in real terms by an officially estimate 0.3% in the third quarter of 2009 (an annualised rate of 1.2%).

The OECD has predicted that the British public sector deficit will reach 13.3% of Gross Domestic Product in 2010, in real terms. Morgan Stanley, anticipates a 10% further reduction in sterling’s trade-weighted external value, completing the most extreme slide in the pound’s external value since the industrial revolution. The decline would exceed the 30% collapse that occurred after Britain was driven off the gold standard in 1931.

The irony of Morgan Stanley, of all institutions, promulgating such realities requires no elaboration.

HAVE YOU RATNERED YOURSELF LATELY*?
Given the blockages perpetrated by the RATS, and the report about a code-carrying banker or trustee having been shot in the foot, and on a closing and lighter note, it may be recalled that a British jeweller, Gerald RATner, with an engaging sense of humour, triggered the near-destruction of his own successful business in 1991 when he jokingly told a meeting of shareholders that a sherry decanter set that his firm was selling for £4.95, was a piece of ‘crap’.

After seven years of despondency – during which, he reports, the highlight of his day was watching the TV show ‘Countdown’ in bed in the afternoons – Mr Ratner picked himself up, started again, and now runs Britain’s biggest Internet-based jewellery business.

In an article in The Daily Telegraph on 2nd December 2009, Mr Ratner described the odd sensation of having had his name hijacked and incorporated into the English language.

Specifically, the verb ‘to ratner oneself’ has come to mean ‘to shoot oneself in the foot’; while ‘to have been ratnered’ means ‘to have been provoked into shooting oneself in the foot’. As a noun, the word ‘to do a ratner’ has the same connotation. (Proper incorporation into the vocabulary presupposes dropping the capital R for Ratner).

Mr Ratner pointed out ruefully that ‘in the past week alone, Boots [a UK pharmaceutical store] had acknowledged that it ‘did a Ratner’ by admitting that so-called herbal remedies didn’t necessarily work, although it was happy to sell them; while British Telecom was said to have ‘Ratnered’ itself when it hooked its Chairman up to Broadband in a small village where no-one else has Broadband access. And now John Bercow, the Speaker of the House of Commons, has finally admitted that the “reputational carnage” inflicted’ [on themselves by Members of Parliament due to their greed and insensitivity over their so-called ‘expenses’, which has revolted the entire nation] had ‘meant that Parliament must urgently restore an image that “it has managed to Ratner”’.

The commendable Gerald Ratner realises that – notwithstanding his remarkable achievement in picking himself up off the floor from the slough of despondency and depression lasting seven years, and surfacing with another high-flying jewellery business – he won’t be remembered for his business achievements at all.

No Siree. He’ll be famous for having contributed a potently descriptive verb and noun to enrich the English language. For that, and for his own successful deratnerisation, he will be remembered for ever and ever. Amen.

PS. Gerald Ratner says he has set up a ‘Google alert’ which sends him an email every time his name crops up on the Internet. No doubt, therefore, he’s reading this column ‘as we speak’.

APPENDIX: A NEW WORLD BANK REPORT REVIEWS THE IMPOVERISHMENT ARISING FROM
THE CRISIS AROUND THE WORLD: A CRISIS THAT HAS BEEN PROLONGED BY U.S. OBSTINACY.
THE REPORT REFERS TO QUOTE ‘THE RAPIDLY DETERIORATING ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT’.
Readers and subscribers will be well aware that we know, and have in the past, referenced the participation of the World Bank in certain Fraudulent Finance operations. However the quality and professionalism of World Bank and IMF staff is, generally speaking, second to none: so that a clear distinction must be drawn between abuse of the international institution’s inner workings (via its tax-exempt bank account privileges, for instance), and the professional work of the staffers.

The World Bank has just issued a report, summarised below, which provides new information on the impact of this crisis, which has been prolonged by the criminal behaviour of US office-holders and operatives, on parts of the Rest of the World (the phrase we use to distinguish everywhere else from the United States itself). We append a summary of the new report:

The global financial crisis is having a devastating impact on families in emerging Europe and Central Asia, with the risk of the region giving back a fifth of the poverty reduction gains of the past decade, according to a new World Bank report. By 2010, there could be over 10 million more poor people in the region, and close to an additional 25 million more who were almost middle class but now just above the poverty line (relative to pre-crisis projections) with the potential of losing their homes, jobs, and basic services.

The new report, ‘The Crisis Hits Home – Stress-Testing Households in Europe and Central Asia’, takes a unique look at the impacts of the global financial crisis at the household level in this region. According to the report, families are being hit by credit market shocks, the increasing prices of goods and services, and rising unemployment.

“The global financial crisis risks reversing the substantial gains and improvements in living standards achieved by the Europe and Central Asia region over the last few years”, said Luca Barbone, Director for Poverty Reduction and Economic Management in the World Bank’s Europe and Central Asia Region. “One of the tragic impacts of the crisis has been that the middle income countries that had turned the corner, are the ones hardest hit. Across countries in the region, unemployment levels have risen while economic activities have collapsed. Poverty will rise. Families are being stretched to the limit”.

• Editor’s inserted Note:
See data for the collapse of exports, in the narrative above. See also the report’s reference below to quote ‘THE RAPIDLY DETERIORATING ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT’ unquote.

CREDIT MARKET SHOCKS
The report says that stress tests recently conducted by the World Bank on household loans show that ongoing macroeconomic shocks to interest rates, exchange rates, and household income may increase the numbers of families that are unable to pay back their debt.

For example, up to 20 percent more families with mortgages and other loans in Lithuania and Hungary could be at risk of defaulting on their loans.

PRICE SHOCKS IN THE PIPELINE
The food and fuel crisis may not be over. International commodity price levels have not returned to pre-2007 levels. In addition, falling currencies in some countries are now generating a new round of price increases. Because food represents a very large share of the poor’s total consumption – in some of the low-income countries of Europe and Central Asia, the food share of consumption among the poor is 70 to 80 percent – the poorest consumers will again be vulnerable.

In addition, in a number of countries, such as Belarus, Moldova, and Ukraine, the utility reform program remains largely incomplete. As a result, a number of countries will have to adjust their energy tariffs to cost-recovery levels in the coming years.

EMPLOYMENT AND INCOME SHOCKS
Over the recovery period following the 1998 Russian crisis through 2006, more than 50 million people moved out of poverty in the region. However, the poverty impact of this crisis will be enormous. The RAPIDLY DETERIORATING GLOBAL ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT [sic] is eroding the region’s substantial gains and, given the increased poverty projections, is threatening the welfare of a total of about 160 million people – close to 40 million people who are poor and approximately 120 million people who are just above the poverty line.

It is the middle-income Commonwealth of Independent (CIS) countries that have seen the largest and most significant downward revisions to their Gross Domestic Product growth projections.

COPING WITH THE CRISIS
According to the report, lessons from the region’s own experiences with previous crises suggest that temporary economic shocks have a lasting impact on human development, as families cut back their education and health investments in response to a banking or exchange rate crisis.

Compared to past crises, the scope for households in Europe and Central Asia to fall back on their traditional coping strategies – from secondary employment and money transfers from friends and family to working abroad – is much more limited. [SUMMARY ENDS].

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.