Monday, June 9, 2008

LAST-MINUTE BLACKMAIL DEMAND 'AGREED TO' BY G-8 FINANCIAL POWERS

25% REPORTED CREAMED OFF THE TOP OF SETTLEMENTS

LAST-MINUTE BLACKMAIL DEMAND 'AGREED TO' BY G-8 FINANCIAL POWERS

By Christopher Story

Go To Original

CRIMINALIST CADRES RECOUP THEIR LOSSES UNDER GUISE OF 'HUMANITARIAN' DEMAND

It has been reported to us that the World Court agreed to the terms of a petition, believed to have been lodged by the World Bank, providing for 25% to be sliced off the top of the aggregate Settlements figure for redirection to ‘humanitarian’ purposes*.

According to sources, the last-minute demand was accompanied by what amounted to a threat that if this concession were not forthcoming, the Settlements would be aborted. (The latest information at posting was that they are moving forward, but such assertions, as we know, are meaningless).

Pragmatic arguments presented to the World Court may have focused on the ‘urgent’ requirement for additional finance to enable the World Bank to come to the assistance of developing countries that are being brought to the edge of destitution by rapidly rising food and fuel prices.

No doubt every kind of ‘reasonable-sounding’ pleading that can be imagined, including ‘climate change’ (previously known as global warming), will have been thrown into the petition, for good measure. Also presented, no doubt, was the argument that the global refinancing would be skewed if the World Bank were not to be refinanced on a scale commensurate with the global Settlements operation in parallel, given the importance of the World Bank per se. And so on and so forth.

CONDITIONAL AGREEMENT TO THIS BLACKMAIL BY THE G-8
Our several sources inform us that, faced with this last-minute demand, immense pressures (see below) were brought to bear, with the end-result that the Group of Eight (G-8) financial powers finally AGREED to 25% of the Settlements aggregate being creamed off the top, as requested. HOWEVER, this concession was made contingent upon the following two conditions:

The releases must have been completed by Monday 9th June 2008.

In the event that there are any further delays, the 25% concession will cease to apply and certain major countries will take matters into their own hands. We have been requested not to elaborate on what this means, at least at this juncture.

‘HUMANITARIAN PURPOSES’ IS CODE FOR PAYOFFS TO CRONIES
Being interpreted, what this latest disgraceful state of affairs means is that, through one or more collectivised international financial institutions, which are understood to have acted as cover for hidden financial corruption on a massive scale over the years, payoffs may be intended for all the usual suspects, headed by the Bush-Clinton crime nexus.

As the Editor knows from his observations and reporting on embedded fraud inside the European Commission’s structures, all these globalist collectivised institutions are riddled with corruption or ‘creative accounting’, in their privileged, taxation-free environment, not least since they report to nobody, are subject to no meaningful external accounting disciplines, and nobody takes ultimate responsibility for wrongdoing since the institution, being a collective, takes decisions collectively, with the buck stopping nowhere.

Moreover, given this state of affairs, they develop their own self-serving ‘ethic’ – which permits transactions to take place that would be criminal if undertaken in the outside world.

Recipients of secret payoffs ultimately derived from this 25% ‘slice’, aggregating multiple trillions of dollars, may, however, discover that they could face ‘unanticipated’ difficulties to which they have never been accustomed – such as having to provide ‘source of funds’ information, a consideration which suggests that, in practice, actual enjoyment of their 'restored' funds may prove problematical.

Given the size of the Settlements overall, 25% would certainly RESTORE the finances of the Bush Crime Family, which were decimated by President Bush Jr., as a consequence of naked shorts and other unfortunate operations (as we reported), and would FLOAT OFF Mrs Hillary Clinton, so that her renewed financial muscle would enable her to bribe whoever she needed to bribe, in order to avoid the fate that otherwise may (or should) await her.

Mrs Clinton’s theatrically ‘delayed’ announcement of her withdrawal from the competition to be the the Democratic presidential nominee for the forthcoming US General Election is believed to have been DIRECTLY RELATED to this coup against the Settlement funds, we understand.

For Jezebel is thought to have demanded, not least as a price for her political cooperation and in lieu of no longer being able to ‘run’ stolen or diverted monies, a slice of the ‘clean’ Settlements funds – a demand coordinated with the Bush Crime Family.

As a Senator who has taken her oath of office, such behaviour is treason; but since the holders of the highest offices in the United States have been committing treason daily ever since they came to power, this consideration is hardly likely to have weighed with this notorious CIA operative.

THE CENTRAL ROLE TO DATE OF THE CIA’S HILLARY CLINTON
To appreciate this dimension, we need to rehearse a few basics about Mrs Clinton’s role here.

Hillary Clinton, a long-term CIA operative with a reputation for ruthlessness, was ‘promoted’ behind the scenes to run as candidate for the Democratic nomination, by none other than Herr Godfather George H. W. Bush Sr., inter alia so that she could ‘look after’ Bush Sr.’s interests.

Some of the mists surrounding Jezebel’s activities in the background have recently lifted, especially the blanket of fog that has masked her alleged financial operations. Let us explain.

When the ‘Wanta’ $4.5 trillion was brought over from the People's Bank of China in May 2006, as described in our Wantagate reports and confirmed in the text of Mr Wanta’s Petition for a Writ of Mandamus [see Wantagate reports dated 24th June and 5th July 2007], the funds were hijacked by Bush Jr.’s newly appointed Treasury Secretary, (the late) Henry M. Paulson, and were then ‘run’ by Mrs Hillary Clinton. This FACT has been confirmed to us by several sources of late, but, although previously mentioned in these reports, had not hitherto fallen into clear focus.

Mrs Clinton competed for the Democratic nomination for a number of motives, of which the least understood were that she was fronting for George H. W. Bush Sr. (the Bushes and Clintons work together), was tasked with running Wanta’s hijacked money, and was relied upon to emerge as the Democratic candidate so that, the forthcoming election having delivered the ‘necessary’ outcome, she would, as President, be able to restore the financial corruption status quo, signalling ‘business as usual’ for the Bush Crime Family and its myriad associates in the corrupted elements of the US intelligence, financial intermediary and banking sectors – as though nothing had ever happened.

THE $6.2 TRILLION IN THE CITIBANK SUSPENSE ACCOUNT
The original $4.5 trillion that we were told had been earmarked for the Wanta Settlement having first been replicated (several times over) and then stolen, ‘replacement’ LOAN funds, believed to have been made available by order of Her Majesty The Queen (probably deploying funds furnished by a branch of the Rothschilds, although obviously this cannot be confirmed), were delivered via the Bank of England into the hands of Bank of New York Mellon, which was supposed to act as the conduit for the funds, as we reported on 30th July 2007.

The ‘replacement’ monies, aggregating $6.2 trillion, were subsequently established to be located with Citibank (as we also reported), where secret bank accounts were discovered in the names of the key highest-level criminalists, including the Clintons.

Guardian of these secret accounts was, and remains, Mr Robert Rubin, Clinton’s former Treasury Secretary. Although Sir Win Bischoff, the senior British banker originally from Schroders, who had apparently managed some of Wanta’s funds many years ago, was sent over to Citibank in 2007 from London, together with Mrs Catherine Weir, as we believe, in order to act as the eyes and ears of Her Majesty The Queen, the real power at Citibank, given the state of affairs summarised here, has evidently remained all along in the hands of Robert Rubin. He sat (and sits) there, protecting the secret bank accounts and historically blocking what was supposed to have been the Leo/Lee Wanta Settlement and Plan, as approved in June 2007 by the Group of Eight financial powers.

THE SITUATION FACING MRS CLINTON IN EARLY JUNE 2008
Before continuing, we can take a quick glance at Mrs Hillary Clinton’s political options prior to any decision on her part to step ‘out of the nomination race’. It is known that the vote tallies in the New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Kentucky Democratic primaries were rigged (using the same, long since exposed, electronic voting machine scamming procedures that had enabled the Bush-supporting components of the criminalised US intelligence community to steal the 2000 and 2004 Presidential Elections). It follows that, since the rigging of electronic voting handled inter alia by the Diebold machines, continues (exposure of this scandal having made no difference), voting in the forthcoming US General Election will also be scammed. That can be taken for granted.

Since the Republican candidate, John McCain (Mr Cain), has indicated in no uncertain terms that he will take steps that will de facto facilitate a ‘reversion’ back to the (financial corruption) status quo, should he be elected President, it is probable that Mrs Jezebel H. Clinton could ‘arrange’ for (a) a proportion of her supporters to switch to Mr John McCain (as has ALREADY been hinted at) and/or (b), more to the point, for blatant electronic vote-rigging to take place, as before, so that the outcome is again ‘thrown’ in favour of the Republicans.

This sounds far-fetched, and it may have become unlikely now, but it is EXACTLY the sort of thing that these crooks are believed to have had in mind.

As we know, the fact that Bush Jr. ‘stole’ the 2000 and 2004 General Elections has not prevented him from ‘preaching democracy’ in the Middle East, in repeated displays of hypocrisy so obnoxious that it has nauseated all who could bear to absorb this information. But since WHEN was SHAME a word that featured in the vocabulary of these criminalised mental defectives?

THE REAL REASONS MRS CLINTON SOUGHT THE NOMINATION
Notwithstanding that many influential Democratic Party figures had been clamouring, both publicly and behind the scenes, for Mrs Jezebel to retire from the ‘race’, her earlier confidence against the background of mounting evidence of failure, and her behaviour in clinging to her old status as the former Democratic front-runner, have puzzled all who have been unaware of the REAL reasons that Mrs Clinton has been running at all, which can be summarised as follows:

She has been fronting for George Bush Sr., guarding his flank and illegally running the Wanta money as quid pro quo for facilitating an intended reversion, come the new Presidency (Clinton or McCain), BACK to corrupt business as usual.

She has been protecting her own future (as she may see it) from the day of reckoning that may await her ‘down the pike’, given sealed indictments against her and her vulnerability to retribution, e.g. for the 'diversion' of that undeclared $500 million from Crozier Bank, Grenada, and for other alleged crimes that would be much too tedious and unpleasant to mention here. (When four US operatives went down to Grenada to investigate that theft, it was discovered that the bank’s video camera system tapes were blank during the precise period that Jezebel was present in the bank).

Her presence on the US political stage contending for the Democratic nomination buttressed the position of Robert Rubin, who as noted is the guardian of the secret bank accounts held at Citibank in the names of high-level US criminal operatives, all of whom have been diverting funds.

The sudden demand for 25% of the Settlements aggregate may have represented a bold Bolshevik throw of the dice by the Bush-Clinton organised crime circles, along the lines of: as you won’t let us continue to undertake our usual untaxed financial operations below the radar, and as the British police have seized our collateral [see below], we will take 25% of the ‘clean’ Settlements money, thank you. Otherwise we’ll see to it that George Bush Jr. continues to block the Settlements.

5TH JUNE: WORLD BANK SUDDENLY SOLICITS G-8 ‘PROJECTS’
On 5th June, sources advised us that, all of a sudden, the Group of Eight financial powers were being solicited by the World Bank for (‘humanitarian’) ‘projects’, to be funded by the 25% that has been or is to be creamed off the top of the Settlements aggregate. We know how much money is involved, but it has been suggested that we should not reveal this information.

The kind of scenario would be that a given Group of Eight country would respond to such urgent solicitations by informing the World Bank that, oh, we’d like, say, five hundred billion to upgrade our entire mass transit network, or: we need ten new nuclear power stations, at, say, $2.0 billion a piece, please. Response: Great, we will allocate $X billion for this, that and the other project, and another $Y billion for your second choices. Or whatever – ‘projects’ being the standard cover for corrupt, hidden fiat financial operations and payoffs. Remember: every corrupt financial operation has to be ‘covered’ and therefore masked by a ‘plausible’ front project (preferably labelled with a marketable humanitarian or global warming dimension, for public consumption).

In other words, the sudden World Bank requests for ‘project’ information from the Group of Eight countries that reportedly 'agreed to' the 25% ‘tax’, represent a collective OBFUSCATION initiative to provide the necessary ‘justification’ to cover the ‘expenditure’ of the 25% ‘penalty’ or blackmail money hijacked from the Settlements aggregate at the last moment, as reported.

We need hardly be fooled by these sudden ‘feelers’ requesting the Group of Eight countries to submit ‘project’ proposals, knowing, as we do, that only a small proportion of such projects (a few cosmetic ones) will ever materialise – with the bulk of the funds earmarked for the aforementioned payoffs, including huge remittances to the Bush and Clinton Crime Families.

So Mrs Clinton will, according to this analysis and on the basis of these reports, be ‘floated off’ after she has left the nomination stage; and because of her new ‘bribery power’, she will (it may be cynically assumed) become ‘untouchable’ again. Back to Square One.

These solicitations for ‘humanitarian projects’ from the G-8 countries which started on 5th June, provide us with indirect confirmation (on top of other indications) that the 25% ‘charge’ levied at the last moment by the criminalist cadres, fronted by the World Bank, has been concluded.

THE 25% DEMAND: BACKDROP TO BUSH’S TRIP TO GERMANY?
It is likely that Mrs Jezebel stalled, with respect to her conceding to Obama, while this last brazen piece of treasonous blackmail against the whole world, was attempted and conceded by the Group of Eight financial powers. It is easy to see how the G-8 countries will have fallen for this ruse: after all, not only would some key leaders have been made aware of ‘tempting offers’, but the prospect of huge projects’ being financed and offering untold further opportunities for graft, will have been mouth-watering. Exactly how long this particular obfuscation process may take, is anybody’s guess.

Ominously, President George W. Bush Jr. is reported to be scheduled imminently to visit Germany, as was the case in June 2006 and again in June 2007. Given that George Bush Sr. implements long-range strategy developed by the Pan-German Abwehr (Deutsche Vertiedigungs Dienst) operatives working from their Dachau headquarters, these visits by George Bush Jr. to Germany, always timed to coincide with the most sensitive phases of this crisis, are naturally disconcerting.

THE SEIZURE OF THE SAFETY LOCK BOXES IN LONDON
In the light of the above, we can now perceive more clearly how the seizure of 7,000 safety lock boxes and vaults by 300 heavily armed British police undertaken on Monday 2nd June, which has been continuing ever since, fits into the picture. Each of the 7,000 boxes or vaults is being treated as a separate crime scene. We can also understand more easily why the Metropolitan Police made sure that the press were briefed ahead of these raids, so that photographers and reporters could be present at the scene of the Mayfair operation.

In our report on 4th June, we noted that the splurge of orchestrated publicity that followed the raids in Mayfair last Monday, was not replicated in the press the following day, and we suggested that this indicated the likelihhod that further press coverage of the unprecedented British police operation had been officially discouraged.

But given the heightened international tensions of which the police raids were symptomatic (see below), any de facto ‘gag’ was almost immediately lifted, since on 5th June, reports on the police lock box and vault seizures appeared in The Independent, The Sun, the London Evening Standard and the Belfast Telegraph, to name some of the UK newspapers monitored.

The purpose of the preplanned Scotland Yard publicity on Tuesday 3rd June was to signal to the criminalist cadres, governments and elements concerned with the Settlements that they have lost control of the situation and that they will be held to account, that the $6.2 billion 'replacement' loan funds held in the suspense account with Citibank is now hostage to the British authorities, and that matters had better proceed seamlessly, without further ado.

We are reliably advised that our assessment of the importance of this police operation has been correct, because the safety boxes are indeed believed to contain nothing less than many of the original stolen assets and documentation, including possibly some Wanta assets, that have been used since the 1980s as collateral for the vast hypothecation and leverage operations which have brought the world financial system to the brink of collapse.

As we pointed out in the report dated 4th June, original underlying assets and collateral have tended to be held in safety deposit boxes outside the banking system, at commercial operations such as Safe Deposit Centres Limited that are believed to be controlled by intelligence cadres – with the ‘derived’ assets, rather than the original collateral, being held in safety lock boxes at financial institutions (although this pattern is thought to be very far from universal).

In this connection, the British police investigations may well identify the whereabouts of the gold confiscated during the ransacking of the Central Bank of Iraq, which was reportedly brought to London. Some or all of this gold could have been stored in the vaults with Safe Deposit Centres Limited in Mayfair or Edgware.

It has also been suggested to us that Rafidain Bank assets/collateral, seized after the Central Bank of Iraq had been taken over, could turn up in these safety deposit lock boxes and/or vaults. One motive for the Bush Crime Family attacks on Iraq will have been the recovery or stealing of assets used or held by Saddam Hussein from the days when George Bush Sr. et al and the Iraqi dictator, trained along Nazi lines, were 'buddy buddy' partners in crime.

INVESTIGATIONS WILL LEAD TO GROUP OF EIGHT FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
It stands to reason that the drastic mass seizure of the safety lock boxes by the Metropolitan Police raises pertinent questions about these original assets and will inevitably direct police enquiries to financial institutions, including some of the biggest financial names in the United States, Canada, Britain, Japan, Germany, Switzerland, the Netherlands and Israel. We COULD name the institutions that are liable to find themselves subjected to police enquiries, the senior personnel of which will wind up under investigation and interrogation; but we won’t, for the time being.

Now, given that the banks in question ‘belong to’ Group of Eight countries, some idea can perhaps be gained as to the nature of the immense pressures that have been/are being brought to bear on the Group of Eight financial powers:

On the one hand, the leaders of some of these countries are said to be beside themselves with anger at the brazen Bolshevik blackmail perpetrated via the World Bank on behalf of the criminalist cadres, in demanding a 25% ‘cut’, accompanied by the threat, implied or otherwise, that, if this were not to be forthcoming, the entire Settlement process would be aborted.

On the other hand, given the timing of the raids on the lock boxes and vaults in London by the British police, some of the Group of Eight's biggest institutions and their senior personnel are in imminent danger of being exposed as criminal enterprises, like Citibank and the other American institutions that we have identified as such in the past.

BRITISH POLICE HAVE SEIZED THE UNDERLYING COLLATERAL
So what, then, was the real significance of the timing of the British police raids?

We speculate that the seizure of the safety deposit boxes and vaults represents a long overdue retaliatory measure by the British authorities which ‘just happens’ to provide immense leverage against ALL concerned, to ensure that the Settlements process is completed – and at the same time to signal to the criminalist forces hiding behind the cover provided by the World Bank that if they imagine that they can revert to ‘business as usual’ by exploiting the 25% ‘tax’ that has been abruptly imposed at the last minute, they have another shock coming.

At the same time, if they interfere with the Settlements now (as was clearly continuing to happen as this report was being prepared, although we were still being told that matters were ‘progressing’), the British authorities may hold all the trump cards and (put it this way) the police investigations will ‘run their full course’. And remember, this devastating cornucopia of prospective sanctions is quite separate from the measures that several very powerful countries have made it clear, behind the scenes, that they will take, if the US and German criminalists continue to overplay their hand.

One can also imagine certain tense ongoing international exchanges, including such equations as this: ‘Halt the British police investigations’. ‘No, we don’t do that kind of thing in Britain. We have no powers to do so, even if we were so inclined, which we aren’t’. ‘Then we’ll carry on sabotaging the Settlements’. ‘Go right ahead: we’ll recall the $6.2 trillion (CASH) from Citibank’. ‘Why don’t you try that? You’ll destabilise the entire international banking system, including banks in the United Kingdom’. ‘Not relevant. The police are in the driving seat’.

Finally, we have to say that we have been advised, within the past 36 hours, by TWO completely separate informed sources, one British, one American, that the level of tension behind the scenes, arising from this Luciferian intelligence war over money, has reached the stage at which certain preparations are being made just in case the outcome fails to meet demands and expectations.

That’s all we can safely say at this juncture.

UPDATE, 6th June 2008: Since others are using the word 'war', that's what we are referring to.

* A source has stated overnight that the 25% is to be/has been sliced off the 'humanitarian' money. THAT IS NOT WHAT WE STATE HERE. We mean that 25% is to be/has been sliced off THE ENTIRE SETTLEMENT, the total value of which we have been asked to withhold. Remember the difference (which some people still seem to have a problem with) between WHOLESALE and RETAIL. The 25% is off the WHOLESALE NUMBER. It stinks either way, but an assertion to the effect that it doesn't impact across the board, made this morning, is INCORRECT.

We note separately that some sources on the police raids have lifted the text verbatim from British newspapers, for instance, the Belfast Telegraph. That newspaper was referring to juicy 'tangibles', such as stolen paintings etc. Yes, such artefacts are being/have been found: but that information is just fodder for the general public, to ensure that the story continues to run as though it is all about locating a cache of stolen goods. But THAT IS NOT WHAT THESE BRITISH POLICE SEIZURES ARE IN FACT PRIMARILY ALL ABOUT. We note with interest that certain US sources are indeed quite keen that the reports should be reduced to a mundane press story about the recovery of stolen goods. One may wonder why they should be so keen that this should be the interpretation.

Evidence of extreme panic at the highest levels of the US Government is meanwhile accumulating.


ANNEXE:

REITERATION OF THE STATUTES, SECURITIES REGULATIONS AND LEGAL PRINCIPLES OF WHICH THE CRIMINALISTS, THEIR ASSOCIATES AND RELEVANT BANKSTERS ARE IN BREACH:

LEGAL TUTORIAL: The Steps of Common Fraud:

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

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

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

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

Step 3: Theft by Deception and Fraudulent Conveyance:

THEFT BY DECEPTION:

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

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

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

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

FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE:

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

“Conveyance made with intent to avoid some duty or debt due by or incumbent on 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’.

SECURITIES REGULATIONS OF WHICH BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON IS IN BREACH AND OF WHICH THE SIX ‘LEVY BANKS’ MAY LIKEWISE BE VARIOUSLY IN BREACH [CREDIT SUISSE, UBS, DEUTSCHE BANK, BANK OF AMERICA, CITIBANK, THE BANK OF ENGLAND]:

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

In addition to which Bank of New York Mellon is/was in violation of:
97-13 Bank Secrecy Act, Recordkeeping Rule for funds transfers and transmittals of funds, et al.

U.S. LAWS BREACHED BY THE CRIMINAL OPERATIVES AND BANKSTERS [see previous reports]:

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

No comments: