Category Archives: Banking

The Fiduciary Comment on FTX and Other Imaginary Investments

By Anna Von Reitz

Many people are waking up this week with a big pain in their now non-existent crypto wallets.  FTX is no more.  It’s only the first to fail. 

Here is an example of the real function of FTX and all similar operations: 

1. “Foreign Aid” goes to Ukraine (or some other country reduced to  Hell Hole status by the Vermin), 

2. Instead of using the aid to help the people in Ukraine, the Ukrainian Puppet Government invests in FTX. (I am just using Ukraine and FTX as a current example.) 

3. FTX “invests” in the Clinton Foundation, the DNC, etc., etc., etc., 

And the end result would be the same if they donated to the Bush Foundation, the RNC….. 

This form of money laundering is how 98% of all Foreign Aid appropriated by the “Congress” gets siphoned off and right back into the pockets of the Vermin.  Along the way, there is considerable payola lavished on the middlemen and other corporations owned by cronies, but, in the main, this is how it works.  

The actual people, the refugees, the homeless, the sick — they never get the Foreign Aid.  The DC Fat Cats and Friends pocket it and smile; well, they are foreigners aren’t they?  

They just aided themselves. 

It’s “Foreign Aid” alright. 

And as usual, nobody told the American Public.  Not a whisper from the FBI or the DHS or any Banking Commission — though we have dozens of them, at both the State-of-State and “National” level. 

I told everyone a long time ago that I don’t believe in or trust crypto currencies. A cyber wallet?  Really?  Call me a skeptic, even a cynic. My wallet is made of cowhide. 

Even those crypto operations that actually do sell “coins” as a product and don’t just leverage debt, are prone to being abused for money laundering purposes. 

As I explained yesterday, the DOJ has been running proxy wars all over the place since 2001, and they have to have ways of funding all those proxies and “Security Cooperation Authorities” — otherwise known as puppet governments and Terrorists. Cryptos offer an avenue for that. 

So, the small fry attempting to capture a small part of the money commodity market and keep banking private for their customers, are given a bad name and shut down by bigger corporations that are actually their main competitors. 

It’s a dog eat gerbil world. 

This is what you get when you privatize money and the reason that money needs to be issued directly by the Public for the Public. It’s not perfect, but if the Public issues the money it is not subject to usury, it’s physical, it’s standardized, and it doesn’t just go “Poof!” in the night. 

It’s also much harder to use for illicit purposes, like money laundering. 

And siphoning off Foreign Aid. And funding proxy wars. And buying political traction. 

For all these reasons and more, I caution my friends who have rushed willy-nilly into cyber-coinage and crypto-currencies to think more deeply about what they are doing, and what, in my opinion, they should be doing instead. 

There are plenty of good options that lead to peace and, if i may say so, relative security.  You can’t go wrong buying silver with inflated fiat dollars.  If nothing else, silver has a thousand industrial uses, and it is the asset of exchange accumulating all the value that the fiat currency is losing to inflation. 

If you are a betting man (or woman) daily twenty to one odds are pretty good and getting better. 

That said, you know that Grandma doesn’t go to the race track.

As the Fiduciary for this great country, I have to meet “The Prudent Man Standard” so I can’t get sidetracked into this or that surefire scheme or new whiz-bang product adventure.  As a result, I don’t hold any cryptocurrencies. No Prudent Man ever would. 

My condolences to all the people who held FTX investments. 

If you want additional insight into the leverage swindle employed by FTX,  this is the best (and shortest at 99 seconds) explanation I’ve found:

There will be more collapses like this to come.

In the meantime, remember — just because it’s private doesn’t mean that it’s a quality “financial product” and anything that can be used to launder money for politicians and mercenary conflicts will be used for that purpose. 

If you aren’t into financing political parties and proxy wars with your retirement nest egg, get out of cryptos and into something solid. Preferably something you can hold in your hand. 

And while we are on that subject, remember — corporations sell shares. Even controlling shares don’t “control” in a liquidation. 

So if you invest your money in a corporation by buying shares of ownership interest in the corporation and its assets, what happens when that corporation goes bankrupt or liquidates by other means? 

I’ll tell you.  One of my Grandfathers made the mistake of investing in an incorporated Creamery during the 1920’s.  He held quite a few shares and for the first five years or so, everything went very well. The Creamery was state of the art and there were a lot of dairy farms needing its services.  Then the Depression hit. Dozens of farmers went under. They had to sell off their farms and their cows.  The Creamery was in trouble as a result of losing all those customers and all that milk. 

Finally, the Creamery couldn’t pay the bank for the money it still owed for equipment purchases, and the Creamery also went under.  The bank came in, the bankruptcy Trustees sold off everything they could sell for pennies on a dollar, and there was nothing left for the shareholders but the pretty engraved stock certificates.  We still have those as a momento. 

And a warning. 

My Grandfather was relieved to lose his 20% investment in the Creamery so long as he didn’t have to carry its debts, but I look at the 1924 value printed on those certificates and think — what if he had invested in almost anything else? Something other than “shares” in a corporation?  

Then the story for him and for our whole family would have been very different from then until now. 

If you are in the stock market, or like my Grandfather, a direct shareholder, remember that corporations are made of paper. Literally. 

We have all become so brain-washed and inured to the presence of corporations, that we forget that they are imaginary. We see the product, “Pepsi” for example, and we see the big corporate headquarters, and we think that Pepsico is real, right?

Always remember that corporations only exist on paper and in the form of the men and women who team together to make a product or sell a service, with or without additional equipment and facilities used to make a dime. 

My Grandmother called corporations “ships made of paper”, because they sail on the “seas” of international trade and commerce, and because they lack substance.  

Corporations are created by paper — charters and patents, etc., and financed by paper — shares, stocks, bonds, notes, etc.,  and they die by paper, too — bankruptcy, liquidation, merger.  

There is a reason that the Wicked Witch of the West gets liquidated in The Wizard of Oz.  Neither she nor the corporations she represents are real.  They are all subject to liquidation. As creatures of our minds, no less than Flying Monkeys, they come and go almost with the speed of thought. 

I can create and register a corporation online in less than an hour.  All I need are two accomplices, a name, an address,  and some lawful purpose. 

That’s how, when the UNITED STATES, INC. goes bankrupt, Joe Biden and a couple of buddies can create the WHITE HOUSE OFFICE, INC. and he can be “President” of this new corporation and go right on sailing. 

The harm in all this is that we have forgotten what’s real.  We’ve forgotten Kansas. If you want to keep your shirt in the disaster the banks have planned for us, remember what’s real. 

It could be gold or silver or coffee beans, it could be livestock or flower bulbs, it could be car parts. Whatever you invest in, let it be something that is physical and that you control. 


See this article and over 3800 others on Anna’s website here:

Bail In, Bail Out, Good Cop, Bad Cop

By Anna Von Reitz

First, the Gubmint steals your credit to bail out banks and insurance corporations. 

Second, the banks and insurance companies steal your bank deposits to pay back the Gubmint. 

Third, it all comes down to crooks bilking you in your own name.  Crooks who are pretending to “represent” you.

Crooks who are impersonating you. 

Brace for losing every cent you have deposited in commercial banks and in “equitable” consideration, you will be given shares in the bankrupt bank that stole your deposits. 

How’s that for compensation? 

You will get more shares based on the size of the deposits you lose.  And this has been advertised since 2010.

Did you know you were buying shares in a bankrupt bank? 

Did you know your deposits became bank property the moment you walked away with a receipt in your hand? 

Did you know you were loaning the bank your home when they offered you a home loan? 

All those IRS garnishments were the obligations of the bank? Not yours? 

And what about all the investments made in your name?  What became of them? 

Your “shares” again? 

Naught into naught is naught.  Naught divided by naught is naught. 

Every positive number is greater than every negative number. 

Every debt creates an equal credit. 

Fraud vitiates everything. 

Don’t take any wooden nickels and I would not accept any bank shares, either, because the shareholders become responsible for the debts  of the bank. 

Ever heard of the Trojan Horse?  Gifts that kill are all too common to this day. 


See this article and over 3800 others on Anna’s website here:

Game On

By Anna Von Reitz

Inflation lessens the perceived value of money or credit by making it more plentiful.  The more money or credit there is, the less people think it is worth, and the less it will buy.  This is the reason why a house that sold for $30,000.00 in 1974 now sells for $180,000.00, even though the house is older and is still the same house.  What happened?  

Fiat debt notes naturally self-destruct because nobody has any incentive to save them. Instead, we have incentive to get rid of them as quickly as possible.  This leads to an “ever-expanding” money supply and that leads to inflation —- and does so even if the incredibly unrealistic expansion theories of the Bretton Woods agreements could be realized. 

Pundits call it “inflationary creep” — over time, people press the limits of the pricing structure.  The apples that sold for seventy cents a pound in 1974, now sell for $4.60 a pound — same apples, but wildly inflated price.  “Everything costs more” and nobody knows why, but it’s inflationary creep caused by the devaluation of the fiat currency.  

Look at the present situation.  Does EXXON care if it sells a million gallons of gas at five bucks a gallon or half a million gallons at ten bucks a gallon?  It’s all the same to EXXON, and in fact, from their perspective, they’d prefer selling less product for more profit  than making their same profit by selling more gas at a lower price.  It’s just economics and plain to see, but at least half of America still thinks that Joe Biden is against Big Oil. 

Uh-huh, Honey, you just keep on sucking on that thar’ Blue Pill…. 

At some point, this loss of a currency’s buying power results in consumers no longer being able or willing to pay the higher prices, partially because their wages and salaries never keep up, and partially because at some point they start looking at the sticker price and thinking…. OMG!

Sales for apples (or cars or computers or houses) goes flat and stalls at that OMG Tipping Point, ,as people shake their heads and walk away — so the apple pies don’t get made, the car lots are over-supplied and then the supply of cars dries up as the manufacturers cut back to match the lower sales, same thing with houses, millions stand empty while the former inhabitants pour out onto the streets, evicted by banks that are cutting their own throats. 

The job market goes bust, too. 

The governments that caused the problem institute emergency measures using whatever excuses they can come up with and start handing money out to farmers not to produce crops and paying people to sit at home in front of their television sets, so suddenly there is no market, and no workers, and after this situation kills off all the small businesses, only the government controlled box stores are left.  And then, there’s no food.  Surprise, surprise. 

All the victims are now dependent on the government that caused the problem, but most of them don’t know that the government caused the problem, and the government is busy blaming a host of never-heard-of pathogens that either (a) don’t exist or (b) are being mass produced and distributed as a cover story.  

Blame it on God — as usual. 

These same idiots in suits will also amp up taxation, attempting to squeeze more and more property and credit and cash assets out of the victims.  Alarmed by all this and pushed to the mattresses by the inflation and stagnation and taxation, everyone will be trying to sell off at the same time, and as a result, the housing and commercial business markets will tank, tank, tank. 

Inflation and taxation will predictably kill any economy, no matter how robust.  

But remember — inflation of the currency also functions as a silent, insidious tax.  Whether you save your money or spend it, it is worth less and less in the marketplace everyday.  As a result, the inflation plus overt taxation increases to double or triple taxation, above and beyond what everyone is already suffering.  How many people can afford that?  Raise your hands? 

The dollars that my friend put into his IRA in 1986 were worth vastly more than the dollars he continues to sock away, and he recently called me to laugh at himself and tip his hat.  

I had just looked at a 1986 Monte Carlo SS in pristine shape, being sold for $16,500 — an increase in value of $1,500 over its original sales price back in 1986.  Think about it.  He was giggling hysterically into the phone and gasping and saying, “How did you know?  How did you know?” 

I refused to set up an IRA way back when and spent my money on my own investments. My rationale?  Pay the  taxes now, I said, because they will be higher later, and have the use of your money to make investments now in hopes of getting ahead of inflation and staying ahead of inflation as long as possible.  Besides, I said, by the time I am ready to retire, the Government will have added severe penalties for early withdrawals and will have added more years before you can withdraw funds from an IRA without penalty. 

Was I wrong? 

Did I have a crystal ball?  

No, I observed the Government at work and used my horse sense.  I had no doubt that IRA’s were just another means, like Federal Income Taxes,  to keep money out of the marketplace and put another stop-gap on the inexorable inflation of the fiat currency—- and I reasoned that everyone with an IRA would eventually pay for it.  Literally.   Fine enough for the Government, but of no help to Joe Average, as usual.  

I spent my money and spent it well a long time ago; this may seem unpatriotic, but from an individual standpoint, it was the only logical thing to do.  I could see the present situation coming like a freight train over thirty years ago.  Why didn’t everyone else?  

They were depending on Pundits.  Talking Heads.  Experts.  “My stock broker….”  “My banker…..”  and “My financial advisor…..” all took the place of common sense. People weren’t actually thinking and observing things for themselves, because their public school indoctrination trained them to rely on Authorities instead of their own ability to observe and reason through things.   My friend thinks I am a genius, but no, I’m not.  

When the House is betting on Blackjack, I’m playing Roulette.  When everyone is buying Tech Stocks, I’m buying Blue Chips. When Bitcoin and Digital Currencies are the rage on every BBC Anchor’s lips, I am headed full bore for cash and coins instead.  

It isn’t hard to see, if you teach yourself to look.  And when you do, you soon notice that you are being herded like sheep or goats. Each new fad, even Pet Rocks and Finger Spinners, have a dark side, a reason for being, that isn’t just silliness. “The Market” is testing you at all ages and stages of your life cycle, endlessly prodding to find out what amuses you, what comforts you, what scares you —- how much will you pay?  What attracts you visually?   How gullible are you?  What will you do next?  

And all this ceaseless analysis is motivated by the desire to control you and make more sales — and find new ways to profit off of you.  

So you want me to look into my crystal ball?  Really?  Okay, Aunt Mammy Whammy Big Swamp just put on her Economic Indicator Hat, and this is what I predict: 

The IMF and Federal Reserve still believe that we are all endemically stupid and trusting to a fault, and therefore, we will accept a Fed or “Treasury” — that is, IMF offering of “gold-backed” digital currency “notes” —- which would allow them to continue to pull the same old scam with even less investment and more profit for them.  

Those of us that already fully realize that “money” —-as a commodity, has been reduced to digits entered in a ledger — are not impressed. 

They will try their best to convince us that a picture of a hamburger is a hamburger. 

They will fail. 

No wonder they are all out in numbers, publicly praying to their Money God, Mammon.  

My advice?  Start using cash, cash, cash, for all your small transactions and trades  Use cash as much as possible and keep as much as possible on hand.  Buy it up, slap it down, throw handfuls up in the air and dance around as it falls around you like the falling leaves.  Rejoice. Keep those printing presses running and the banks sweating as we round our way into the fall season.  

If you are cringing and sitting on a pile of lifetime savings all painfully scraped together “for the future” — spend it.  Spend it now.  Take it out of the banks as cash.  The “future” is now, and everything you have saved is worth less and less and less by the hour.  Take that long planned trip to the far islands off Tahiti.  Make all the house repairs. Batten down the hatches. Buy the extra food and water. Indulge in good sheets and soft toilet paper.  Live large.  And use cash.  Lots of cash.  

The banks are afraid of bank runs, so gear up slowly —- don’t all run down the street and take everything out all at once.  Just start using cash more.  And next week, more cash.  And the week after, more cash.  Transfer things around.  Convert cash into money orders.  Remember that Postal Money Orders are NOT credit instruments.  They are money instruments.  You want cash that will last?  Buy Postal Money Orders.  

When they start touting all the benefits of “digital currency” —- ask yourself, what are the odds of Clif High and Grandma both being wrong? 

Wake up, people, the Game is On.  


See this article and over 3700 others on Anna’s website here:

Bombshell: DOJ Says JPM Execs Manipulated Gold

by VBL

Bombshell: The Key Word is “Executives”

Source: Bloomberg

Authored by GoldFix Substack

Closing arguments Thursday set the table for years of bank problems. It may be a very serious development. Implications are all laid out clearly in this 9 minute podcast  where the DOJ has finally turned its focus on one of the institutions  the US has protected for decades. Future implications are very large for bullion banks and executives everywhere. Listen: here.

One Minute Clip summarizing the situation…

Clip: Spoofing blame goes upstream — VBL (@VlanciPictures) August 1, 2022

Bank Executives Now On The Hook

In the segment we give serious context to the Bloomberg story out late last week on the case. It implies more problems for the bullion banks and their executives down the line.  Full 9 minute broadcast here

 Points discussed:

  • US DOJ Accuses JPM Bank of manipulation now
  • Rogue actors not only ones anymore
  • Sh*t flows upstream now
  • Unethical culture is the problem
  • What it means for Executives
  • Jamie Dimon, Lloyd Blankfein type of risk
  • Underlings rolling over on bosses
  • The many problems surrounding JPM metals
  • How banks/ funds react to fear
  • Comex death, Asian birth
  • Something is going on (Transparency bomb?) between comex drawdowns, JPM case, recategorizing Gold derivatives,and Basel 3
  • Related: Unlocked JPMorgan And Citi are 90% of The U.S. Gold Derivative Market


Continue reading here

Discovering The Money Tree  – Money grows on (trees) “promises to pay”

By Monique Terrazas

May 2013 – SA Real Estate Investor – Money grows on trees

(This post is old but just as valid today until we End the Fed, which is a non-permanent non-banking debt system, and move to an alternative permanent value-backed real money and real banking system.)

The banking and Financial system globally is under scrutiny as scandal after scandal rocks what we had always assumed was a trustworthy industry, solid as rock. But things have changed. There is little doubt that the irresponsible practice of securitization and inter-bank lending brought about the global credit crunch. After setting in motion the subprime crisis that dumped the global economy into the worst recession in living memory, banks were exposed for manipulating the Libor and Euribor interbank interest rates- providing false figures on key interest rates upon which mortgages and loans are priced – affecting millions of families and hundreds of thousands of companies, large and small, across the globe. As one commentator noted: “This dwarfs by orders of magnitude any financials cam in the history of the markets. In addition, the information age has brought to the man in the street the knowledge that “money” is no longer backed by gold reserves, but fabricated through the fractional reserve banking system. Given how pervasive the financial system is – affecting every aspect of our lives – it has become critical that we move out of our comfort zone where ignorance was bliss. We need to become far more proactive and involved, understanding thoroughly how the system works. This is the only way in which we can shift from being victims of a system we have helped to create through ignorance, complacency and greed, to becoming empowered consumers and users of these systems, understanding the rules so we can play the game or step outside the game for our own collective best interests, and the interests of generations to come.

Understanding the rules

We cannot play on an equal footing in the global financial system if we don’t understand the rules. While learning the rules requires time, effort and dedication, it is absolutely necessary if we are to become empowered players, instead of victims. It is not possible to explain the intricacies of the entire global financial system in one article, but there are a few concepts that, once understood, will help us to understand the basic tenets of the system, notably the fractional reserve banking system and securitization.

The fractional reserve system

In previous articles in REIM, we revealed that banks do not actually lend out money they already possess, but rather “create” the money loaned to borrowers, using the “promise to pay” signed by the borrower. In other words, “money” is created through debt. This is called a ‘fractional reserve’ banking system, and it is used by governments, central banks and financial institutions across the globe. On a national scale, central banks print money that has no intrinsic value, based on a “promise to pay” issued by a government. Because this new “money” has no intrinsic value, it derives its value by literally taking value from the money already in circulation, and this is what is called “inflation”. The money already in circulation is worth ever less to give value to new money that is printed. This practice was taken to extreme in Zimbabwe not so long ago, when the government’s practice of simply printing more money at a rate well in excess of economic growth, sent inflation to levels above 1 000%,  rendering the money already in circulation worthless. Of course, today, they do not really actually “print” more money, but simply “create” the money through a “deposit entry”, even though no deposit was made by anyone! The same happens when a borrower approaches a bank for a loan. The bank does not actually have the money it “loans” to the borrower. They simply “create” money, through similar electronic “deposit entries” or “book entries”, simply based on a borrower’s “promise to pay”, with no actual deposit being made by anyone, anywhere. This raises a number of issues, including the legal validity of a “loan” and the legality and the morality of charging interest on such a “loan”. It has been contested in a number of court cases that a “loan” agreement cannot exist legally under these circumstances, because the bank did not “lend” something they had prior title, ownership and rights to. The “money” lent to the borrower did not exist before the borrower signed the all-important “promise to pay”, but was “created” based on the borrower’s “promise to pay”. How can a loan agreement exist when nothing was loaned? This, furthermore, raises issues around the charging of interest. How can the bank charge interest on a “loan” that is not legally valid? If the “money” loaned is “created” out of nothing more than a “promise to pay” – which belongs to the borrower – and the bank does not loan its own money to the borrower, why is interest charged by the bank? “A management fee payable to the bank for managing the system seems more appropriate,” comments Robert Vivian, Professor of Finance and Insurance at the School of Economic and Business Sciences at the University of the Witwatersrand.


Another hot topic over the last few years is the practice of securitization. Banks securitize loans by bundling them together, using a special purpose vehicle (SPV), and selling them to third party investors, who trade them on the capital markets. For example, in the home loan market, the borrowers’ promissory notes are backed by collateral through the mortgage contraction the property. As such, these become “mortgage-backed securities”. The bank approaches another institution that buys and sells mortgage-backed securities. It “sells” the buyer’s mortgage-backed security to this institution for the full amount – the principal and interest – payable by the buyer over the period of the mortgage loan. This is up to three times the amount of the principal debt. Since the bank is paid in advance, it makes a tidy profit without using or risking its own money. However, legally, once a bank securitizes a loan, it loses all rights to it – i.e. the bank is no longer the owner of the debt. Should the borrowers default on their loans, the debt to the SPV and its investors are covered by insurance policies, called “credit default swaps” in the US and other countries. While the use of this insurance has not been confirmed in South Africa, it stands to reason, according to legal experts, that an SPV trading on a stock exchange would be required to have this insurance in place. The South African Securitization Forum has confirmed that the implication of this is that the bank cannot, for example, repossess

the property if the borrower defaults on repayments, because the bank no longer has any rights to the property that is the collateral for a “loan” which has been securitized and now belongs to another entity. Quite simply, there can be no legal case against the defaulting borrower, because all parties have been settled. The bank was settled when the mortgage-backed security was sold, and the investors were settled through an insurance policy. Several recent court rulings in a number of states in the US have, essentially, declared the practice of securitizing home loans illegal, and as a result numerous banks have stopped foreclosure procedures on home-owners who have defaulted on their mortgage repayments. The implications are staggering: four million people in the US have had their homes repossessed illegally and the banks have been forced to pay out $8.5 billion in settlements.

“How can a loan agreement exist when nothing was loaned? And how can the bank charge interest on a “loan” that is not legally valid? ”

The situation in South Africa

How do these practices in the global financial system impact South Africa? South Africa has one of the most advanced financial systems in the world, which is why we survived the global economic crisis better than most developed countries. But this does not mean there is nothing to be concerned about. The fractional reserve system is used extensively in South Africa.

According to Russell Lamberti, writing on, the blog of the Mises Institute South Africa ( “Since 2000 the SARB [South African Reserve Bank] probably printed about R100 billion out of thin air. This allowed the commercial banks to use about R40 billion to fractionally leverage at about 40:1 and create about R1.6trillion in additional money out of thin air (that’s R1,600,000,000,000).” This means that South Africa has quadrupled its money supply in the last decade and, of course, the value of this new money must be derived from the money in circulation, creating inflation.

He adds that: “Since 2000, the US Fed balance sheet grew 370%. Over the same time the SARB balance sheet increased from R76bn to R440bn, about 480%. In other words, since 2000 the SARB balance sheet has grown 1.3 times more than the Fed balance sheet.” The fractional reserve system is also used by our banks to “create” money based on the borrowers’ “promises to pay”, which raises the issues of the legal validity of the loans and legality and morality of charging interest when “nothing” was loaned, because the money “loaned” did not belong to the bank, but was “created” ex nihilo (out of nothing) based solely the borrower’s “promise to pay”.

The Banks Act states that a bank cannot act as an agent or intermediary for a third party, such as a securitization SPV, without the express written consent of the customer. However, according to the South African Banking Association’s website, local banks securitize loans worth about R30 billion a month. The issue here is that is a bank securitizes a loan, it loses all rights to the asset. Tis means the bank cannot, for example, repossess property put up as collateral on a loan which has been securitized, because the bank no longer has any rights to the debt. It could well mean that thousands of homes may have been illegally repossessed by banks in South Africa too. The issue has already been tested in court, and on a number of occasions, it has resulted in a bank abandoning the foreclosure proceedings, because it was no longer the lawful owner of the debt. These practices are also being challenged in the High Court by New ERA (New Economic Rights Alliance), a non-profit organization supported by 150 000 people, which argues that if a loan has been securitized, not only has the borrower’s legal status with the bank changed, but the debt with the bank no longer exists. Their case is supported by extensive evidence and research with specific reference to South African economics and South African law and presented by lawyers acting pro-bono. The banks have emphatically argued that they cannot understand New ERA’s papers and the court ruled that New ERA must amend its papers, “removing all the evidence”. New ERA has said it will file amended documents with renewed ferocity, “to protect millions of South Africans from what we believe are blatant and unscrupulous actions of the banks.”

Follow the case on REIM asked the banks and the major role players the following questions about securitization.

1. Can you provide us with an indication of the value of loans securitized and what percentage of these loans are home loans?

2. Does a consumer have the right to know if their loan has been securitized? Or is there a clause in the credit agreement that the client signs that provides the bank with the rights to securitize the loan? If so, can you provide a sample of the wording used? If not, how is the client informed?

3. Can a consumer choose not to have their loan securitized?

4. How can a consumer trace the securitization of his/her loan?

5. How do the banks ensure compliance with the legislation that credit agreements that have been sold or traded are registered with the NCR?

6. How is the legal standing of a South African citizen’s loan affected if the loan has been securitized?

7. How would the debt counseling process be affected by securitization?

The Banking Association of South Africa did not bother to acknowledge or respond to numerous emailed requests for information. The National Credit Regulator (NCR) –legally mandated to protect the interests of South African credit consumers – replied: “The NCR views this matter in an extremely serious light and is giving it the requisite attention. For fear of compromising the project the NCR is not at liberty to discuss any details at this stage”. Frightening. Especially given the fact that the National Credit Act, Sec 69(4) requires that all credit agreements that have been sold or traded(i.e. securitized) are to be registered with the National Credit Regulator.

“If the ownership of the debt shifts, it could mean the banks have no legal status over the debt, because they do not own the debt.”

Humbulani Salani, spokesperson for FNB Legal, simply responded: “We can confirm that currently FNB does not have any home loan securitization outstanding in the market. When securitization transactions were entered into by FNB in the past, it did not breach any law. Securitization is an industry matter. Steven Barker, Standard Bank’s Head of Home Loans, replied: “Only a small portion of Standard Bank’s Home Loans form part of a securitization arrangement. The customer agrees up front that the bank may cede its rights and delegate its obligations under any loan agreement to a third party. Where a loan is securitized there is generally a cession of the rights under the mortgage bond registered at the Deeds Office. The terms and conditions of the loan agreement are not affected by the securitization and a customer is required to repay the loan as set out in the loan agreement. The debt counseling process and any rights under the National Credit Act is not impacted. Further, Standard Bank complies with its reporting requirements under the Act.”

Absa noted that, currently, their total residential mortgage book amounts to approximately R233bn and only about 2% of this has been securitized. “Worth mentioning is that the performance of South African residential mortgaged backed securitization transactions have been superior to those in the US over the last 10 years. This is primarily due to South Africa’s very well-regulated securitization market where transactions are monitored by the SARB, the JSE, international rating agencies and the NCR. Fitch Ratings recently released a report confirming that EMEA (Europe, the Middle East and Africa) residential mortgaged backed securitization transactions (from 2000to 2011) had significantly lower losses than their US counterparts.” With regard to the questions about the consumer’s rights, Absa stated the following: “The customer will receive a letter from Absa to advise the customer [in the event] of the securitization of the loan and thereafter the credit provider’s details are reflected in all communications to the customer. Usually there is an express provision for a credit provider to transfer its rights and obligations. It should be noted that a credit provider has a common law right to transfer rights without consent. The NCA did not remove this right.”

Furthermore, Absa notes that “The consumer remains indebted under the loan, albeit to a different creditor and, save for this the terms and conditions of the loan do not change. The debt counseling process is not affected by securitization and the consumer is still entitled to exercise the rights he/she has in terms of the National Credit Act. ”Deborah Solomon, founder of the DCI, the debt counseling industry portal that has become the springboard to better debt management for thousands of overly indebted consumers, offered a different view. “The NCR is aware of the process called ‘securitization’ and have stated that they are investigating how this fits into the National Credit Act.

We have also brought the matter of securitization to Minister Rob Davies’ attention and will hopefully get some answers from the Minister’s office. We have also requested further information from the NCR regarding the compliance of the banks in terms of registering credit agreements that have been sold or traded with the NCR, but nothing has been forthcoming as yet. In terms of the NCA, the banks must give the debt counselors information as per their request. But the banks all have one ‘template answer’ and obviously feel that they do not have to answer these types of questions. It is another point which we have raised both with the NCR and with the Minister,” says Solomon.

She notes that from a debt counselor’s perspective, securitization has huge implications, as the counselor needs to know who the debt belongs to, to ensure negotiations and payments. “If we do not know who the real owner of the debt is, how can we make a judgment call on the outstanding ownership of the debt?” In terms of the effect of securitization on the debt counseling process, Solomon says that it could mean that a credit agreement is illegal. “If the ownership of the debt shifts, it could mean the banks have no legal status over the debt, because they do not own the debt.

The new holder or owner of the debt would also need to be a registered credit provider in terms of the NCA. Of course, a debt counselor would look at the debt differently if they knew it was securitized and would question the legality of the action on behalf of the consumer.” Solomon further notes that consumers absolutely have the right to know if their loan has been securitized. “If the bank has securitized a debt, made money from your signature without your consent or knowledge, and then try to take legal action against you should you default on the loan, it is 100% your right as a consumer to know this. Maybe this could be the reason why the banks have not embraced the NCA or tried to window dress the debt counseling process, because they know that should the truth be revealed, they could stand to lose more than what they are currently worth.”

Bank Loan Validity.doc – The Banker And The Attorney (Promissory Notes)

Anyone who has ever had a Bank loan or, is about to apply for one, really must read “The Banker And The Attorney” story…

The banker was placed on the witness stand and sworn in. The plaintiff’s (borrower’s) attorney asked the banker the routine questions concerning the banker’s education and background.

The attorney asked the banker, “What is court exhibit A?”

The banker responded by saying, “This is a promissory note.”

The attorney then asked, “Is there an agreement between Mr. Smith (borrower) and the defendant?”

The banker said, “Yes.”

The attorney asked, “Do you believe the agreement includes a lender and a borrower?”

The banker responded by saying, “Yes, I am the lender and Mr. Smith is the borrower.

The attorney asked, “What do you believe the agreement is?”

The banker quickly responded, saying, “We have the borrower sign the note and we give the borrower a check.”

The attorney asked, “Does this agreement show the words borrower, lender, loan, interest, credit, or money within the agreement?”

The banker responded by saying, “Sure it does.”

The attorney asked, `”According to your knowledge, who was to loan what to whom according to the written agreement?”

The banker responded by saying, “The lender loaned the borrower a $200,000 check. The borrower got the money and the house and has not repaid the money.

The attorney noted that the banker never said that the bank received the promissory note as a loan from the borrower to the bank. She asked, “Do you believe an ordinary person can use ordinary terms and understand this written agreement?”

The banker said, “Yes.”

The attorney asked, “Do you believe you or your company legally own the promissory note and have the right to enforce payment from the borrower?”

The banker said, “Absolutely we own it and legally have the right to collect the money.”

The attorney asked, “Does the $200,000 note have actual cash value of $200,000? Actual cash value means the promissory note can be sold for $200,000 cash in the ordinary course of business.”

The banker said, “Yes.”

The attorney asked, “According to your understanding of the alleged agreement, how much actual cash value must the bank loan to the borrower in order for the bank to legally fulfil the agreement and legally own the promissory note?”

The banker said, “$200,000.

The attorney asked, “According to your belief, if the borrower signs the promissory note and the bank refuses to loan the borrower $200,000 actual cash value, would the bank or borrower own the promissory note?”

The banker said, “The borrower would own it if the bank did not loan the money. The bank gave the borrower a check and that is how the borrower financed the purchase of the house.

The attorney asked, “Do you believe that the borrower agreed to provide the bank with $200,000 of actual cash value which was used to fund the $200,000 bank loan check back to the same borrower, and then agreed to pay the bank back $200,000 plus interest?”

The banker said, “No. If the borrower provided the $200,000 to fund the check, there was no money loaned by the bank so the bank could not charge interest on money it never loaned.”

The attorney asked, “If this happened, in your opinion would the bank legally own the promissory note and be able to force Mr. Smith to pay the bank interest and principal payments?”

The banker said, “I am not a lawyer so I cannot answer legal questions.”

The attorney asked, ” Is it bank policy that when a borrower receives a $200,000 bank loan, the bank receives $200,000 actual cash value from the borrower, that this gives value to a $200,000 bank loan check, and this check is returned to the borrower as a bank loan which the borrower must repay?”

The banker said, “I do not know the bookkeeping entries.”
The attorney said, “I am asking you if this is the policy.”

The banker responded, “I do not recall.”

The attorney again asked, “Do you believe the agreement between Mr. Smith and the bank is that Mr. Smith provides the bank with actual cash value of $200,000 which is used to fund a $200,000 bank loan check back to himself which he is then required to repay plus interest back to the same bank?”

The banker said, “I am not a lawyer.”

The attorney said, “Did you not say earlier that an ordinary person can use ordinary terms and understand this written agreement?

The banker said, “Yes.”

The attorney handed the bank loan agreement marked “Exhibit B” to the banker. He said, “Is there anything in this agreement showing the borrower had knowledge or showing where the borrower gave the bank authorisation or permission for the bank to receive $200,000 actual cash value from him and to use this to fund the $200,000 bank loan check which obligates him to give the bank back $200,000 plus interest?”

The banker said, “No.”

The lawyer asked, “If the borrower provided the bank with actual cash value of $200,000 which the bank used to fund the $200,000 check and returned the check back to the alleged borrower as a bank loan check, in your opinion, did the bank loan $200,000 to the borrower?”

The banker said, “No.”

The attorney asked, “If a bank customer provides actual cash value of $200,000 to the bank and the bank returns $200,000 actual cash value back to the same customer, is this a swap or exchange of $200,000 for $200,000.”

The banker replied, “Yes.”

The attorney asked, “Did the agreement call for an exchange of

$200,000 swapped for $200,000, or did it call for a $200,000 loan?”

The banker said, “A $200,000 loan.”

The attorney asked, “Is the bank to follow the Federal Reserve Bank policies and procedures when banks grant loans.”

The banker said, “Yes.”

The attorney asked, “What are the standard bank bookkeeping entries for granting loans according to the Federal Reserve Bank policies and procedures?” The attorney handed the banker FED publication Modern Money Mechanics, marked “Exhibit C”.

The banker said, “The promissory note is recorded as a bank asset and a new matching deposit (liability) is created. Then we issue a check from the new deposit back to the borrower.”

The attorney asked, “Is this not a swap or exchange of $200,000

for $200,000?”

The banker said, “This is the standard way to do it.”

The attorney said, “Answer the question. Is it a swap or exchange of $200,000 actual cash value for $200,000 actual cash value? If the note funded the check, must they not both have equal value?”

The banker then pleaded the Fifth Amendment.

[The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides, “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”]

The attorney asked, “If the bank’s deposits (liabilities) increase, do the bank’s assets increase by an asset that has actual cash value?”

The banker said, “Yes.”

The attorney asked, “Is there any exception?”

The banker said, “Not that I know of.”

The attorney asked, “If the bank records a new deposit and records an asset on the bank’s books having actual cash value, would the actual cash value always come from a customer of the bank or an investor or a lender to the bank?”

The banker thought for a moment and said, “Yes.”

The attorney asked, “Is it the bank policy to record the promissory note as a bank asset offset by a new liability?”

The banker said, “Yes.”

The attorney said, “Does the promissory note have actual cash value equal to the amount of the bank loan check?”

The banker said “Yes.”

The attorney asked, “Does this bookkeeping entry prove that the borrower provided actual cash value to fund the bank loan check?”

The banker said, “Yes, the bank president told us to do it this way.”

The attorney asked, “How much actual cash value did the bank loan to obtain the promissory note?”

The banker said, “Nothing.”

The attorney asked, “How much actual cash value did the bank receive from the borrower?”

The banker said, “$200,000.

The attorney said, “Is it true you received $200,000 actual cash value from the borrower, plus monthly payments and then you foreclosed and never invested one cent of legal tender or other depositors’ money to obtain the promissory note in the first place? Is it true that the borrower financed the whole transaction?”

The banker said, “Yes.”

The attorney asked, “Are you telling me the borrower agreed to give the bank $200,000 actual cash value for free and that the banker returned the actual cash value back to the same person as a bank loan?”

The banker said, “I was not there when the borrower agreed to the loan.”

The attorney asked, “Do the standard FED publications show the bank receives actual cash value from the borrower for free and that the bank returns it back to the borrower as a bank loan?”

The banker said, “Yes.”

The attorney said, “Do you believe the bank does this without the borrower’s knowledge or written permission or authorisation?”

The banker said, “No.”

The attorney asked, “To the best of your knowledge, is there written permission or authorisation for the bank to transfer $200,000 of actual cash value from the borrower to the bank and for the bank to keep it for free?

The banker said, “No.”

The attorney said, “Does this allow the bank to use this $200,000 actual cash value to fund the $200,000 bank loan check back to the same borrower, forcing the borrower to pay the bank $200,000 plus interest?”

The banker said, “Yes.”

The attorney said, “If the bank transferred $200,000 actual cash value from the borrower to the bank, in this part of the transaction, did the bank loan anything of value to the borrower?”

The banker said, “No.” He knew that one must first deposit something having actual cash value (cash, check, or promissory note) to fund a check.

The attorney asked, “Is it the bank policy to first transfer the actual cash value from the alleged borrower to the lender for the amount of the alleged loan?”

The banker said, “Yes.”

The attorney asked, “Does the bank pay IRS tax on the actual cash value transferred from the alleged borrower to the bank?”

The banker answered, “No, because the actual cash value transferred shows up like a loan from the borrower to the bank, or a deposit which is the same thing, so it is not taxable.”

The attorney asked, “If a loan is forgiven, is it taxable?”

The banker agreed by saying, “Yes.”

The attorney asked, “Is it the bank policy to not return the actual cash value that they received from the alleged borrower unless it is returned as a loan from the bank to the alleged borrower?”

The banker replied “Yes“.

The attorney said, “You never pay taxes on the actual cash value you receive from the alleged borrower and keep as the bank’s property?”

No. No tax is paid.”, said the crying banker.

The attorney asked, “When the lender receives the actual cash value from the alleged borrower, does the bank claim that it then owns it and that it is the property of the lender, without the bank loaning or risking one cent of legal tender or other depositors’ money?”

The banker said, “Yes.”

The attorney asked, “Are you telling me the bank policy is that the bank owns the promissory note (actual cash value) without loaning one cent of other depositors’ money or legal tender, that the alleged borrower is the one who provided the funds deposited to fund the bank loan check, and that the bank gets funds from the alleged borrower for free? Is the money then returned back to the same person as a loan which the alleged borrower repays when the bank never gave up any money to obtain the promissory note? Am I hearing this right? I give you the equivalent of $200,000, you return the funds back to me, and I have to repay you $200,000 plus interest? Do you think I am stupid?”

The banker, In a shaking voice the banker cried, saying, “All the banks are doing this. Congress allows this.”

The attorney quickly responded, “Does Congress allow the banks

to breach written agreements, use false and misleading advertising, act without written permission, authorisation, and without the alleged borrower’s knowledge to transfer actual cash value from the alleged borrower to the bank and then return it back as a loan?”

The banker said, “But the borrower got a check and the house.”

The attorney said, “Is it true that the actual cash value that was used to fund the bank loan check came directly from the borrower and that the bank received the funds from the alleged borrower

for free?”

The banker, “It is true“, said the banker.

The attorney asked, “Is it the bank’s policy to transfer actual cash value from the alleged borrower to the bank and then to keep the funds as the bank’s property, which they loan out as bank loans?”

The banker, showing a wince of regret that he had been caught, confessed, “Yes.

The attorney asked, “Do you believe that it was the borrower’s intent to fund his own bank loan check?”

The banker answered, “I was not there at the time and I cannot know what went through the borrower’s mind.”

The attorney asked, “If a lender loaned a borrower $10,000 and the borrower refused to repay the money, do you believe the lender is damaged?”

The banker thought. If he said no, it would imply that the borrower does not have to repay. If he said yes, it would imply that the borrower is damaged for the loan to the bank of which the bank never repaid. The banker answered, “If a loan is not repaid, the lender is damaged.”

The attorney asked, “Is it the bank policy to take actual cash value from the borrower, use it to fund the bank loan check, and never return the actual cash value to the borrower?”

The banker said, “The bank returns the funds.”

The attorney asked, “Was the actual cash value the bank received from the alleged borrower returned as a return of the money the bank took or was it returned as a bank loan to the borrower?”

The banker said, “As a loan.

The attorney asked, “How did the bank get the borrower’s money for free?”

The banker said, “That is how it works.

. . . And so it is!

CONCLUSION: See Drop-box:


ps; YouTube

Fight Inflation: ECB Asks EU Citizens To Add A Zero To Banknotes By Hand

Waterford Whisper News – June 17, 2022 – BREAKING NEWS, WORLD NEWS

The European Central Bank is finally doing something to combat rampant inflation: ECB President Christine Lagarde today called on all residents of the European Monetary Union to add a zero to their banknotes with a permanent marker. The value of the currency will increase by 900 percent as a result of the immediate measure.

“In view of the historical fall in value for the euro area, a simple and easy remedy is needed that anyone can carry out quickly free of bureaucratic red tape,” said Lagarde, before demonstrating how a 5 euro note with just one additional hand-drawn zero could be converted into a 50 Euro note. “It’s that simple. Problem solved! Do the same at home and help us beat inflation.”

With this simple trick, you can not only convert 5 euro notes into 50 euro notes, but also 10 euro notes into 100 euro notes, 20 euro notes into 200 euro notes, 50 euro notes convert to 500 euros, 100 euros to 1000 euros and 200 euros to 2000 euros. According to the ECB, the method can also be applied to coins.

In the past, the European Central Bank has repeatedly come under criticism for sticking to its policy of printing money despite rising inflation. It is all the more surprising that the financial institution is now preferring to use conventional handwriting instead of sophisticated printing processes to implement its monetary policy goals – a clear shift in focus away from more bureaucratic measures.

However, critics warn that the ECB’s unusual step is opening the floodgates to currency crime. “Lagarde obviously has no idea what kind of mischief can be caused by clever fraudsters with this dangerous technology,” explains Vincent Coyne, a lecturer in Economics in UCD. “What’s to say a mad man will stop at adding just one zero on the end, we will be Zimbabwe in a matter of days.”


Giftoftruth Comment: Inflation – by Stephen Mitford Goodson

Ex SARB employee, Stephen Goodson, wrote a book called The History of Banking and the Enslavement of Mankind and A History of the South African Reserve Bank for which he was publically smeared by the banksters. He states:

INFLATION – …What the private banks create is not money, but debt, which does not have a legal tender status and is immediately destroyed when the debt is repaid.

When a commercial bank creates a loan, it does not create the interest to be paid on it.  Additional loans have to be created to pay the interest, which is for a non-productive purpose and is not backed by labor. 

This interest contributes to a rising money supply and a continuing cycle of re-borrowing until the interest can no longer be paid, the debt is reneged and the economy slides into recession/depression.  …the equation is exponential and eventually will become unsustainable.

Y = ex

The natural exponential function  

The bottom axis is the time over which the debt matures. 

The vertical axis represents the accumulation of debt. 

In the usury system growth of debt + interest accelerates with time and there is a shorter and shorter period in which to alleviate the problem. 

As at March 2013 world-wide government debt stood at over $50 trillion and has now grown to the point where it has surpassed the knee of the exponential curve at (1,e) and is shooting up asymptotically to the vertical. 

This parabolic curve of debt +interest proves that a financial system based on debt and usury will eventually implode.

In our humble opinion this is yet another NWO ploy in their planned demolition of society – in this case of paper money to pave the way for digital currency…

Ruble rally continues to defy sanctions

The Russian currency strengthens to a fresh seven-year high against the US dollar and the euro

Ruble rally continues to defy sanctions

© Getty Images / Alexander Nedviga / 500px

The Russian ruble continued to strengthen on Tuesday, gaining over 1% against both the US dollar and the euro, trading data on the Moscow Exchange shows.

At the opening of the session, the dollar exchange fell below 55 rubles for the first time since June 30, 2015. The euro was also trading at a seven-year low against the Russian currency, below 58 rubles per euro.

The ruble is gaining strength against both of the globe’s top reserve currencies ahead of large tax payments and high prices on commodity markets. Russian exporters sell foreign currency to pay taxes in rubles at the end of June. The peak is expected on June 27-28, and analysts predict the ruble will rally further in the coming week, strengthening to 50 rubles against the dollar and 55-56 against the euro.

Read further at:

How Russia’s SWIFT Ban Could Backfire on West & Pave Way for Alternative Payment Systems

15:14 GMT 27.02.2022

: A man using a mobile phone passes the logo of global secure financial messaging services cooperative SWIFT at the SIBOS banking and financial conference in Toronto, Ontario, Canada October 19, 2017 - Sputnik International, 1920, 27.02.2022

© REUTERS / Chris Helgren

All Russian banks already subjected to sanctions will be disconnected from SWIFT, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced on Saturday. The EU, the UK, Canada and the US agreed to implement the measure over Russia’s “special operation” to “de-militarise and de-nazify” Ukraine.

“The removal of Russian banks from SWIFT means that while transactions can continue to take place the means of communicating have been rendered slower,” says Suranjali Tandon, assistant professor at a Delhi-based National Institute of Public Finance and Policy. “In order to predict the impact, it is important to assess the number of banks that currently use SWIFT and the size of transactions undertaken through these.”

The Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT) is a Belgium-based independent organisation that serves as an internal messaging system between over 11,000 banks and financial institutions in over 200 countries. Several major Russian banks, including Sberbank and VTB, could be disconnected from the system in the coming days. The Western leaders have also committed “to imposing restrictive measures that will prevent the Russian Central Bank from deploying its international reserves in ways that undermine the impact of our sanctions.”

Swift logo is placed on a Russian flag are seen in this illustration taken, Bosnia and Herzegovina, February 25, 2022.  - Sputnik International, 1920, 27.02.2022

Swift logo is placed on a Russian flag are seen in this illustration taken, Bosnia and Herzegovina, February 25, 2022.


Russia’s Vnesheconombank (VEB) stated that having been disconnected from SWIFT, the nation will switch to the financial messaging system (SPFS) of the Russian Central Bank and alternative channels.

“In 2014, Russia had already initiated a switch to its alternative payment system called SPFS,” says Tandon. “To the extent that these banks are used for cross border payments, the impact of the current sanctions will not have the intended impact.”

According to the Central Bank of Russia’s website, at least 331 banks, both domestic and foreign, are listed as the SPFS system users.

Russia’s withdrawal from SWIFT does not pose a threat to our internal settlements, stimulates the spread of the ruble as an international currency and at the same time reduces the possibility of destructive control by the West of our settlement operations,” Andrey Klimov, head of the Federation Council Commission for the Protection of State Sovereignty, told the press on 27 February.

Read more at:–pave-way-for-alternative-payment-systems-1093424581.html

Choose One, But Only One: Defend the Billionaire’s Bubble or the U.S. Dollar and Empire

January 19, 2022 by Charles Hugh Smith

The Empire is striking back, protecting what really counts, and the Billionaire Bubble sideshow is folding its tents.

One of the most enduring conceits of the modern era is that the Federal Reserve acts to goose growth and therefore employment while keeping inflation moderate (whatever that means–the definition is adjustable). This conceit is extremely handy as PR cover: the Fed really, really cares about little old us and expanding our ballooning wealth.

Nice, except it doesn’t. The Fed’s one real job is defending the U.S. dollar, which is the foundation of America’s global hegemony a.k.a. The Empire.

One thing and one thing alone enables global dominance: being able to create “money” out of thin air and use that “money” to buy real stuff in the real world. The nations that can create “money” out of thin air and trade it for magnesium, oil, semiconductors, etc. have an unbeatable advantage over nations that must actually mine gold or make something of equal value to trade for essentials.

The trick is to maintain global confidence in one’s currency. There is no one way to manage this, as confidence in a herd animal such as human beings is always contingent. Once the herd gets skittish, all bets are off.

Read more at:

If you don’t know procedure you don’t know how to win.

Posted on January 18, 2022 by Neil Garfield

The claim of securitization is present in virtually every case of a loan account receivable. It is a false claim. All  subsquent claims to administer, collect or enforce the alleged loaon account receivable are therefore also false.

But the false claim becomes the law of the case unless the consumer — with no help from government agencies that are tasked with protecting consumers — contests every single piece of correspondence, exhibit, document, notice or pleading starting with “Greetings we are your new servicer.”

One of my favorite contributors asked a question about how to find the fact that there is no loan account. This question comes from uncertainty about whether there is a loan account after all or not. It also raises the wrong question because it addresses substance rather than procedure. Procedure is what wins and loses cases.


The specific question is whether the recitation of “valuable consideration” or $1, $10, etc. is enough to show that the loan account receivable was not actually sold in a commercial transaction. the precise answer is no it isn’t enough on its own.


You don’t need to find the loan account or to get an admission that it doesn’t exist. In fact, the fewer the answers to the actual legal demands the better for you if you know how to enforce them.


If you want to accomplish anything you need to assume that the loan account receivable does not exist. And you must challenge every claim of any right, title or interest in the administration, collection or enforcement of any alleged unpaid debt.


You have to realize that you are never going to get the answer you were looking for. And you have to accept the fact that the only effective way of pushing back is by legally contesting every piece of correspondence, notice, recording, pleading, or exhibit.

* The answer to your question would be that the party simply wanted to keep the details of the transaction confidential. That isn’t true, but that is what they will say. And that is why you need to pierce through the arguments and allegations and demand actual copies of the account receivable and evidence of payment for the underlying obligation.

* Failure to do that leaves the judge in the position of hearing you say “isn’t this suspicious?” and hearing the other side say “No, it isn’t suspicious, we simply use that form to comply with statutes and to keep the details of our transaction confidential.” The key is the word,” transaction.”

* No document is anything more than a legal nullity if it is not a memorialization of something that actually happened, is happening, or is intended to happen. The argument that a transaction exists is not evidence — but it becomes evidence when the homeowner fails to challenge it in a manner that requires a compulsory response. THAT is procedure.

* Like most things, law is about perception. If you wait to first raise these meritorious issues until the opposition actually starts with enforcement, the perception is that your defenses are suspicious —- not that the claims are suspicious.


SAJurA Comment: If you are facing foreclosures then Neil’s website is a good source of info for self-defence against the banksters.

Clif High speaking on Money


Clif_High discusses money and confirms that GESARA/NESARA, QFS – Quantum Financial System and St. Germaine Trust are illegal scams; and, that Charlie Ward and Simon Parkes are false prophets; buyer beware; and, that we do not need free money to have a healthy economy; if you are not educated you will suffer through this time; very educational and well worth watching; a must watch;

Six Myths about Money and the Banking System

by TGE News11 December, 2016 in Awareness, Economics, Media, Talks/Lectures

How is money created? If you ask average people on the street this question, most of them have absolutely no idea. This is rather odd, because we all use money constantly. You would think that it would only be natural for all of us to know where it comes from. So where does money come from? A lot of people assume that the federal government creates our money, but that is not the case. If the federal government could just print and spend more money whenever it wanted to, our national debt would be zero. But instead, our national debt is now nearly 16 trillion dollars. So why does our government (or any sovereign government for that matter) have to borrow money from anybody? That is a very good question. The truth is that in theory the U.S. government does not have to borrow a single penny from anyone. But under the Federal Reserve system, the U.S. government has purposely allowed itself to be subjugated to a financial system in which it will be constantly borrowing larger and larger amounts of money. In fact, this is how it works in the vast majority of the countries on the planet at this point. As you will see, this kind of system is not sustainable and the structural problems caused by such a system are at the very heart of our debt problems today.

Related: Who Controls the Money Supply Controls the World

Josh Ryan-Collins of the New Economics Foundation explains how banks create money, out of thin air, through the accounting process they use when they make loans.

“Independent Commission on Banking told us that there was a “disagreement” amongst the commissioners about whether or not the banks created money!
…So, that’s the situation we’re in. These are the people who are charged with recreating our banking system! And they don’t even understand that banks create credit when they make loans”

The 6 myths about banks and money are:

That banks are intermediaries between savers and borrowers
That money is created through the ‘money multiplier’ and the amount of money depends on the amount of ‘base money’ created by the central bank
That interest rate adjustments affect bank credit creation
That credit allocation is demand driven, rather than controlled by banks
That the banks know what’s best for the economy
Regulating (or democratising) credit creation doesn’t work.

Related: Damon Vrabel: Debunking Money – The Way the World Really Works

“The entire taxing and monetary systems are hereby placed under the U.C.C. (Uniform Commercial Code)” – The Federal Tax Lien Act of 1966

As always, use this info to gather more info.

Subscribe to this channel –
Where Does Money Come From? –…
Everybody Should Read This Explanation Of Where Money Really Comes From –…
Where Does Money Come From? –…
Where does money come from? –…
Federal Revenue: Where Does the Money Come From –…
Where Does Money Come From? –…
Why is there so much debt? –
Money As Debt –
Banks create money as a debt –…
Federal Reserve Explained – The Fed is Out of Control –…
New World Order – Undeniable and Verifiable –…
Fractional Reserve Banking Explained – Fraud Becomes Legal –…
Money: The Greatest Scam In History – What Is Money? –…
Rothschild Family Banking Dynasty and the International Bond Market –…
All Wars Are Bankers Wars – A Very Clear Pattern Throughout History –…
The Money Game – The Greatest Scam Ever –