Chazzsongs International News

How Nelson Mandela brought Crime & Murder to South Africa

2007-03-11T14:47:00.000-04:00

How Nelson Mandela brought Crime & Murder to South Africa

In October 2006, I suggested that we do a graphical exercise on the long history of South African crime because it would result in an interesting analysis.

The original email along with its source data and the logic therein can be found at this link: Click here for the original article, data and rationale.

Crime in South Africa is on everyone's lips these days and it is even the talk of the world. Everyone condemned Apartheid and what whites here were doing for decades. It was said that the ANC (African National Congress), led by Nelson Mandela would be the solution to the problems of this country.

The brutal crime in this country which stuns the world, is something of a mystery to most people. I want to engage in an exercise using data from a New York Times writer and well known Libertarian, along with official data from the current S.African Government to demonstrate a few shocking facts which most people are oblivious to when analysed within the context of the history of this country.

I would like to thank the many readers from my website who helped compile these graphs, most especially Verena, whose layout I chose for this exercise.

I am going to make the Excel spreadsheet we used, available for download by other South Africans, including crime websites, who may wish to do their own investigations and perhaps modify the figures according to their own research. I'm making this available to everyone, along with all the sources of the data so that anyone can check and verify my logic and statements. I would appreciate it, if anyone can find more complete and more accurate records, if they would kindly return to me the updated spreadsheet along with any new graphs or data or analyses they have done.

That's another thing... South Africa must be the only country in the world with a plethora of individually run Crime Websites! Why? Because crime is an enormous issue here and the mere fact that people are debating it and going to the extent of forming anti-crime organisations and websites should tell you what a concern it is over here.

You can download the spreadsheet we created from here: Click here to download the Crime Stats Excel Spreadsheet

My original idea came from a book called, "Die, the Beloved Country?" by Jim Peron who wrote for the New York Times and who came to live in South Africa.

That book's details can be seen on my website's shop at this URL:
Click here for the link to: "Die, the Beloved Country?"

Jim Peron was/is a well known Libertarian. He was so excited when Nelson Mandela and his ANC came to power in 1994, that he left America to live in South Africa to be a part of the amazing country which he believed we were creating here.

However, when Jim Peron saw what Mandela was doing up close, he was so disgusted that he did not even wait for the 2nd term of ANC rule. He wrote a book called, "Die, the Beloved country?" which when it was printed was quietly removed from bookshelves by the S.African Government. Jim Peron was so disgusted that he packed up and went to New Zealand!

Here are a few quotes from Jim Peron in his book:-

"There is going to be interference from the Government in every sphere of life and activity in South Africa..." - Steve Tshwete, Minister of Sport

"It is imperative to get rid of merit as the overriding principle in the appointment of public servants." - Mario Rantho - ANC MP

President Mandela said the ANC wants a two-thirds majority "to ensure that we are not interfered with by Mickey Mouse (opposition) parties".

In Jim's book, on pages 104-105, he compiled crime statistics for South Africa from 1974-1997. It was those statistics in this book by this New York Times writer that gave me the idea for this exercise.

I want to take these figures to show you some interesting things about South Africa which I'll bet most people never knew.

Over the years, as I have watched and analysed the ANC's actions, I have come to the conclusion that crime and the ANC go together. There should be no mystery about the fact that we are flooded with crime. The crime did not happen by accident.

My thesis which I will present to you is this: The Explosion of Crime in South Africa runs directly parallel with the growth, influence and power of Nelson Mandela's (ANC) African National Congress.

Indeed, I have said over the years that:-
(a) The ANC loves crime, wants crime and will try to make it worse!
Now I want to add a further thought:-
(b) As long as the ANC rules South Africa, crime will always be out of control. Crime will only go away when the ANC goes away.

Remember those words... in the years ahead as we revisit this crime issue.

In the first exercise we will work only with Jim Peron's compiled statistics. Below we see burglary statistics from 1974-1997. I drew 3 green arrows on the timeline because I want to show you some things.

I drew 3 green arrows on the graph to coincide with important historical dates which affected this country. South Africa was firmly under White Apartheid rule in the 1970's. The first serious sign of trouble were the 1976 Soweto riots. These were quelled and things quietened down. ANC terrorists were unable to enter the country in large numbers from the north because of the war raging in Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe). In 1980, Robert Mugabe came to power in Zimbabwe. The following year, I was the first of my family to leave and go to South Africa. 1981 was a relatively quiet year in South Africa, but in 1982, with Mugabe in power in Zimbabwe and the Rhodesian war (which had raged not only in Rhodesia but in Mozambique and other neighbouring states) was over. Now that the Rhodesian war was over, the ANC terrorists could enter South Africa. So it took them a while to get organised and by 1982, they started coming in over the borders.

So that is why I drew the green arrow roughly in the 1982 column - because you will see that from 1982 to 1987, crime - in South Africa - in ALL categories went up! However, no history book will tell you this. The history books will tell you that the ANC's "struggle against Apartheid" was occuring in this time. What I'm showing you is a dimension of the ANC's political/military struggle which everyone has ignored.

But first let's focus on the burglary graph only. You will see similar patterns in other graphs.

By 1987, South Africa was a hotbed of ANC terrorism. This was "the struggle" which they talk so proudly of. But, the struggle was not warfare in the conventional sense. It was not really aimed at the white power structures - it was aimed at civilians - because that's who terrorists go for. Terrorism is about killing and terrorising the weak, the old, the young and the UNARMED. Crime is just another dimension of terrorism. They also used crime as a way of funding their activities - and perhaps this is still going on - to this very day!

So while Nelson Mandela's ANC was busy planting bombs... they were also busy... driving up crime in this country - in fact, every conceivable facet of CRIME!

By 1987 things were really violent... But the Apartheid Government fought back furiously on all levels, and so you can see a dip in most crimes after 1987.

The ANC's plan in those days of its "struggle" was to "make the country ungovernable" - that was their slogan and their strategic aim.

Nelson Mandela was released from 27 years in jail on February 11th, 1990.
Go back to the graph with Jim Peron's figures on it, and you'll see something interesting. In 1989/1990, the Apartheid Government under President FW De Klerk was talking PEACE. They were talking about handing over power to Nelson Mandela and the ANC. As a consequence of this talk, and to show their sincerity, they released Nelson Mandela from prison in February 1990. But what happened immediately after that? Not what you would expect! Look at the graph... and you will see... crime started exploding upwards! You will see it on each and every one of the graphs below - except for rape. Rape is the only crime that did not go up as a result of Nelson Mandela's release. But every other crime - from burglary to MURDER exploded upwards from that moment onwards!

And EXPLODE - it did! Like never before in the history of South Africa!

In 1994, Nelson Mandela became the first black President of South Africa, and the ANC took over the country. Most crimes went up even after Nelson Mandela and the ANC came to power - again - contrary to expectation!

Let's quickly look at these same time periods and the crime statistics for different types of crime. In the car theft statistics below we see it levelling out a bit but then by 1997 showing the beginnings of a new upward trend.

Robbery showed a similar patten, a bit of a slowing down, but then back on upward.

Take Note: Nowhere, in any of these graphs will you see crime returning back down to the low Apartheid levels. In fact, crime never even returns back to the days of the maximum violence of the struggle days of 1987! In 1987, this country was regarded as falling apart at the seams because of the violence, yet... if you will look at any crime statistics for 1997 and compare it with 1987 you will see that the 1987 levels are very low. As incredible as this may sound, post-Apartheid South Africa is much more violent than Apartheid South Africa was even at the height of the war and instability brought on by the ANC! That is an incredible fact!

Rape is an interesting crime. Rape only really started rising from 1988 onwards. It is the only crime which does not go up a lot when Nelson Mandela is released from prison. It is rising all the time, but its real explosion occurs just before the ANC takes over in 1994 and thereafter. I have no explanation for it.

Now murder is an interesting crime. It is also the most sensitive crime and the one the Government is most likely to cover up. Murder can also be a way of assassinating one's opponents. There is a proven link in revolutions between murder and assassination. Terrorists and Liberation Movements in many countries around the world have used murder and crime as a way of hiding their revolutionary activities. They not only use crime to obtain funds, but also to despatch troublesome people. Note how murder climbed quietly and constantly and exploded upwards even until and shortly after 1994. Then it settles down a bit. Or does it? Or have some of the figures been fiddled? We'll discuss that later.

Now we see in the combined graph below, all the crimes. I even inserted the release of Nelson Mandela in 1990 - and tried to position the column exactly there along with the elections in April 1994. So looking back over the trends we can see:-
1982 - The borders are open, ANC infiltration begins in a big way...
1987 - Violence and terror hits its peak...
1990 - Nelson Mandela is released...
1994 - Nelson Mandela and the ANC come to power.
All these points in time, showing the rise in power of the ANC (even when the White Govt was talking peace and handing over power)... coincide with ever more violence. In short... as the ANC's power grows... so do almost all forms of crime.

Jim Peron's statistics only go up to 1997. Even under Mandela, crime was stressing people out and most people who have left this country and emigrated elsewhere have cited crime as the reason. Now you can see why 1 million out of the 5 million whites who left... had good reason to. Even non-whites have left South Africa since 1994!

But as crime was getting worse under Mandela's rule, and then Jim Peron's book came out (which the Govt quietly removed from bookstores) ... the Government became rather concerned about their "image". They weren't so much concerned about actually combatting crime - but about everyone's "perceptions" about crime. So in 2000, they did a strange thing - they put a moratorium on the release of crime statistics. From 2000, until the present time (March 2007), the Govt has never again released crime statistics like they did in the past. They simply keep all crime under wraps for a year and then they release it. From 2000 onwards they also started counting it differently and they changed all sorts of categories. The fudging of crime statistics probably started on a smaller scale prior to 2000 but in 2000 they had to control it very firmly. From then onwards (it should come as no surprise to us), crime has officially been "going down". Pretty much everybody in this country believes the Govt is lying about crime. That's no secret. Everyone can see it. But I wish to make two points:-
1) What might the real crime levels actually be like now?
2) And how does crime compare, even with these fudged statistics, with what it was in the 1970's and 1980's?

I searched the Internet a bit and found two well acknowledged sources of crime statistics.

The one is the Institute for Strategic Studies.

Click here for ISS Crime Statistics.

The other is the South African Government itself.
Click here for the South African Govt Crime Statistics page.

I took the statistics - the fudged ones from Govt, and modified 3 of the crime categories (going back to 1995). And this is the result.

Here is burglary. I have an arrow at 2000, when the Govt officially and openly started suppressing, editing and changing the crime statistics. It should be no surprise that "crime went down". Firstly notice the general upward trend of burglary in S.Africa. If one were to extrapolate it, one could guess that by now, 2007, we should be having about 500,000 burglaries annually as opposed to the 300,000 maximum recorded in those statistics. (Note: Many people in S.Africa do not report all crimes except in order to get a case number for insurance purposes). Secondly, even the fudged crime statistics are extremely high - in fact - higher than at any time during Apartheid including "the struggle/war/revolution".

Look at car theft statistics when modified by the official, fudged, Government statistics - taken in a historical context. The blue arrow is when the moratorium on crime statistics was implemented by the ANC in 2000. Not surprisingly, thereafter things "improved". But look at a clear trend in car theft which goes as far back, in a flat straight line as 1984 - even back to 1982. Extrapolate that... and the figure is shocking. Compare it to the fudged figure. We can: (a) Say that the fudged figure is a LOT lower than what the real figure probably is. (b) Even the fudged figure is still higher than before the ANC came to power.

Murder statistics are the most sensitive statistics of all. They are the crime figure that worry people the most. So they show a consistent downward trend since 1997 - but people will question that. You will notice that even according to official statistics, murder increased well after the ANC came to power and officially it peaked in 1996/7. It went down a little and then started going UP again... and then, in kicks the moratorium on crime statistics... The blue arrow is when the moratorium kicked in and the fudging began. I did a bit of a thumbsuck and guess and my arrow points to 30,000+ murders a year. International studies have shown that S.Africa is 8 times more violent than the average country on planet earth. The USA with 300 million people worries about 16,000 murders. S.Africa with an official population of 45 million has an official murder rate of over 18,000 (fudged). The reality is probably 30,000 or even higher. Dan Roodt was using the figure of 30,000 back in 2003. I'm not sure the source he obtained it from, nevertheless, I think many would say that it is a pretty reasonable assumption.

I recently contacted the regional manager of a very big nationwide security company asking if he could give me an indication of crime in my suburb. He said, according to their records "crime doubled in the period 2005-2006". When I asked him to elaborate more, he did not respond further when he realised I had a website. So although my extrapolations on these graphs may seem scary... it is possible... that the reality is even more frightening!

These days, people are turning out in huge numbers to protest against crime. People have been begging for a return of the death penalty for years. The Government ignores them. One group of people sent 30,000 petitions directly to President Mbeki. (He says out of control crime "is just a perception"). More recently I heard of 80,000 people signing a petition, and one organisation promising to collect 1 million signatures to give to government. Crime is a huge issue in S.Africa and yet, NOBODY has dared to take numbers, such as I have here, and put them into graphs and studied them - because perhaps - that is the most shocking exercise of all!!

By the way, Nelson Mandela loved releasing criminals as does the current Government. One year, Nelson Mandela said he would "give the country a present" and the present was the release of 9,000 criminals. In recent years enormous numbers were released. In one series of releases they were talking of letting 63,000 criminals go. I posted that story on my website quite a long time ago, along with TvNews photos. Here is the link to the story:- Click here for the story of the release of 63,000 criminals.

I would like to co-operate with anyone who can source better and more accurate data. I have wondered if anyone in one of the larger security or insurance companies would be prepared to anonymously release some of their data. I would like to see statistics for the last 10 years because it is these years which are the most worrisome.

But when crime in S.Africa is looked at in a historical context, it brings home a completely different picture showing what this country was like and how things have changed in a way which I think few expected - most definitely not anyone outside this country.

Finally, if anyone wants to take some of these pages with statistics and wishes to expand/grow the spreadsheet with additional data and then send it to me - feel free to do so. Just drop a line on the "Contact us" page of my website.

I hope this spurs people on and helps them to see and understand the state of this country. Jan.

Taxes and The ´Crown

2006-05-13T08:41:00.000-04:00

by Mark Owen

There are two Crowns operant in England, one being Queen Elizabeth II. Although extremely wealthy, the Queen functions largely in a ceremonial capacity and serves to deflect attention away from the other Crown, who issues her marching orders through their control of the English Parliament. This other Crown is comprised of a committee of 12 banks headed by the Bank of England (House of Rothschild). They rule the world from the 677-acre, independent sovereign state known as The City of London, or simply 'The City.'

The City is not a part of England, just as Washington D.C. is not a part of the USA. The City is referred to as the wealthiest square mile on earth and is presided over by a Lord Mayor who is appointed annually. When the Queen wishes to conduct business within the City, she is met by the Lord Mayor at Temple (Templar) Bar where she requests permission to enter this private, sovereign state. She then proceeds into the City walking several paces behind the Mayor. Her entourage may not be clothed in anything other than service uniforms.

In the nineteenth century, 90% of the world's trade was carried by British ships controlled by the Crown. The other 10% of ships had to pay commissions to the Crown simply for the privilege of using the world's oceans.

The Crown reaped billions in profits while operating under the protection of the British armed forces. This was not British commerce or British wealth, but the Crown's commerce and the Crown's wealth. As of 1850, author Frederick Morton estimated the Rothschild fortune to be in excess of $10 billion, which at today's standard translates to 450 Trillian. Today, the bonded indebtedness of the world is held by the Crown.

The aforementioned Temple Bar is the juristic arm of the Crown and holds an exclusive monopoly on global legal fraud through their Bar Association franchises. The Temple Bar is comprised of four Inns of Court. They are; the Middle Temple, Inner Temple, Lincoln's Inn and Gray's Inn. The entry point to these closed secret societies is only to be found when one is called to their Bar.

The Bar attorneys in the United States owe their allegiance and pledge their oaths to the Crown. All Bar Associations throughout the world are signatories and franchises to the International Bar Association located at the Inns of Court of the Crown Temple.

The Inner Temple holds the legal system franchise by license that bleeds Canada and Great Britain white, while the Middle Temple has license to steal from America. To have the Declaration of Independence recognized internationally, Middle Templar King George III agreed in the Treaty of Paris of 1783 to establish the legal Crown entity of the incorporated United States, referred to internally as the Crown Temple States (Colonies). States spelled with a capital letter 'S,' denotes a legal entity of the Crown.

At least five Templar Bar Attorneys under solemn oath to the Crown, signed the American Declaration of Independence. This means that both parties were agents of the Crown. There is no lawful effect when a party signs as both the first and second parties. The Declaration was simply an internal memo circulating among private members of the Crown. Most Americans believe that they own their own land, but they have merely purchased real estate by contract. Upon fulfillment of the contract, control of the land is transferred by Warranty Deed. The Warranty Deed is only a 'color of title.' Color of Title is a semblance or appearance of title, but not title in fact or in law. The Warranty Deed cannot stand against the Land Patent.

The Crown was granted Land Patents in North America by the King of England. Colonials rebelled at the usurious Crown taxes, and thus the Declaration of Independence was created to pacify the populace.

Another method used to hoodwink natural persons is enfranchisement. Those cards in your wallet bearing your name spelled in all capital letters means that you have been enfranchised and have the status of a corporation. A 'juristic personality' has been created, and you have entered into multi-variant agreements that place you in an equity relationship with the Crown.

These invisible contracts include: birth certificates, citizenship records, employment agreements, driver's licenses and bank accounts. It is perhaps helpful to note here that contracts do not now, nor have they ever had to be stated in writing in order to be enforceable by American judges. If it is written down, it is merely a written statement of the contract.

Tax protestors and (the coming) draft resistors trying to renounce the parts of these contracts that they now disagree with will not profit by resorting to tort law (fairness) arguments as justification. Judges will reject these lines of defense as they have no bearing on contract law jurisprudence. Tort law governs grievances where no contract law is in effect.

These private agreements/contracts that bind us will always overrule the broad general clauses of the Constitution and Bill of Rights (the Constitution being essentially a renamed enactment of English common law). The Bill of Rights is viewed by the Crown as a 'bill of benefits,' conferred on us by them in anticipation of reciprocity (taxes). Protestors and resistors will also lose their cases by boasting of citizenship status. Citizenship is another equity agreement that we have with the Crown. And this is the very juristic contract that Federal judges will use to incarcerate them. In the words of former Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter, "Equity is brutal, but we are merely enforcing agreements." The balance of Title 42, section 1981 of the Civil Rights Code states, ".citizens shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind"

What we view as citizenship, the Crown views as a juristic enrichment instrumentality. It also should be borne in mind that even cursory circulation or commercial use of Federal Reserve Notes effects an attachment of liability for the payment of the Crown's debt to the FED. This is measured by your taxable income. And to facilitate future asset-stripping, the end of the 14th amendment includes a state of debt hypothecation of the United States, wherein all enfranchised persons (that's you) can be held personally liable for the Crown's debt.

The Crown views our participation in these contracts of commercial equity as being voluntary and that any gain accrued is taxable, as the gain wouldn't have been possible were it not for the Crown. They view the system of interstate banks as their own property. Any profit or gain experienced by anyone with a bank account (or loan, mortgage or credit card) carries with it - as an operation of law - the identical same full force and effect as if the Crown had created the gain.

Bank accounts fall outside the umbrella of Fourth Amendment protection because a commercial contract is in effect and the Bill of Rights cannot be held to interfere with the execution of commercial contracts. The Crown also views bank account records as their own private property, pursuant to the bank contract that each of us signed and that none of us ever read.

The rare individual who actually reads the bank contract will find that they agreed to be bound by Title 26 and under section 7202 agreed not to disseminate any fraudulent tax advice. This written contract with the Crown also acknowledges that bank notes are taxable instruments of commerce.

When we initially opened a bank account, another juristic personality was created. It is this personality (income and assets) that IRS agents are excising back to the Crown through taxation.

A lot of ink is being spilled currently over Social Security. Possession of a Social Security Number is known in the Crown's lex as 'conclusive evidence' of our having accepted federal commercial benefits. This is another example of an equity relationship with the Crown. Presenting one's Social Security Number to an employer seals our status as taxpayers, and gives rise to liability for a reciprocal quid pro quo payment of taxes to the Crown.

Through the Social Security Number we are accepting future retirement endowment benefits. Social Security is a strange animal. If you die, your spouse gets nothing, but rather, what would have gone to you is divided (forfeited) among other premium payers who haven't died yet.

But the Crown views failure to reciprocate in any of these equity attachments as an act of defilement and will proceed against us with all due prejudice. For a person to escape the tentacles of the Crown octopus, a thoroughgoing study of American jurisprudence is required. One would have to be deemed a 'stranger to the public trust,' forfeit all enfranchisement benefits and close all bank accounts, among other things. Citizenship would have to be made null and forfeit and the status of 'denizen' enacted, which would be very difficult to live and operate in its system.

The Power Of The British Commonwealth Over The World

2006-05-12T10:47:00.000-04:00

By Joan Veon - Executive Director
The Women's International Media Group, Inc

Introduction

The following report on "The Power of the British Commonwealth Over the World" began when I was at the WTO meeting in Cancun in September 2003. There, several African countries held a press briefing in which they said that they would starve if America and other rich countries did not open their cotton and agricultural markets to them. I asked several questions about their vast natural resources (gold and strategic minerals) and if they had any monies left over after their World Bank loans were paid. They refused to answer. Afterward I spoke to each one and asked the following questions and received the same response. Since they were Commonwealth members, I asked if they could go to Britain for help. They could not. So I then asked why they don't withdraw from the Commonwealth if there is no help. With great alarm, they told me they could not withdraw from this voluntary association. When I returned home, I called the British Information Office to see if they could tell me if the countries which Britain de-colonized in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s received a vote at the UN at the time of separation. The lady told me she would have to research my very good question. She called the next day to tell me that every time a country was granted independence from Britain, they were given a vote at the UN. BINGO!

I have always questioned how Britain would regain control of America when they were defeated by Andrew Jackson at the Battle of New Orleans in 1812. Are we so naive to think that they would not try some other way to "capture the world"? In the past ten years, as I have covered the UN, I have been amazed at the number of suggestions and key reports that come from the British which influence UN policy. So, just how much power does Britain have in the world today?

The first book that I wrote is 'Prince Charles the Sustainable Prince' which has to do with the role of the British Royal Family as the power behind the United Nations. This book asserts that the British ARE the power behind the United Nations. This opinion has not changed since I wrote Prince Charles. The prince is a key, behind-the-scenes mover and shaker and is responsible for the radical environmental agenda that perverts Genesis 1, 2, and 3 and puts the earth above man and not man above the earth as God intended. When I wrote Prince Charles, I was not aware of the information you are now going to read.

A Brief History of Britain

The following is taken from the Internet site, "britania," and is from 'England, A Narrative History' by Peter N. Williams. What I have tried to do is to show the aggressiveness of this little island nation and its role in the world today. Some of the sub-titles are my interpretation of the material reprinted.

Early History

The Celtic culture in Early Britain developed about 1000 BC and came from Gaul, driven from their homelands by the Romans who invaded in 55BC under Julius Caesar. In 43 AD an expedition was ordered against Britain by Emperor Claudius who sent an army of 40,000 men. The Romans established their bases in what is known as Kent and subdued much of Britain in less than 40 years. They remained for nearly 400 years. After the Romans left, England entered a dark period. By 314 an organized Christian Church seems to have been established in most of Britain. By 410 Britain had become self-governing in three parts. In 597 St. Augustine was sent to convert the pagan English by Pope Gregory. Ethelbert had married Bertha, daughter of the Merovingian King and was practicing Christianity. The first Anglo-Saxon kingdom in Britain was an Anglo-Celtic kingdom. In 726, Aethelbold called himself "King of Britain" while his son Offa called himself "king of all the English." For several hundred years, various kings in various part of Britain tried to gain control. In 896, Alfred occupied London. He was born in 849 and became King of Wessex in 871. Due to his battles with the Danes, he succeeded in becoming the first king of England. Throughout the 8th century, the Danes, Norwegians, Scandinavians, and British fought as to who would have power and control. The Normans invaded England in order to secure the throne for William of Normandy who was crowned King of England at Westminster on Christmas Day, 1066. With him, came feudalism and a new aristocracy. By 1086, other than small-estate holders, there were in the whole of the land only two Englishmen holding estates of any dimension. William insisted that landowners who had land from the king produce a set quota of mounted knights which produced a new ruling class in England. In this system, those at the bottom suffered most, losing all their rights as free men and coming to be regarded as mere property, assets belonging to the manor.

Feudalistic Sustainable Development

Further restrictions and hardship came from William's New Forest laws and his vast extension of new royal forests in which all hunting rights belonged to the king. The peasantry was deprived of a valuable food source in times of bad harvests. In 1080, the "Domesday Book" was begun and was an attempt to provide the king with every penny to which he was legally entitled. It worked only too well, reckoning the wealth of England, "Down to the last pig." William sent his men into every village and had them find out how many hides there were, what land and cattle the king should have in the country, and what dues he ought to have in twelve months from the town or village [JV: Does this sound like sustainable development and the UN Biological Diversity Treaty?].

From the rule of the Plantagenet's to Richard the Lionhearted and the Crusades to King John who was forced to sign the "Great Magna Carta" in Runnymede on June 15, 1215, to Edward I, Longshanks to Henry VIII and to Queen Elizabeth I, the British kings and queens were concerned with holding on to the power of the monarchy.

As a result of the defeat of the Spanish Armada by Elizabeth I and her long reign, England saw remarkable economic growth and a time of calm from her chaotic past. Industry and trade prospered under the guidance of men like Secretary Cecil, later Lord Burghley. [JV: It should be noted that Lord Burghley perfected torture techniques and the secret police.] During her reign, many of the Dutch bankers and capitalists from Antwerp flocked to London to find a new and more secure international money and credit market. That year Thomas Gresham opened the Royal Exchange in London to make it the financial capital of the world. Cecil encouraged the fishing industry, the source of England's navy and backbone of its sea power. English sailors began their mastery of the world's oceans. Though little more than pirates, these seamen laid the foundations of their nation's naval superiority which was to last for centuries. John Cabot discovered Newfoundland in 1497, Martin Frobisher established trade with Moscow in 1555 to trade with Russia. Sir Francis Drake searched the world for treasures.

Key British Economic and Trade Concepts In 1694, the Bank of England was formed by a private stock company which raised their own funds and issued their own money to be lent to the government "in perpetuity." This started the concept of "central banking." Then a group of merchants and sea captains at Lloyd's Coffee House in 1688 formed marine insurance which would underwrite enormous expenditures in overseas ventures and shipping. On May 26, 1698, Parliament came up with the idea of granting monopolies in trade by an act of Parliament. This act created the East India Company. This company, with the newly formed Bank of England showed only too well the growing power of the British traders and financiers over the state government (emphasis added). [JV: This is very key for they still rule the world today.]

As a result of the East India Trading Company, the trading classes were able to control parliament. It became one of the ever-increasing problems for the country's government: the interference of trade with legislation and administration was to become an inevitable part of the future.

In 1496, John and Sebastian Cabot discovered Newfoundland and Nova Scotia. England's own era of exploration, initiated by the Cabots, was expanded by the journeys of Hugh Willoughby to seek a Northeast Passage to China and the spice trade. He reached Moscow by way of the White Sea and Archangel in 1553. As a result, the Muscovy Company was founded by Richard Chancellor to trade with Russia in 1555. Then John Hawkins, who began his career high-jacking Portuguese and Spanish ships in 1562, led to England's entering the Slave Trade. David Ingram explored from the Gulf of Mexico to Canada and reported finding vines with grapes as large as a man's thumb. English mariner Francis Drake undertook his daring voyage of 1572 to capture the Spanish treasure fleet returning from Peru, a feat surpassed by his even greater haul one year later.

In 1580, Drake arrived back in Plymouth having circumnavigated the globe in the Pelican, renamed the Golden Hind after the gallant ship had passed through the Straits of Magellan. Drake was knighted by the Queen after capturing the richest prize ever taken at sea. In 1584, Sir Walter Raleigh established a colony in Roanoke, Virginia. One year later, Chesapeake Bay was discovered by Ralph Lane and Davis Strait by John Davis.

In 1585, the first oriental spice to be grown in the New World, Jamaican ginger, arrived in Europe. In 1586, Sir Richard Cavendish became the third man to circumnavigate the globe when the ship the Desire reached England after a voyage of over two years. When the Portuguese closed its spice market in Lisbon to Dutch and English traders, the Dutch East India Company was created to obtain spices directly from the Orient. In 1600, the Honorable East India Company was chartered to make annual voyages to the Indies and to challenge Dutch control of the spice trade.

After James I made peace with Spain in 1604, he re-directed England's efforts at colonizing North America and the Plymouth and London companies sent ships and colonists. Jamestown, Virginia was founded in 1607. That same year, Henry Hudson sought a route to China and sailed around the Eastern Short of Greenland. In 1610, Hudson's ship Discovery reached the strait later to be known as Hudson Bay, Canada. In 1620, the Mayflower arrived off Cape Cod with 100 Pilgrims. In 1628, John Endicott arrived as the first Governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. In 1632, Maryland received its charger by a grant from King Charles to Cecil Calvert. In 1655, Admiral Penn captured Jamaica from the Spanish. In 1654, New Amsterdam was renamed New York after its capture from the Dutch. A year later, the New Jersey Colony was founded by English colonists. The 1674 Treaty of Westminster returned New York and Delaware to England. In 1681, Pennsylvania had its beginning in the land grant given to William Penn. In 1698, William Dampier sailed on his Pacific expedition to explore the West Coast of Australia.

In 1648, South Africa came to attention of Europeans when a Dutch ship broke up and the survivors urged authorities to establish a settlement for provisioning their East India fleets. In 1652, a small group of Dutch settlers founded Cape Town. In 1815, Britain gained its long-desired "half-way house" on the sea route to India when the Dutch ceded the Cape of Good Hope. The British arrived in 1820. When diamonds were discovered in the Orange Free State, the Boer War began. Then gold was discovered in the Transvaal in 1886. Cecil Rhodes who founded the De Beers Mining Corporation in 1880 was determined that the riches being discovered in South Africa were not going to the Boer farmers. Rhodes dreamed of extending British rule in Africa. Using his great wealth, amassed in the diamond and gold fields, Rhodes with other imperialists established British colonies to the north of the Boer territories. Both Northern and Southern Rhodesia were granted charters by London. Eventually the Boer republics were annexed to the British crown in 1900.

The South Sea company founded in 1711 had acquired a monopoly in the lucrative Spanish slave trade and other trading ventures in South America.

At the Treaty of Paris in 1763, Britain gained Canada, Nova Scotia, Cape Breton, the right to navigate the Mississippi, the West Indian Islands of Grenada, St. Vincent, Dominica and Tobago in the West Indies; Florida (from Spain); Senegal in Africa and the preservation in India of the East India Company's monopoly, and in Europe, Minorca.

In India, Robert Clive defeated pro-French forces at Arcot in 1751 thus helping his East India Company monopolize appoints, finances, land and power. The British victory led to the withdrawal of the French East India Company. Then Clive defeated the local Nabob at Plassey to become virtual ruler of Bengal and opened up much of the country to further exploitation and control by the East India Company. India was regarded as the "jewel in the crown" of the British Empire; over two thirds of the vast sub-continent was ruled by the East India Company. Its finances and its troops were used to protect British interests, even overthrowing native Indian princes.

In 1769, Captain Cook discovered a country that consisted of two main islands, it was called New Zealand. In 1770, he explored the eastern coast of what was then called "New Holland." He took possession of the island continent in the name of George III. Britain had found a new empire, Australia to resettle criminals and to accommodate early settlers to help with the overpopulation in Britain which the agricultural and industrial revolutions had contributed to. In 1822, an article by James Mill on "colonization" in the "Encyclopedia Britannica" offered emigration as a remedy for over-population.

Between 1768 and 1781, Captain Cook made three exploratory voyages to the West Coast of Canada. Because the Chinese were interested in receiving fur in exchange for the tea, silks and porcelain which was in demand in Europe, the British went further west. In 1788, a group of English traders settled on Vancouver Island. Spain still claimed the whole West Coast of America up to Alaska but after a confrontation at Vancouver between the two countries, England presented an ultimatum to the Spanish whose lack of allies and an effective navy forced them to accept its terms. The Spanish recognition of British trading and fishing rights in the area opened the way for the establishment of British Columbia and the creation of a British North America. In 1867, the British North America Act united Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia in the Dominion of Canada.

When Admiral Nelson defeated a combined French and Spanish fleet near Gibraltar in 1805, the long struggle between Britain and France for world supremacy ended. English soldiers were involved in a war with China over British export of opium from India in exchange for silks and tea. When China forbade the opium trade and fired on a British warship, they were bombarded by a Royal Navy squadron. The Opium War ended with the Treaty of Nanking in 1842 that opened up five "Treaty Ports" for trade and gave Hong Kong to Britain.

Britain's rise to a world power meant that she found interest everywhere. Not only was she now head of the self-governing colonies such as Australia, Canada, New Zealand, but also the vast Empire of India and a veritable host of dependent territories all over the world's oceans. Most of these had been acquired somehow to protect the merchants and traders of England. On the following page, you will find a chart of British interference and domination in the affairs of the world.

Observations of Commonwealth Countries While I could make numerous observations about the various countries that comprise the Commonwealth countries, I would like to offer the following:

1. There is an interesting mix between extremely wealthy countries such as Australia, Canada, Brunei, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and UAE versus the Highly Indebted Poor Countries-HIPC such as Bangladesh, Mozambique, Uganda and the Sudan.

Many of the HIPC have vast mineral resources which are used to pay for World Bank loans instead of building infrastructure. Please refer to Prince Charles the Sustainable Prince. For example:

Ghana - Rich in gold, bauxite, manganese, diamonds

Guyana - Rich in bauxite, manganese, gold, diamonds Mauritania - Iron and copper ore Senegal - Petroleum refining Sierra Leone - Diamonds, chrome, bauxite and iron ore Uganda - Copper and cobalt Tanzania - Rich in gold, diamonds and coal Zambia - Rich in copper.

2. By the number of countries that the British invaded, ruled and plundered, you can see that "the sun never sets on the British Empire."

3. Israel was a British Mandate and then was made a country by vote at the United Nations.

4. The financial and economic power of some of the Commonwealth Countries and those invaded by the British is as follows:

Australia - rich in coal, gold, meat, wool, machinery, iron ore, bauxite, natural gas, uranium and petroleum.
Brunei - Rich in oil and gas with 79 million barrels of oil exported in 2001. It also has forests, fish, rubber and pepper.
Kuwait - Has 10% of the world's oil reserves at 98 billion barrels.
India - Has textiles, chemicals, steel, transportation equipment, cement and petroleum.
Nigeria - The most populous country with proven oil reserves of 27 billion barrels and natural gas reserves of 4 trillion cubic feet along with coal, peanuts and palm oil.
Malaysia - Rubber, palm oil and electronics. Oman -Has oil and natural gas with some copper, gold, manganese, and goal.
Qatar - Has 5% of the world's oil reserves of 14.6B barrels and proven natural gas of 17.9% trillion cubic feet.
Singapore - Electronics, chemicals, transportation equipment, one of the world's largest petroleum refining centers and an important ship-building center.
South Africa - The world's largest producer of platinum, gold and chromium.
UAE - Has 10% of the world's oil reserves estimated at 98.1 billion barrels and natural gas at 5.8 trillion cubic feet as well as largest producer of dates and fresh fruits, has a national shipping fleet of more than 4,000 vessels, produces aluminum, chemicals, paper and pharmaceuticals.
Zimbabwe - Coal, gold, copper, nickel, tin, clay, steel, wood, cement and chemicals.

While we are at it, let us make mention that most of the off-shore trading and banking is conducted in the Cayman Islands which is part of the UK. They have 40,000 companies as of 1998 with 600 banks and trusts. AT that time, banking exceeded $500B.

Definition of Commonwealth

The English word, "Commonwealth", dates from the 15th century and indicates one of the following: a nation, state or political unit, a state founded on law by agreement of the people for the common good, a republic, and/or a federated union of constituent states. The Commonwealth of England was the official title of the political unit that replaced the kingdoms of Scotland and England under the rule of Oliver Cromwell.

The states of Kentucky, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and Virginia are all "commonwealths" which emphasizes they have "government based on the common consent of the people" (Source: Wikipedia.Org.)

The Commonwealth

According to an Internet encyclopedia, Wikipedia.org, "The Commonwealth of Nations is a voluntary association of independent sovereign states, mostly formed by the United Kingdom and its former colonies." Countries that "acknowledge the British monarch as head of state are known as Commonwealth Realms" while all members recognize Queen Elizabeth II as Head of the Commonwealth.

The Commonwealth is the successor of the British Empire and has its origins in the Imperial Conferences of the 1920s. The Commonwealth was established as an association of free and equal states, and membership was based on common allegiance to the British Crown.

The old British Empire, we are told, was dismantled after World War II beginning with India and the activities of Mohandas Gandhi. A number of the countries that have been de-colonized are republics. Because several left the Commonwealth, they established the London Declaration which provided for members to accept the British monarch as Head of the Commonwealth regardless of their domestic constitutional arrangements, and are now considered by many to be the start of the modern Commonwealth.

The population of the Commonwealth is about 1.8 billion people which comprise about 30% of the world's population. India is the most populous member with a billion people while Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Nigeria have more than 100 million people. The land of Commonwealth nations equals about 1/4 of the world's land area. Membership is open to countries that accept the association's basic aims.

In recent years, the Commonwealth has suspended Fiji (2000-2001), Pakistan from 1999-2004, Nigeria from 1995 ñ 1999, Zimbabwe was suspended in 2002 and left the Commonwealth in 2003.

Organization and Objectives

Queen Elizabeth II is the nominal Head of the Commonwealth. Since 1965 there has been a London-based Secretariat. The current Commonwealth Secretary-General is the former New Zealand Foreign Minister Don McKinnon.

The objectives of the Commonwealth were set down in The Harare Declaration of 1991. While it is not a long declaration, part of it is reprinted only to show that there really is no real reason for the UK to have the Commonwealth except to control the UN through the Commonwealth. Its goals are exactly those of the UN. The Declaration states in part,

The Heads of Government of the countries of the Commonwealth reaffirm their confidence In the Commonwealth as a voluntary association of sovereign independent states, each Responsible for its own policies, consulting and co-operating in the interests of their peoples and in the promotion of international understanding and world peace.

The Commonwealth way is to seek consensus through consultation and the sharing of experience. It is uniquely placed to serve as a model and as a catalyst for new forms of friendship and co-operation to all in the spirit of the Charter of the United Nations.

We believe that international peace and order, global economic development and the rule of International law are essential to the security and prosperity of mankind.

Internationally, the world is no longer locked in the iron grip of the Cold War. Totalitarianism Is giving way to democracy and justice in many parts of the world.

Many Commonwealth countries are poor and face acute problems, including excessive population growth, crushing poverty, debt burdens and environmental degradation.

Only sound and sustainable development can offer these millions the prospect of betterment. Achieving this will require a flow of public and private resources from the developed to the developing world, and domestic and international regimes conducive to the realization of these goals: environmental degradation, migration and refugees, communicable diseases and drug production and trafficking.

Having reaffirmed the principles to which the Commonwealth is committed, we pledge the Commonwealth and our countries to work with renewed vigor, concentrating especially In the following areas: the protection and promotion of the fundamental political values of the Commonwealth.

How Voluntary is the Commonwealth?

You would think that if a country was de-colonized that Britain would have a "hands-off" policy. That is not the case. Every Commonwealth country that acknowledges the queen as head of state has a representative of the queen who is called a "Governor-General." The Governor-General retains all the reserve powers that the Queen exercises in the UK which includes opening and closing parliament and abolishing parliament. Furthermore, the Governor-General appoints the prime minister and cabinet from the part with the most support from the House of Commons. In Canada, for example, the ten provinces all have a representative of the Queen! When Parliament is opened, both the prime minister and the Governor-General give a speech. The Governor-General delivers "The Speech from the Throne."

Commonwealth Votes at the UN

When the UN was formed in 1945, Canada, New Zealand and the United Kingdom had three votes. As the UK de-colonized countries, they were made voting members of the United Nations. Then between 1946-1959 when the United Kingdom de-colonized a number of countries, their votes increased by four: Ghana, Malaysia, Pakistan and Sir Lanka. During 1960-1969, twenty more countries were de-colonized: Barbados, Botswana, Cameroon, Cyprus, Gambia, Guyana, Jamaica, Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Swaziland, Trinidad and Tobago, Uganda and Zambia. During 1970-79, ten more countries de-colonized: Bahamas, Bangladesh, Dominica, Fiji, Grenada, Mozambique, Papau New Guinea, Samoa, and Solomon Islands. During 1980-89, seven more countries de-colonized: Antigua and Barbuda, Belize, Brunei Darussalam, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Vanuatu, and Zimbabwe. The last country to de-colonize was Namibia.

In addition, associated states, external territories and dependencies include: Anguilla, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Channel Islands, Falkland Islands, Isle of Man, Montserrat, Pitcairn Islands, St. Helena, and Turks and Caicos Islands. Those that come as a result of being part of Australia or New Zealand include: Christmas Island, Cocos Island, Cook Islands, Niue, Norfolk Island, and Tokelau.

Canada and the Free Trade Areas of the Americas Our neighbor to the north and our largest trading partner, Canada, is the largest member of the Commonwealth in this hemisphere. Canada is America's largest trading partnerósurpassing our trade with Japan. On a daily basis the volume is over $1B or about $400B a year. Twenty-three percent of American exports are sent to Canada and more than 80% of Canada's exports come to us. Canada is the largest export market for 39 of the 50 states. We import 80% of Canada's wood, paper and pulp and 17% of their oil and 18% of their natural gas. Furthermore, we not only share energy grids all across the northern borders but New England obtains most of their power from Quebec.

From a military standpoint, over the past 46 years, America has been inextricably linked to Canada through our joint military efforts through the North American Aerospace Defense Command-NORAD. On September 11, it was a Canadian general who was holding the chair at NORAD that gave the order to initiate our defenses. As a result of September 11, more than 200 commercial planes were diverted to airports across our country from coast to coast. Since then both countries have implemented measures to strengthen military cooperation as well as law enforcement and intelligence agencies. In December 2002, they established the Bi-national Planning Group to develop joint plans for maritime and land defense, and for military support to civil authorities in times of emergency. In Canada, President Bush expressed hope that our two countries would move forward on a ballistic missile defense system.

In November, 2004 President Bush told Canada's Prime Minister Paul Martin at a meeting on "Common Security, Common Prosperity, A new Partnership in North America, "It's good to be home." He went on to declare, "Both the U.S. and Canada participate together in more multinational institutions than perhaps any two nations on earthófrom NATO to the OAS to APEC in the Pacific." He went several steps forward when he pledged,

My country is determined to work as far as possible within the framework of international organizations and we're hoping that other nations will work with us to make those institutions more relevant and more effective in meeting the unique threats of our time.

With all this "interconnectedness," I would like to seriously question our involvement with, not only Canada, but the Free Trade Areas of the Americas-FTAA which is a trading zone for all the countries in our hemisphere. Begun in 1994, the various cabinet level secretaries of the 34 countries have been meeting throughout the year since then to integrate our laws. In a the Western Hemisphere, Canada, Antigua, the Bahamas, Belize, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Jamaica, St. Lucia, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, and Trinidad and Tobago are members of the British Commonwealth. We are outvoted by 13 votes to our one vote in our own hemisphere! Let's take a look at the voting power of the Commonwealth in the world today.

THE VOTING POWER OF THE COMMONWEALTH IN THE WORLD TODAY

Starting with the founding of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank in 1944, an economic international infrastructure was established which was followed by a political international infrastructure above the nation-states. Over the last 61 years, this infrastructure has been developed to include trade, law, the military and now intelligence as a result of the September 11 terrorist attacks on America. Interestingly enough, the Commonwealth of Nations operates in each of these organizations. Not once has an American President said, "Chose either the UN or the Commonwealth." On the following page, you will see the power of the Commonwealth. We are outvoted with our one vote at every turn.

Let me just make mention that on a regional basis, the U.S. and the world are also outvoted: Free Trade Areas of the Americas by 13 votes, two votes in the European Union, and seven votes at the Asian Pacific Economic Cooperation!

Furthermore, whenever a committee is formed at the UN, they rotate "presidency". For example, if there are 4 Commonwealth countries that are part of a committee of 15, that means Britain is president 25% of the time. This is occurring throughout ALL of the hundreds of committees, agencies, organizations, etc. throughout the WHOLE of the UN system.

IN CONCLUSION

In conclusion, I believe the purpose behind the construction of the international level is to transfer complete and absolute power to Britain.

I can now see why Prince Charles was working behind the scenes. For him to be center-stage along with the power of the Commonwealth would look like they are in the process of using Francis Drake's pirating methods to grab the world! You can now see how The British have the majority of votes in the global organizations of the world through the Commonwealth and not one major power has questioned the ability of the Commonwealth to operate in tandem with the other global organizations!

And while we are on the subject of being outvoted, let us turn to the EU for a moment. When it came together the whole purpose was to create a "United States of Europe." Now that the travel and trade barriers are down between the European states which now total 25, and they have adopted a common currency which is giving the dollar a run for her money, and they have a common parliament in Strasbourg, how come, they still have 25 votes at the UN instead of ONE? America has 50 states and we only get ONE vote! There, the Commonwealth has two votes: Malta and the UK. Globally Queen Elizabeth II has out-maneuvered more than what her namesake did when she defeated the Spanish Armada!

Global Banking: the Bank for International Settlements

2006-05-11T15:07:00.000-04:00

By Patrick Wood | newswithviews.com

Preface
When David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski founded the Trilateral Commission in 1973, the intent was to create a "New International Economic Order" (NIEO). To this end, they brought together 300 elite corporate, political and academic leaders from North America, Japan and Europe.

Few people believed us when we wrote about their nefarious plans back then. Now, we look back and clearly see that they did what they said they were going to do... globalism is upon us like an 8.6 magnitude earthquake.

The question is, "How did they do it?" Keep in mind, they had no public mandate from any country in the world. They didn't have the raw political muscle, especially in democratic countries where voting is allowed. They didn't have global dictatorial powers.

Indeed, how did they do it?
The answer is the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), self-described as the "central bank for central bankers", that controls the vast global banking system with the precision of a Swiss watch.

This report offers a concise summation of BIS history, structure and current activities.

It is not surprising that the BIS, its offices, employees, directors and members share an incredible immunity from virtually all regulation, scrutiny and accountability.

Introduction
The famous currency expert Dr. Franz Pick once stated, "The destiny of the currency is, and always will be, the destiny of a nation."

With the advent of rampant globalization, this concept can certainly be given a global context as well: "The destiny of currencies are, and always will be, the destiny of the world."

Even though the BIS is the oldest international banking operation in the world, it is a low profile organization, shunning all publicity and notoriety. As a result, there is very little critical analysis written about this important financial organization. Further, much of what has been written about it is tainted by its own self-effacing literature.

The BIS can be compared to a stealth bomber. It flies high and fast, is undetected, has a small crew and carries a huge payload. By contrast, however, the bomber answers to a chain of command and must be refueled by outside sources. The BIS, as we shall see, is not accountable to any public authority and operates with complete autonomy and self-sufficiency.

Leading up to Founding
As we will see, the BIS was founded in 1930 during a very troubled time in history. Some knowledge of that history is critical to understanding why the BIS was created, and for whose benefit.

There are three figures that play prominently in the founding of the BIS: Charles G. Dawes, Owen D. Young and Hjalmar Schacht of Germany.

Charles G. Dawes was director of the U.S. Bureau of the Budget in 1921, and served on the Allied Reparations Commission starting in 1923. His latter work on "stabilizing Germany's economy" earned him the Nobel Peace Prize in 1925. After being elected Vice President under President Calvin Coolidge from 1925-1929, and appointed Ambassador to England in 1931, he resumed his personal banking career in 1932 as chairman of the board of the City National Bank and Trust in Chicago, where he remained until his death in 1951.

Owen D Young was an American industrialist. He founded RCA (Radio Corporation of America) in1919 and was its chairman until 1933. He also served as the chairman of General Electric from 1922 until 1939. In 1932, Young sought the democratic presidential nomination, but lost to Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

Global Banking: the Bank for International Settlements - Part 2 of 2

Article 21 of the original BIS statutes define day-to-day operations:

buying and selling of gold coin or bullion for its own account or for the account of central banks;

holding gold for its own account under reserve in central banks;

accepting the supervision of gold for the account of central banks;

making advances to or borrowing from central banks against gold, bills of exchange, and other short-term obligations of prime liquidity or other approved securities;

discounting, rediscounting, purchasing, or selling with or without its endorsement bills of exchange, checks, and other short-term obligations of prime liquidity;

buying and selling foreign exchange for its own account or for the account of central banks;

buying and selling negotiable securities other than shares for its own account or for the account of central banks;

discounting for central banks bills taken from their portfolio and rediscounting with central banks bills taken from its own portfolio;

opening and maintaining current or deposit accounts with central banks;

accepting deposits from central banks on current or deposit account;

accepting deposits in connection with trustee agreements that may be made between the BIS and governments in connection with international settlements.;

accepting such other deposits that, as in the opinion of the Board of the BIS, come within the scope of the BIS’ functions. [1]

The BIS also may

act as agent or correspondent for any central bank

arrange with any central bank for the latter to act as its agent or correspondent;

enter into agreements to act as trustee or agent in connection with international settlements, provided that such agreements will not encroach on the obligations of the BIS toward any third parties. [2]

Why is "agency" an important issue? Because any member of the network can obscure transactions from onlookers. For instance, if Brown Brothers, Harriman wanted to transfer money to a company in Nazi Germany during WWII (which was not "politically correct" at that time), they would first transfer the funds to the BIS thus putting the transaction under the cloak of secrecy and immunity that is enjoyed by the BIS but not by Brown Brothers, Harriman. (Such laundering of Wall Street money was painstakingly noted in Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler, by Antony C. Sutton.)

There are a few things that the BIS cannot do. For instance, it does not accept deposits from, or provide financial services to, private individuals or corporate entities. It is also not permitted to make advances to governments or open current accounts in their name. [3] These restrictions are easily understood when one considers that each central bank has an exclusive franchise to loan money to their respective government. For instance, the U.S. Federal Reserve does not loan money to the government of Canada. In like manner, central banks do not loan money directly to the private or corporate clients of their member banks.

How Decisions are Made

The board of directors consist of the heads of certain member central banks. Currently, these are:

Nout H E M Wellink, Amsterdam (Chairman of the Board of Directors)
Hans Tietmeyer, Frankfurt am Main (Vice-Chairman)
Axel Weber, Frankfurt am Main
Vincenzo Desario, Rome
Antonio Fazio, Rome
David Dodge, Ottawa Toshihiko Fukui,
Tokyo Timothy F Geithner, New York
Alan Greenspan, Washington
Lord George, London
Hervé Hannoun, Paris
Christian Noyer, Paris
Lars Heikensten, Stockholm
Mervyn King, London
Guy Quaden, Brussels
Jean-Pierre Roth, Zürich
Alfons Vicomte Verplaetse, Brussels [4]

Of these, five members ( Canada, Japan, the Netherlands, Sweden and Switzerland) are currently elected by the shareholders. The majority of directors are "ex officio," meaning they are permanent and are automatically a part of any sub-committee.

The combined board meets at least six times per year, in secret, and is briefed by BIS management on financial operations of the bank. Global monetary policy is discussed and set at these meetings.

It was reported in 1983 that there is an inner club of the half dozen central bankers who are more or less in the same monetary boat: Germany, U.S., Switzerland, Italy, Japan and England. [5] The existence of an inner club is neither surprising nor substantive: the whole BIS operation is 100% secret anyway. It is not likely that members of the inner club have significantly different beliefs or agendas apart from the BIS as a whole.

How the BIS works with the IMF and the World Bank

The interoperation between the three entities is understandably confusing to most people, so a little clarification will help.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) interacts with governments whereas the BIS interacts only with other central banks. The IMF loans money to national governments, and often these countries are in some kind of fiscal or monetary crisis. Furthermore, the IMF raises money by receiving "quota" contributions from its 184 member countries. Even though the member countries may borrow money to make their quota contributions, it is, in reality, all tax-payer money. [6]

The World Bank also lends money and has 184 member countries. Within the World Bank are two separate entities, the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and the International Development Association (IDA). The IBRD focuses on middle income and credit-worthy poor countries, while the IDA focuses on the poorest of nations. In funding itself, the World Bank borrows money by direct lending from banks and by floating bond issues, and then loans this money through IBRD and IDA to troubled countries. [7]

The BIS, as central bank to the other central banks, facilitates the movement of money. They are well-known for issuing "bridge loans" to central banks in countries where IMF or World Bank money is pledged but has not yet been delivered. These bridge loans are then repaid by the respective governments when they receive the funds that had been promised by the IMF or World Bank. [8]

The IMF is the BIS' "ace in the hole" when monetary crisis hits. The 1998 Brazil currency crisis was caused by that country's inability to pay inordinate accumulated interest on loans made over a protracted period of time. These loans were extended by banks like Citigroup, J.P. Morgan Chase and FleetBoston, and they stood to lose a huge amount of money.

The IMF, along with the World Bank and the U.S., bailed out Brazil with a $41.5 billion package that saved Brazil, its currency and, not incidentally, certain private banks.

Congressman Bernard Sanders (I-VT), ranking member of the International Monetary Policy and Trade Subcommittee, blew the whistle on this money laundry operation. Sander's entire congressional press release is worth reading:

IMF Bailout for Brazil is Windfall to Banks, Disaster for US Taxpayers Says Sanders

BURLINGTON, VERMONT - August 15 - Congressman Bernard Sanders (I-VT), the Ranking Member of the International Monetary Policy and Trade Subcommittee, today called for an immediate Congressional investigation of the recent $30 billion International Monetary Fund (IMF) bailout of Brazil.

Sanders, who is strongly opposed to the bailout and considers it corporate welfare, wants Congress to find out why U.S. taxpayers are being asked to provide billions of dollars to Brazil and how much of this money will be funneled to U.S. banks such as Citigroup, FleetBoston and J.P. Morgan Chase. These banks have about $25.6 billion in outstanding loans to Brazilian borrowers. U.S. taxpayers currently fund the IMF through a $37 billion line of credit.

Sanders said, "At a time when we have a $6 trillion national debt, a growing federal deficit, and an increasing number of unmet social needs for our veterans, seniors, and children, it is unacceptable that billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars are being sent to the IMF to bailout Brazil."

"This money is not going to significantly help the poor people of that country. The real winners in this situation are the large, profitable U.S. banks such as Citigroup that have made billions of dollars in risky investments in Brazil and now want to make sure their investments are repaid. This bailout represents an egregious form of corporate welfare that must be put to an end. Interestingly, these banks have made substantial campaign contributions to both political parties," the Congressman added.

Sanders noted that the neo-liberal policies of the IMF developed in the 1980's pushing countries towards unfettered free trade, privatization, and slashing social safety nets has been a disaster for Latin America and has contributed to increased global poverty throughout the world. At the same time that Latin America countries such as Brazil and Argentina followed these neo-liberal dictates imposed by the IMF, from 1980-2000, per capita income in Latin America grew at only one-tenth the rate of the previous two decades.
Sanders continued, "The policies of the IMF over the past 20 years advocating unfettered free trade, privatizing industry, deregulation and slashing government investments in health, education, and pensions has been a complete failure for low income and middle class families in the developing world and in the United States . Clearly, these policies have only helped corporations in their constant search for the cheapest labor and weakest environmental regulations. Congress must work on a new global policy that protects workers, increases living standards and improves the environment."

One can surmise that a financial circle exists where the World Bank helps nations get into debt, then when these countries can't pay their massive loans, the IMF bails them out with taxpayer money -- and in the middle stands the BIS, collecting fees as the money travels back and forth like the ocean tide, while assuring everyone that all is well.

BIS dumps gold-backed Swiss Francs for SDR's

On March 10, 2003, the BIS abandoned the Swiss gold franc as the bank's unit of account since 1930, and replaced it with the SDR.

SDR stands for Special Drawing Rights and is a unit of currency originally created by the IMF. According to Baker,

"The SDR is an international reserve asset, created by the IMF in 1969 to supplement the existing official reserves of member countries. SDR's are allocated to member countries in proportion to their IMF quotas. The SDR also serves as the unit of account of the IMF and some other international organizations. Its value is based on a basket of key international currencies." [9]

This "basket" currently consists of the euro, Japanese yen, pound sterling and the U.S. dollar.

The BIS abandonment of the 1930 gold Swiss franc removed all restraint from the creation of paper money in the world. In other words, gold backs no national currency, leaving the central banks a wide-open field to create money as they alone see fit. Remember, that almost all the central banks in the world are privately-held entities, with an exclusive franchise to arrange loans for their respective host countries.

Regional and Global Currencies: SDR's, Euros and Ameros

There is no doubt that the BIS is moving the world toward regional currencies and ultimately, a global currency. The global currency could well be an evolution of the SDR, and may explain why the BIS recently adopted the SDR as its primary reserve currency.

The Brandt Equation, 21st Century Blueprint for the New Global Economy notes, for instance, that

Since the SDR is the world's only means of meeting international payments that has been authorized through international contract, "The SDR therefore represents a clear first step towards a stable and permanent international currency" [10] [bold emphasis added]

As to regional currencies, the BIS has already been hugely successful in launching the euro in Europe. Armed with new technical and social know-how, the BIS' next logical step is to focus on America and Asia.

For instance, according to BIS Papers No. 17, Regional currency areas and the use of foreign currencies,

"Canada, Mexico and the United States are members of the trade group NAFTA. Given the high proportion of Canada and Mexico’s trade with the United States, a NAFTA dollar or “Amero” has been proposed by some Canadian academics such as Grubel (1999). See also Beine and Coulombe (2002) and Robson and Laidler (2002)." [11]

Assuming that NAFTA permanently identifies Canada, the U.S. and Mexico as one trading block, then North America will look like the European Union and the Amero will function like the Euro. All of the work put into the SDR would be perfectly preserved by simply substituting the Amero for the U.S. dollar when they choose to bring the Amero to ascendancy over the dollar.

For those American readers who do not grasp the significance of the adoption of the euro by European Union countries, consider how one American globalist describes it.

C. Fred Bergsten is a prominent and core Trilateral Commission member and head of the Institute for International Economics. On January 3, 1999, Bergsten wrote in the Washington Post

"The adoption of a common currency is by far the boldest chapter of European integration. Money traditionally has been an integral element of national sovereignty ...and the decision by Germany and France to give up their mark and franc ...represents the most dramatic voluntary surrender of sovereignty in recorded history. The European Central Bank that will manage the euro is a truly supranational institution". [12] [bold emphasis added]

Bergsten will have to rephrase this when the U.S. gives up the dollar for the amero -- that will become the most dramatic voluntary surrender of sovereignty in recorded history!

"For more than a century, ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it." - David Rockefeller Memoirs, 2002

Conclusions

Our credo is "Follow the money, follow the power." This report has endeavored to follow the money. We find that:

The BIS is central bank to all major central banks in the world
It is privately owned by central banks themselves, most of whom are also private
It was founded under questionable circumstances by questionable people
It is accountable to no one, especially government bodies
It operates in complete secrecy and is inviolable
Movement of money is obscured and hidden when routed through the BIS
The BIS is targeting regional currency blocks and ultimately, a global currency
It has been hugely successful at building the New International Economic Order, along with its attendant initiatives on global governance.

As to "follow the power," another paper will more fully explore the influence of power that the BIS exerts over other banks, nations and governments. For your own consideration in the meantime, Proverbs 22:7 provides a useful compass: "The rich rule over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender".

NOTE: Carl Teichrib, World Research Library Senior Fellow, contributed to this report.

Footnotes:

1, Baker, op cit, p. 26-27
2, ibid, p. 27
3, BIS, The BIS in profile, Bank for International Settlements flyer, June, 2005
4, BIS, Board of Directors, www.bis.org/about/board.htm
5, Epstein, Ruling the World of Money, Harper's Magazine, 1983
6, IMF web site, http://www.imf.org
7, World Bank web site.
8, Baker, op cit, p. 141-142
9, IMF web site
10, The Brandt Equation: 21 st Century Blueprint for the New Global Economy. The Brandt Proposals – A Report Card: Money and Finances.
11, BIS, Regional currency areas and the use of foreign currencies, BIS Papers No. 17, September, 2003
12, Washington Post, The Euro Could Be Good for Trans-Atlantic Relations, C. Fred Bergsten, January 3, 199

Patrick M. Wood is editor of The August Review, which builds on his original research with the late Dr. Antony C. Sutton, who was formerly a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution for War, Peace and Revolution at Stanford University. Their 1977-1982 newsletter, Trilateral Observer, was the original authoritative critique on the New International Economic Order spearheaded by members of the Trilateral Commission.

Their highly regarded two-volume book, Trilaterals Over Washington, became a standard reference on global elitism. Wood's ongoing work is to build a knowledge center that provides a comprehensive and scholarly source of information on globalism in all its related forms: political, economic and religious.

Article from: http://www.newswithviews.com/Wood/patrick4.htm

BIS Calls For Global Currency

Nazi bankrollers want elimination of national sovereignty for world cashless control grid

by Paul Joseph Watson/ Prison Planet.com | February 21 2006

The scandal-ridden and highly secretive Bank For International Settlements, considered to be the world's top central banking policy, has released a policy paper that calls for the end of national currencies in favor of a global model of currency formats.

The BIS is a branch of the of the Bretton-Woods International Financial architecture and closely allied with the Bilderberg Group. It is controlled by an inner elite that represents all the world's major central banking institutions. John Maynard Keynes, perhaps the most influential economist of all time, wanted it closed down as it was used to launder money for the Nazis in World War II.

Buried in a London Telegraph report on UK inflation rates is the admission that the BIS, "has also suggested ditching many national currencies in favour of a small number of formal currency blocks based on the dollar, euro and renminbi or yen."

Centralized control of currency is a keystone pillar in the construction of global government.

The eventual goal is a cashless society credit system based on a worldwide citizen ID. Those designated as subversives or security threats will have their credit entitlement reduced and restrictions will be placed on when and what they can buy or sell. A world tax will be levied on all purchases.

In the meantime new denominations of paper money will be tracked and traced. Euro notes come with RFID tags as standard and the same feature is being incorporated into newly designed US dollar notes.

Last month the United Nations made a promise to save the world from all its ills in return for complete elimination of national sovereignty and financial markets and their replacement by a proxy world government.

The so-called 'conservative Bush administration have done everything in their power to destroy the last vestiges of American sovereignty, including increasing deficit spending beyond the level of all previous 42 administrations put together, signing legislation anathema to the Constitution, promoting global government and anti-American trade deals like CAFTA and the FTAA, and attempting to 'solve' the illegal immigration problem by enacting blanket amnesty.