• Quote of the week

    “A job worth doing, is worth doing well”
    An ounce of action is worth more than a ton of theory, and the reward for a thing well done is having done it.

Secrets Revealed

Secrets Revealed

“Give me control of a nation’s money and I care not who makes her laws”

Meyer Rothschild, the most powerful man who ever lived.

There’s much to be said for the educational process involved in the search of powerful life-changing information, although surprisingly; not enough people put the time into looking at these programs as anything other than another scheme to take your hard earned money or as a waste of time and effort. So, as a consequence there will always be the majority of people who never will be exposed to this type of information. I hope you reflect on this opening paragraph and realize why this has been kept from the general public at large once you have read this report.

You are about to embark on a journey of which there is no return. Once you have been exposed you’ll never be the same, provided you make an honest effort into researching these freedom technologies. After all what is freedom without the freedom of choice?

 For the purpose of this report we will be discussing in general the concepts and mechanics of how to maximize your financial affairs through the many avenues available here within these pages that follow in an attempt to enlighten you as well as give you the opportunity to participate in extremely lucrative programs exclusive to club members only. (we will discuss this in greater detail later.)

  As it is with American Express cards, “membership has it’s privilege” The same applies to many “trading programs” within the private sector especially. When we think of “investing” what is actually taking place is the exchange of your property for a fixed period of time to another party entrusted to return the “loan” with interest at the agreed time frame in accord to the terms and conditions outlined within the contract body. Typically this is part of the escrow where the terms are defined for execution of any penalties or special instructions that may arise or be required of the contracting parties. The use of an AFFIDAVIT OF KNOWING INTENT TO FREELY CONTRACT WITHOUT MENTAL RESERVATIONS OR PURPOSE OF EVASION when dealing with the private sector is not uncommon as it is necessary to pledge allegiance to no superior authority (government intervention) except to those involved in the contract itself. (more on this later) Disputes in any contracts of this nature are dealt with by the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) Cases brought before this arbitrator carries severe penalties including: “That in the event of circumvention by any party, directly, indirectly, the circumvented party shall be entitled to a legal monetary penalty equal to the maximum commission, service and profit it would realize from such a transaction plus any and all expenses, including legal, that would involve recovery of said funds.” This is known as a NON-CIRCUMVENTION, NON-DISCLOSURE AND WORKING AGREEMENT FOR ALL COMMERCIAL AND NON-COMMERCIAL TRANSACTIONS or as a Non-Disclosure Private Contract Agreement. Penalties for breach of trust typically will not be less than $1,000,000.00 (one million dollars) in U.S. currency and may include forfeiture of funds including initial participation. Because of the severity and repercussions of breaking the terms of these types of agreements it is apparent if for nothing else but to maintain integrity. It simply would be foolish to undermine ones chance at collecting on the booty and/or any future monetary gains and gives just reason to it’s elusiveness to be heard of and for that matter, of it’s nature of secrecy or rather “privacy.”

Benjamin Franklin said:

They who would give up essential liberties for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security.”

  It is the RIGHT of every living breathing human being to freely contract with whom ever we choose. This is one of the most powerful liberties we have at our discretion as sovereign individuals. However, we are living in a society where the basics of what a contract entails is usually entered into without full disclosure. In our system of commerce the law has provided for our lack of interest in these important documents known as an “assumpsit clause.” This is a very interesting subject worthy of researching further. In this discussion we’ll cover a few definitions you should be aware of for the purpose of understanding how trading programs work.
  Assumpsit (root word – assume) comes from old English law – an actual or implied contract not under seal. Or in modern terms, not witnessed. Just stop and think for a moment of all the implied contracts you could be a “party” to through the assumpsit clause these are known as “ADHESION CONTRACTS.”
“The termadhesion contract’ refers to standardized contract forms offered to consumers of goods and services on essentially a ‘take it or leave it’ basis without affording the consumer a realistic opportunity to bargain and under such conditions that the consumer cannot obtain the desired product or services except by acquiescing in the form ‘contract.'”

– VICTORIA VS. SUPERIOR COURT, 710 P.2nd 833, at 837 (1985).

  Now where this is relevant in this discussion is also another topic for future reflection and research but the intent here is to illustrate the pretense of illusion or of “fiction” if you will, (if you look up the word fiction in law you will be surprised to find it’s meaning has much weight in certain circumstances especially with those of a contract nature.) The term legal fiction is described:
 “Legal fiction. A presumption of fact assumed by a court for convenience, consistency or to achieve justice. There is an old adage: ‘Fictions arise from the law, and not law from fictions.'” Oran’s Dictionary of the Law, published by the West Group 1999, defines Fiction: “A legal fiction is an assumption that something that is (or may be) false or nonexistent is true or real. Legal fictions are assumed or invented to help do justice.”
  This is the reason behind the use of full caps when writing a proper name. The U.S. and State Governments are deliberately using a legal fiction to “address” the lawful human beings. This is deliberate because their own official publications state that proper names are NOT to be written in full caps. They are deliberately not following their own recognized authorities. In the same respect, by identifying their own government entity in full caps, they are legally stating that they are ALSO a legal fiction. A legal fiction can be used when the name of a “person” is not known by using the fictional name “John Doe”. Pay attention to the word ‘assumption’ in Oran’s definition above!
  Person. An entity with legal rights and existence including the ability to sue and be sued, to sign contracts, to receive gifts, to appear in court either by themselves or by lawyer and, generally, other powers incidental to the full expression of the entity in law. Individuals are “persons” in law unless they are minors or under some kind of other incapacity such as a court finding of mental incapacity. Note that the word lawful is not used in the above definitions. What is the difference between ‘lawful’ and ‘legal’? The following is from a law dictionary:
  Lawful. In accordance with the law of the land; according to the law; permitted, sanctioned, or justified by law. “Lawful” properly implies a thing conformable to or enjoined by law; “Legal”, a thing in the form or after the manner of law or binding by law. A writ or warrant issuing from any court, under color of law, is a “legal” process however defective.
  Legal. Latin legalis. Pertaining to the understanding, the exposition, the administration, the science and the practice of law: as, the legal profession, legal advice; legal blanks, newspaper. Implied or imputed in law. Opposed to actual. “Legal” looks more to the letter, and “Lawful” to the spirit, of the law. “Legal” is more appropriate for conformity to positive rules of law; “Lawful” for accord with ethical principle.

 

  After reading THE CREATURE FROM JEKYLL ISLAND if you never heard of it before, please do. The above should provide some insightful information for you to review and explore as this alone would require a lengthy paper unto itself. The fact that our fiat based monetary system has been functioning for some 90 years now should provide the support to illustrate it’s existence is based on fraud unlike anything the world has ever seen in history. As a result, it comes as no surprise to anyone privy to the facts that by participating in “trading programs” one can realize extraordinary high-yielding returns. In some cases, these preform payouts in as little as 3 months achieving triple digit returns. The only way to be paid by these ‘special private placements’ is to have the funds wired or transferred to an “offshore jurisdiction” (preferably a tax-free zone ie.Nevis,Belize,Isle of Mann etc.,) where the entity receiving the funds has no direct connection to you personally domiciled in your country.  Are you starting to see the picture?
  The secret of wealth is control, not ownership. When Hassie L. Hunt, a famous oilman of Dallas, Texas, died as the world’s richest man, the only asset he owned in his own name was a 1974 Chevrolet pickup truck worth about $2,500. “His” total worth could only be estimated as it was never disclosed.
Columnist Jack Anderson has noted,

“Vice President Nelson Rockefeller . . . paid no income tax in 1970. His brother, John D. Rockefeller III, pays a 10% federal tax as a matter of personal principle . . . . Paul Mellon, worth a cool one billion dollars, is able to get away with negligible income tax, as do other members of his fabulously rich family. And Texas oil millionaire Bunker Hunt has managed to live in luxury without paying any taxes at all in several years. They have made use of the law. It is the process that . . . makes a chump out of the person who does not distort his affairs . . “

  There is no need to “distort” one’s affairs; merely arrange them properly. Do not violate the law; make use of the law. The secret of the Super Rich seems to be in the manner in which wealth is conveyed to a special kind of trust that, instead of merely holding the property, actually owns the property. Thus the Super Wealthy, enjoying opulent and lavish lifestyles, are able to live and die as Paupers, but with their family’s blessing!
  All trusts are not created equally [it goes without statement that all trusts are not created properly]. There are basically two great classes of trusts: statutory trusts and common law trusts. The more popular and widely used statutory trust derives its existence and is defined, governed, and regulated by statutes to which it must strictly conform. A common law trust or “pure trust” arises from contract under common law, the right to which has been secured by the Constitution and established and upheld by the courts.
  Since the advent of the information age, the availability in which one can obtain information (the internet) and the amount of volume that it can generate; has caused the amount of proper “trust structures” to fall in price to levels that are affordable to anyone looking in the right places. Attorney’s for the most part have been known typically to deal with forms of “statutory trust” as they quite often name themself as the executor and look upon them as retirements. In all fairness this is not to say that the “pure trust” is not known by competent attorney’s, just don’t expect them to encourage you to purchase one as there is little if any benefit in it for them. It’s safe to say, it will be your responsibility to seek out the proper type of services from a competent Attorney.
  Now that we have covered the basics of the arena in which programs function as it relates to us as individuals, it’s prudent at this time to analyze the mechanics of “debentures” within the banking institutions in relation to “trading programs.” Historically, when European banks have had temporary liquidity available for investment, they have bought Debentures and earned interest income. Likewise, when European banks have needed temporary liquidity, they have sold their Debentures.
  Such buying and selling of Debentures utilizes or provides liquidity in the same way United States banks buy and sell Federal Funds through the Federal Reserve Bank system (the FED).
  The four major European banking families have always carefully managed and controlled Debenture trading. Each family operates a “Cutting House” that prepares Debentures for investment as if they were a bank. Because the Debentures are issued by very strong and reliable financial institutions, they are very safe and attractive short term investments.
  In recent times, for reasons discussed below, large numbers of Debentures have been sold at a discount to investors, principally by Mandates who operate under contract with the Cutting Houses to issue new Debentures.
  As communications improved, Debenture trading has been completed on a “Bank- To-Bank” basis by “Secure Telex Transmissions.” The buying bank promises to pay for the Debentures, and the selling bank promises to deliver its Debentures using secure banking codes which authenticate each bank’s commitment and which are known as Key Tested Telex (KTT).
  A Trader might also use a cash deposit as in the case of the specific program discussed here, to establish a line-of-credit to draw on – many times the actual amount of cash on deposit. The utilization of this line-of-credit to buy, sell, replenish the line-of-credit and disburse profit is referred to as “Trading”. It actually is not so much trading, as it is a simple buy/sell transaction, many times, with profit being rolled back into the activity to enhance the overall yield.
  Today, the buy/sell trades are accomplished at lightning speed in electronic “closed book” transactions. “Closed book” refers to the fact that when the Trader taps the credit line to buy a Debenture, he already has a funds buyer awaiting the instrument. The line-of-credit can only be used for one purpose, to purchase Debentures for resale, period! This is the reason that the trader’s credit facility is willing to establish a Trading line-of-credit significantly larger than the credit instrument or cash deposit the line-of-credit is predicated upon. His bank knows that the credit line they have granted him may not be utilized until proof is obtained that said Bank Instruments have been pre-sold. Various end buyers find the Debentures very attractive, because they have a relatively high interest rate, when compared to other instruments such as T-Bills, and additionally are purchased at a discount.
  Transacting Banks and their contracted Mandates (the Traders) are not allowed to trade in instruments with their own funds, but are allowed to undertake transactions for bank clients and thus earn fees for their bank services. In the program discussed here, the Trader uses only evidence of the availability of the investor’s cash on deposit, blocked in the investor’s own private commercial account at the designated bank, to establish a credit line substantially larger than the actual cash on deposit. The Trader then utilizes that line, or rather the enhancement of his already existing and substantial credit facility – created with numerous other investor deposits – to purchase and sell the Debentures in the manner described above.
  In the context of our discussion about international bank debenture trading programs, it is important to remember that banks will deny these programs exist. Even banks that are involved in them themselves will deny they exist. Some even gone to the point of warning customers that they do not exist, and that anything purporting to be such are scams.

quote to you from the Encyclopedia Britannica:

Factional Reserve System, also called a minimum Reserve System, banking system followed by all modern banks in which less than 100 percent of bank deposits are held as reserves. The portion of the money not held as reserves is used to earn income by means of loans and investments; some of this portion eventually returns to the banking system as new deposits. Thus, the banking system is able to expand the money supplied through the creation of new demand deposits.”

For all intended purposes, this article is available in much greter detail at request. Understanding, it is a breach of contract to disclose or solicit any detailed information of a particular program, it is NOT however, a breach of contract to provide details to a party who has requested the information. Upon requesting a Non-Circumvention, Non-Disclosure Agreement, filling out the form and sending it back to the holder the consenting parties are now able to contract freely without reservations.

  Most people have a hard time understanding how the price of bonds [or debentures which are much the same thing] rises as interest rates fall [ and vice versa ], let alone how they can be sold at a discount in the market.
  Stand by letters of credit are a method of earning interest, for banks without the need to lend out any money [in most cases] and without the need to take a liability into their balance sheet. That is, the risk is “off balance sheet”. Provided banks take sufficient security [and do you know any bank that doesn’t] they must love standby letters of credit. It is really like providing insurance, and charging a premium for it without having any risk. Even if the debtor or customer on whose behalf the guarantee is given does default, and the bank has to pay, they would have collateral assets to sell to recoup the money. You could almost say it’s better than creating money out of thin air. With lending money into existence, there is always the risk of bad debt, which means the money goes to money heaven and the bank has to make restitution. With standby letters of credit, the bank doesn’t even have to lend out any money, unless and until there is a default. They charge their fee [or earn their interest] for just being there as a standby, just in case.
  The important point to grasp here is that standby letters of credit are well-known and internationally accepted financial instruments, guaranteed by the full faith and credit of the issuing bank, standardized as to the documentation and procedure by the highly respected and trusted ICC.
  Leveraging: If you invest $1 million at 10 %, you will earn $100,000. If you borrow a further $9 million and pay 5% interest on the loan, and then invest $10 million at 10% your total interest receivable will be $1 million. But then you will have to pay 5% on the $9 million, or $450,000. As well as repay the $9 million loan. Your net return will be $550,000 or five have times the $100,000 you stood to earn before you leveraged [or geared up] your investment.
  But what if the public found out that instruments offering much higher yields than bank CD’s [certificates of deposit] or term deposits were available? That’s easy. Just don’t tell the public. And to keep them from asking questions, the minimum investment was set at U.S. $100 million. So only the very wealthy would be in on these deals. The banks were laughing [to coin a cliché “laughing all the way to the bank may have originated from this source.” ] They now had a method of accessing very large amounts of money without even having to advertise. And they were allowed to keep the liability off balance sheet. They were even allowed to create the transactions in the accounts of offshore subsidiaries. And to make them even more lucrative, the banks were allowed to leverage the returns astronomically by borrowing from the central bank. All under the authority and supervision of the BIS, the IMF, the FED and the ICC.
  The use of these instruments [which are safe and provide massive returns to investors and instant liquidity to banks] has worked extremely well since 1961. In fact, they have become known as such a good thing that more and more banks, including smaller ones not included in the “Top 100”, have joined in offering them.
  Once every quarter of a year, certain international money center banks [described variously as the Top 25, the Top 100 or the Top 250 as ranked by net assets, long-term stability and sound management] are authorized by the ICC, the BIS and the FED to issue large blocks of Bank Debenture Instruments such as Bank Purchase Orders, Medium Term Notes, Promissory Notes, Zero Coupon Bonds, LOC’s, Standby LOC’s etc. according to the official review of each bank’s portfolio. LOC’s usually have a one-year term, whereas Zero’s, MTN’s etc. are usually for ten years with a coupon rate of 7.5% per annum interest.
  As these instruments are bought and sold within the banking community, the trading cycle generally moves from the higher level banks to the smaller banks. Profits are made at each stage of the cycle. Often they move through as many as seven or eight trading cycles, until they are eventually sold to a previously contracted retail customer or “exit buyer” such as pension funds, insurance companies, etc. at the normal “market” price (e.g. 93 cents on the dollar). No trading program can start unless a guaranteed “exit sale” is contracted. This protects the trader and his clients.
   Trading programs are all conducted in Europe, but under the watchful eye of the Federal Reserve, the custodian of the U.S. dollar. The minimum amount traded is usually U.S. $10 million. [it used to be U.S. 100 million.] An entire trading cycle may take only a matter of hours and may be repeated four or five times in a month. Although the profit on each stage may only be for a few percent, the massive amount of money, compounded by leveraging and frequent repetition of the program ensures spectacular profits.
  Until recent years, traders were run as described above. But as the world economy has continued to grow, and more and more banks have become involved, the number of “sure thing” opportunities have increased. Trading programs run for forty weeks each year. Each year, around December 15th, banks and traders and their program managers get together to decide how they will apportion their allocation for the following year, commencing January 15th. Each program comes with it’s own parameters and requirements, and there is no limit to the variety of different programs. Some are for seven days. Some are for twelve months. Some allow withdrawals during trading. Some don’t.
  As discussed earlier First time investors [U.S. $10 million], after completing a non-disclosure, non-circumvention agreement, a letter of intent, proof of funds, and profit sharing agreement will usually be provided with a memorandum of understanding contract. They will then be invited to go to Europe or in some cases at a neutral site to meet the principal at the transacting bank, and thus assure themselves of the validity of the transaction. Note that not one cent is handed over until you meet the trader or program manager at the bank and exchange your cheque for a 106% guarantee [known as a “106”] plus a bank-endorsed contract for profit. At no time do the investors lose control of their money or have their capitol at risk. If ever anyone asks you one cent up front, you can be pretty certain it is a scam. With a genuine trading program you have in your hand at all times either your money or a bank guarantee.
  So, why isn’t it done more often? Why doesn’t the general public know about it? You have to be kidding. If you knew you could get 100% in a week, with a bank guarantee, would you put your money in the bank at 4% for a year? If this leaked out, the vast source of cheep deposits the gullible public slavishly surrender to the banks every day would dry up. No, this is one only for the big boys, the favorites of the banks, the FED, the IMF, etc. That’s why the amounts are kept very, very large. To be invited into this circle is financially speaking, a very great privilege.

The following are quotes taken from various sources over the last century

“Warburg’s revolutionary plan to get American Society to go to work for Wall Street was astonishingly simple. Even today,…academic theoreticians cover their blackboards with meaningless equations, and the general public struggles in bewildered confusion with inflation and the coming credit collapse, while the quite simple explanation of the problem goes undiscussed and almost entirely uncomprehended. The Federal Reserve System is a legal private monopoly of the money supply operated for the benefit of the few under the guise of protecting and promoting the public interest.–”

Anthony Sutton, former Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution for War, Revolution and Peace, and also Professor of Economics at California State University, Los Angeles.

“Today the path to total dictatorship in the United States can be laid by strictly legal means, unseen and unheard by the Congress, the President, or the people….outwardly we have a Constitutional government. We have operating within our government and political system, another body representing another form of government, a bureaucratic elite which believes our Constitution is outmoded and is sure that it is the winning side…. All the strange developments in the foreign policy agreements may be traced to this group who are going to make us over to suit their pleasure…. This political action group has its own local political support organizations, its own pressure groups, its own vested interests, its foothold within our government, and its own propaganda apparatus.”

quoted directly from UN sources. Senator William Jenner (1954)

“… the teachers should deliberately reach for power and then make the most of their conquest” in order to “influence the social attitudes, ideals and behavior of the coming generation… The growth of science and technology has carried us into a new age where ignorance must be replaced by knowledge, competition by cooperation, trust in Providence by careful planning and private capitalism by some form of social economy.”

Educator author George Counts (1932)

“We are at present working discreetly with all our might to wrest this mysterious force called sovereignty out of the clutches of the local nation states of the world. All the time we are denying with our lips what we are doing with our hands….”

historian Arnold Toyee in a speech to the Institute for the Study of International Affairs at Copenhagen.

“… the World Law Fund has begun a worldwide research and educational program that will introduce a new, emerging discipline — world order — into educational curricula throughout the world… and to concentrate some of its energies on bringing basic world order concepts into the mass media again on a worldwide level.”

(1970)Ian Baldwin, Jr. Thinking About A New World Order for the Decade 1990,

May 18, 1972 — In speaking of the coming of world government, Roy M. Ash, director of the Office of Management and Budget, declares that:

“…within two decades the institutional framework for a world economic community will be in place… [and] aspects of individual sovereignty will be given over to a supernational authority.”

April, 1974 — Former U. S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, Trilateralist and CFR member Richard Gardner’s article The Hard Road to World Order is published in the CFR’s Foreign Affairs where he states that:

“the ‘house of world order’ will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down… but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.”

1979 — Barry Goldwater, retiring Republican Senator from Arizona, publishes his autobiography With No Apologies. He writes:

“In my view The Trilateral Commission represents a skillful, coordinated effort to seize control and consolidate the four centers of power — political, monetary, intellectual, and ecclesiastical. All this is to be done in the interest of creating a more peaceful, more productive world community. What the Trilateralists truly intend is the creation of a worldwide economic power superior to the political governments of the nation-states involved. They believe the abundant materialism they propose to create will overwhelm existing differences. As managers and creators of the system they will rule the future.”

June, 1991 — The Council on Foreign Relations co-sponsors an assembly Rethinking America’s Security: Beyond Cold War to New World Order which is attended by 65 prestigious members of government, labor, academia, the media, military, and the professions from nine countries. Later, several of the conference participants joined some 100 other world leaders for another closed door meeting of the Bilderberg Society in Baden Baden, Germany. The Bilderbergers also exert considerable clout in determining the foreign policies of their respective governments. While at that meeting, David Rockefeller said in a speech:

“We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.”

Late July, 1991 — On a Cable News Network program, CFR member and former CIA director Stansfield Turner (Rhodes scholar), when asked about Iraq, responded:

“We have a much bigger objective. We’ve got to look at the long run here. This is an example — the situation between the United Nations and Iraq — where the United Nations is deliberately intruding into the sovereignty of a sovereign nation… Now this is a marvelous precedent (to be used in) all countries of the world… “

Winter, 1992-93 — The CFR’s Foreign Affairs publishes Empowering the United Nations by U.N. Secretary General Boutros-Boutros Ghali, who asserts:

“It is undeniable that the centuries-old doctrine of absolute and exclusive sovereignty no longer stands… Underlying the rights of the individual and the rights of peoples is a dimension of universal sovereignty that resides in all humanity… It is a sense that increasingly finds expression in the gradual expansion of international law… In this setting the significance of the United Nations should be evident and accepted.”

1994 — In the Human Development Report, published by the UN Development Program, there was a section called “Global Governance For the 21st Century”. The administrator for this program was appointed by Bill Clinton. His name is James Gustave Speth. The opening sentence of the report said:

“Mankind’s problems can no longer be solved by national government. What is needed is a World Government. This can best be achieved by strengthening the United Nations system.”

Source: Secrets Revealed

Leave a Reply

  • Famous Quotes In History

    “Warburg’s revolutionary plan to get American Society to go to work for Wall Street was astonishingly simple. Even today,…academic theoreticians cover their blackboards with meaningless equations, and the general public struggles in bewildered confusion with inflation and the coming credit collapse, while the quite simple explanation of the problem goes undiscussed and almost entirely uncomprehended. The Federal Reserve System is a legal private monopoly of the money supply operated for the benefit of the few under the guise of protecting and promoting the public interest.–”
  • What's New

    What's New
    Finally, construction is making headway & soon the doors open.
    There's no set date yet, but it's getting close.
    Until then: Enter at your own risk.

    Featured Article

    Featured Article
    Periodically there comes along an article that everyone should read. The link below is updated regularly with stellar works that can't be missed.