April 1, 2013
Jeroen Dijsselbloem, president of the Eurogroup, explained recently that Cyprus is the blueprint that the technocrats will follow all across the globe; it is their scheme to steal wealth from the poor and economically terrorize sovereign nations.
Dijsselbloem said: “If there is a risk in a bank, our first question should be ‘Okay, what are you in the bank going to do about that? What can you do to recapitalize yourself?’. If the bank can’t do it, then we’ll talk to the shareholders and the bondholders, we’ll ask them to contribute in recapitalizing the bank, and if necessary the uninsured deposit holders.”
In Cyprus the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and European Central Bank (ECB) have turned up the heat on the scheme to steal money from private checking accounts. Those depositors who have at least €100,000 could have 60% of their money syphoned out by the bailout provided by the technocrats.
This translates to 37.5% of the value of the deposit to be redirected to the technocrats.
By turning those deposits of €100,000 into shares, the Popular Bank of Cyprus, their central bank, will transfer 22.5% to a fund should more money be needed. This would prompt those with the largest deposits to move their money out of the country which would automatically devastate the Cypriot banking system.
In anticipation, foreign investors have already moved 18% of their deposits out of Cypriot banks as of February 2013.
This process has been planned as a way for the citizens of Cyprus to pay for the bailout.
Indeed the central bankers have set up a platform to force limits on cash flow in Cyprus that is out of “the control of the Cypriot authorities.”
Referencing Cyprus, Jim Rogers, billionaire investor, said: “It’s pretty scary what’s going on in Europe when they start taking money out of people’s bank accounts. I for one am making sure I don’t have too much money in any single bank account anywhere in the world now because now there is a precedent. The IMF has said sure, loot the banks accounts. The EU has said loot the bank accounts. So you can be sure in other countries when the problems come are going to say, well, it’s condoned by the EU, it’s condoned by the IMF. let’s do it too.”
Rogers continued on: “I have started the process of in a couple of countries in Europe already to make sure I am under the guaranteed amounts. And everybody you know should do the same.”
In 2012, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that when a bank is insolvent, under duress or in bankruptcy the funds in private checking accounts could be used to pay off debts or loans owed by the bank.
Since the ruling gives banks the right to co-mingle customer funds with their own, no crime can be committed for the use of customer deposited monies.
According to Walker Todd, former lawyer for the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and Cleveland: “Basically, there is a new 7th Circuit opinion saying that there is no reason to impose a constructive trust on a lender’s takings of customers’ funds from client commodity firms that were used (inappropriately) to secure the firms’ borrowings, as long as the lender can say that it did not know WITH CERTAINTY that customers’ funds were being repledged. Negligence and misappropriation (vs. knowing criminal intent) are now a sufficient excuse for letting the lender keep the money and go to the head of the line for distributions in bankruptcies of the client commodity firms.”
When a customer deposits money into a bank, the bank essentially issues a promise to have those funds available when the customer returns to withdraw the deposited amount. When the same customer withdraws funds from their account (whether checking or savings) the customer assumes that the bank has enough funds to cover their withdrawal; including the presumption that their monies are separate from the bank’s assets.
Now, those funds are up for grabs by the bank at their discretion without explanation to the customer – nor is the bank obligated to recoup the customer should they “lose” those funds due to bad loans, bankruptcy or stock market loss.
According to a document released by the FDIC-BOE entitled, “Resolving Globally Active, Systemically Important, Financial Institutions” the 2008 securities scandal causedby the technocrats proved that there is a need for “financial stability” to avert the next potential collapse.
The document reads: “An efficient path for returning the sound operations of the G-SIFI to the private sector would be provided by exchanging or converting a sufficient amount of the unsecured debt from the original creditors of the failed company [meaning the depositors] into equity [or stock]. In the U.S., the new equity would become capital in one or more newly formed operating entities. In the U.K., the same approach could be used, or the equity could be used to recapitalize the failing financial company itself—thus, the highest layer of surviving bailed-in creditors would become the owners of the resolved firm. In either country, the new equity holders would take on the corresponding risk of being shareholders in a financial institution.”
The fact that the FDIC is a privately-funded insurance corporation explains that their ability and willingness to cover deposits is based on the needs of stakeholders, not the depositors.
In essence, should the need arise, the FDIC would be empowered to take the funds from depositors to cover the losses of the banks should legislation be passed to make this scheme applicable in the US.
The plan to steal money from citizen’s private checking accounts is also being suggested as viable in New Zealand.
Dr. Russel Norman, co-leader of the Green Party stated: “Bill English is proposing a Cyprus-style solution for managing bank failure here in New Zealand – a solution that will see small depositors lose some of their savings to fund big bank bailouts.”
Bill English, finance minister in New Zealand, complains that banks cannot properly monitor and insure deposits while anticipating “future financial market difficulties.”
English has publically endorsed the Open Bank Resolution (OBR) which outlines that should a bank fail under the OBR, depositors would be subject to a portion of their deposits confiscated by technocrats to pay for that bank’s bailout.
Canada has proposed in their government budget entitled, “Economic Action Plan 2013” that those too big to fail banks will benefit from a bail-in. Just like the European Parliament, Canada is setting the stage for depositors to have their funds removed from their accounts on behalf of the government for the benefit of the technocrats.
The document reads: “The Government proposes to implement a “bail-in” regime for systemically important banks. This regime will be designed to ensure that, in the unlikely event that a systemically important bank depletes its capital; the bank can be recapitalized and returned to viability through the very rapid conversion of certain bank liabilities into regulatory capital. This will reduce risks for taxpayers. The Government will consult stakeholders on how best to implement a bail-in regime in Canada. Implementation timelines will allow for a smooth transition for affected institutions, investors and other market participants.”
The IMF is scheduled to visit Egypt to discuss a $4.8 billion loan to “ease a deep economic crisis”. Under duress, the Egyptian government is willing to entertain the IMF’s emergency loan to raise the national fiat’s worth after national reserves have fallen low.
In exchange, the IMF has outlined austerity measures Egypt will have to adhere to in order to receive the loan. In response, the government is devising a plan (much like Cyprus did) to satisfy the IMF while extracting wealth from Egyptians to pay the technocrats back.
Rationing natural resources such as petroleum could be implemented at the behest of the IMF.