It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Entrapment Programme Forces British Politicians To Accept Financial Fraud

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 28 2015 @ 05:11 AM

...‘fractional reserves banking’ - lending out far more ‘money’ than one actually has in the form of deposits.

Obviously this is fraud. Nonetheless, it’s perfectly legal today, but in essence it remains the same fraud it has always been, with the main difference being that today it's a more sophisticated as well as officially sanctioned fraud.

This seems to be a well researched piece of writing. I would question some of his inferences but I have more faith in him being right than in some of the less well researched sources.

...tally sticks were still used until the early 19th century, and even formed part of the capital of the Bank of England when it was founded in 1694...

Arguably the tally stick system lives on. The fiat value has been transferred onwards.

'Legal' versus 'Lawful'.

Legal means some scribe wrote it somewhere and if you don't comply we trash your life.

Lawful means treat others as you wish to be treated yourself. No harm, theft, damage, fraud.

Fraud. Like fractional reserve fraud. Like the private bankers criminal system, constantly funnelling perceived title of property from the masses to the few.

The banking system as we know it is unlawful yet 'legal'. Politicians do legislation. Which British politician is fighting for us in this?

It's becoming increasingly apparent the major child abuse hotlines were used to give advance warning of whistleblowers. Every effort will be made in the cover-up of the abuse entrapment programme that stops politicians from dismantling the private banking system. Key people will be put into key positions. People who have proved themselves capable of defending the entrapment programme.

edit on 28 9 2015 by Kester because: and, and

edit on 28 9 2015 by Kester because: Inference

posted on Sep, 28 2015 @ 08:32 AM
a reply to: Kester

Notice how Cameron's too busy to sue Ashcroft?

Case in point!

posted on Sep, 28 2015 @ 10:38 AM
a reply to: Kester

Well, all money is fiat even gold. What gives it value? The only true value gold has is for industrial and jewelry uses and those are fairly minor. Instead I would argue that no currency is fiat, what backs currency is the fact that you can trade it for another persons labor. Lets say for a moment that there's a currency collapse (I'm going to use the US for my example but it's equally applicable to the UK) and the dollar ceases to be worth anything. People are still going to work. At first it will be just the grocery stores because they have food. But if there's no currency, then how do people buy food?

The answer is that they barter, but the stores aren't going to be interested in your goods... they're going to be interested in your labor and each food item is going to be priced at different rates, steak will be more expensive than ramen. The problem though is that the store only needs a limited amount of labor to keep the store running and soon they have for example pledges of 3 hours of fence repair work sitting in reserve.

From here the bankers step in and start pricing this labor. They (and the labor market) determine the 3 hours of fence work is worth 30 credits and 1 hour of the electricians work is worth 60 credits and from here you once again have a full fledged fiat monetary system.

Now with fractional reserve banking, let me explain it this way because it's not something that only bankers can do. Lets say you have $100,000 to invest and you put it in gold. Now you turn around and use that $100,000 in gold as collateral for a loan to make $100,000 in business investments. This is called leverage and your leverage rate is 1:1. What happens in this scenario is your business investments pay off and you profit by lets say 100%, but while doing this your gold also appreciated in value, lets say 15%. So now from that $100,000 investment you got back $215,000 in total.

But what happens if you don't put up 100% of the collateral? What if you have good credit and you only need to secure the loan by 50%? Now you have $100,000 in gold that appreciates and you have $200,000 in business investments all from an initial investment of $100,000. Now you have a leverage rate of 2:1, and you get to profit immensely. You can even add another layer to this. What if you use that $200,000 in business equity to fund a futures market investment on oil? Now you're leveraging again and none of this is illegal or wrong because you still have an initial investment that can cover losses.

posted on Sep, 28 2015 @ 12:24 PM
a reply to: Kester

I agree with you about fractional reserve banking and Azadan when it comes to gold also being a type of fiat currency.

new topics

top topics

log in