The Forum for Stable Currencies would not have been created without Lord Sudeley. He would not have learned about usury at the root of our dishonest money system, if his family had not been bankrupted in 1893 by Lloyds Bank – as published on the above archive site.
Since we organised meetings at the House of Lords and Commons, we made so many connections among victims of bank and judicial fraud that I created a whole list of websites:
- first men who had created businesses and were bankrupted;
- then families whose homes were re-possessed;
- and finally the mothers whose children were kidnapped by the state’s institutions – all in all 33 sites promoting and advocating Open Justice.
When I met Lord Sudeley for the first time, I remember saying to him: when we heal your family, we will heal your nation… Today I received this email from him:
“Much new ground was broken on our bankruptcy in the paper by Dr Stanley Chapman, author of The Rise of Merchant Banking, in The Sudeleys – Lords of Toddington, published in 1987 by the Manorial Society of 104 Kennington Road, London SE11.
Further advances are given in my 10-page paper, just published in the Transactions of the Cymmrodorion Society, together with its Ancillary Memorandum. The Enterprise Act has mitigated the harsher effects of the old cardinal rule in business that liquidity or cash flow is more important than capital. And now we may understand more clearly how under Slow Payment of our debt which arose put of the agricultural depression there would have been no bankruptcy.
Looking ahead, perhaps not enough headway is to be anticipated over the eradication of usury, which was the root of our trouble, since usury has become too ingrained in our monetary system. More headway might be expected however over the unsatisfactory character of banks guarantees, which reduced without in the end altogether eliminating the fourth Lady Sudeley’s Tollemache inheritance.
English: The expansion of $100 through fractional-reserve lending at varying rates. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
The writers of the Bank of England Act 1694 had the intention
to avoid the serious oppression of Their Majesties’ subjects.
Hence they didn’t allow the Corporation to trade. Should it trade after all, it would have to pay as punishment:
treble the value of the trade.
In theory, this means that the BoE would have to pay the Treasury treble the value of all national and public debt bonds!
Will MPs appreciate this when they debate ‘money creation and society’ this Thursday as part of Backbench Business?
See Parliament Debate, including the link to watching the debate live .
Further info on Facebook and these Google results.
Posted in Bank of England, Cash, Creation of Money, Credit, Legalized Usury, Money, Money supply, Money Supply, Money supply inflation, Treasury money
Tagged Associated Press, Dow Jones Industrial Average, Eastern Time Zone, European Central Bank, NASDAQ, New York City, S&P 500, Standard & Poor's, United States Department of the Treasury, United States Treasury security
This 48-page booklet (1981) and this 200-page book (1986) are as fundamental as The Money Bomb (1983) – and as true and relevant today as there and then – if you want to understand how ‘money’ has changed from being a ‘medium of exchange’ to being used as a ‘tool for control’!
The title says it all: Government Debt and Credit Creation!
Posted in Austerity, Bank of England, Blind spots, Bradbury Pound, Cash, Creation of Money, Credit, Credit Creation, Debt, Economics, Government debt, Legalized Usury, Money, Money supply, Money Supply, National Debts, Public Debts
Tagged Bradbury Pound, Central bank, early day motion, Government debt, HM Treasury, Money Bomb, Money creation, Thomas Paine
The Growth of Credit over Cash since 1943
The Bradbury Pound to the Rescue!
A little known historical precedent that will stop the criminal debt-creating banksters well and truly in their tracks!
Central Banks – the Irresponsible Institutions
The completely contrived and planned global debt bubble is rapidly becoming unsustainable and will burst at some point very soon bringing with it a financial meltdown on a scale never before seen. It’s now clear from whistleblowers and researchers that the cabal that makes up the debt-creating banking elite, with their global network of central banks (including the Bank of England and the Federal Reserve) led by their little known Bank for International Settlements (BIS), has a well laid plan to collapse the world’s economy.
One World Debt-Based Currency – the mechanism for Global Slavery
The plan, using unsustainable and unlawful debt to collapse the major currencies of the world, is well advanced. It’s all about the banking elite’s long term goal to create a centralised and global electronic currency – a currency that will inevitably lead to the reality of a cashless world where complete Orwellian control decides who gets paid and who doesn’t! Continue reading
Posted in Austerity, Bradbury Pound, Cash Crumble, Challenging the Recession, Creation of Money, Issue of Currency, Legalized Usury, Money supply, Money Supply, National Debt, National Debts, Online activities, Public Debts
Tagged Bank for International Settlements, bank of england, Bradbury, British people, Central bank, government, HM Treasury, London
In this video, retired teacher Bill Abram expresses his analysis and outrage over the Crime of the Canadian Banking System.
He points out that the Canadian as well as the US constitution contain the right of creating money to be reserved to the Government.
But, as more and more people begin to realise: successive governments have gradually given that power to private central banks and bankers.
We should not have a national debt!
But national or public debts have become commonplace for every national government.
Posted in Bank of Canada, Banks, National Debt, The Rule of Law
Tagged Canada, Canadian, Consumer price index, Crime, Insurance, Porter, Theft, United States Constitution
It’s been in the air for a long time: the IMF is meant to “unite” the world with Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) as the debt-based global currency. Let’s hope that the gods will NOT allow this complete enslavements! But Cassandra was always right, wasn’t she…
Here’s an article in The Telegraph that summarises the current power plays at work.
And here are related articles that I select for once while too many people write too much about the subject methinks, while not enough people challenge those who pull the strings…
Posted in Banks, Cash, Federal Reserve, Financial products, Interest, International Monetary Fund, Legalized Usury, Money, Special Drawing Rights
Tagged Barack Obama, Central bank, federal reserve system, IMF, International Monetary Fund, SDRs, Special drawing rights, united states, World currency, Zhou Xiaochuan
Jesus chased the money lenders from the temple.
Abraham Lincoln put it in “bullet words”:
The money powers prey on the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity.
The banking powers are more despotic than monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy.
They denounce as public enemies all who question their methods or throw light upon their crimes.
A lawyer friend of mine has pointed me to Sections XXVI and XXVII of this act which have not been repealed (yet).
If I translate correctly, it means the following in nickel words:
- the act was written with the intention that their Majesties’ subjects may not be oppressed by the Bank of England
- the Bank of England may not monopolize or engross any goods, wares or merchandize
- the Bank of England may not deal or permit to deal or trade with any of the ‘stock-monies’ or ‘effects’, i.e. ‘deposits’ or ‘collateral’, to buy or sell any goods, wares or merchandize
- should anybody do so anyhow, or by order or directions, such dealings or tradings are prosecuted and punished by treble the value of the goods and merchandize traded, if ‘victims’ sue for action in the High Court.
I read the ‘stock-moneyes’ and ‘effects’ to pertain to the ‘financial economy’, while goods, wares and merchandize belong to the ‘real economy’.
Hence I wonder whether “we, the taxpayers” could construe such a High Court Action on the back of the national debt and the money supply, since ‘effects’ are used for the national debt and ‘effects’ are used to pay bailiffs to engross people’s homes and other assets?
But maybe my German / analytical mind thinks around too many corners here…