All federally insured
banks (FDIC) must follow what are called the
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP)
which are found in the federal statutes at 12 USC §
1831n — Accounting objectives, standards, and
requirements;
12 USC § 1831n(a)(1)
That there are certain accounting principles
that must be followed by (FDIC) banks and
financial institutions.
12 USC § 1831n(a)(1)
That certain reports or statements must be filed
with federal banking agencies by insured
depository institutions.
12 USC § 1831n(a)(1)(A)
That these reports and or financial statements
must accurately reflect the capital of these
institutions.
12 USC § 1831n(a)(2)(A)
That the institution's accounting principles
shall be uniform and consistent with the
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.
"Anything accepted by
a bank for deposit would be considered as cash."
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, 2003 ed.,
Wiley, page 41, Cash and Cash Equivalents.
BRIEF EXPLANATION OF THE "CREDIT CARD" SYSTEM AT
WORK
THAT HAS VICTIMIZED YOU THROUGH YOUR OWN IGNORANCE
Upon “approval, banks accept your signed "credit
card" agreement as a promissory note and deposits
your note as an asset.
That note is then “monetized,” and “deposit
multiplied” by a factor of 10. For example, a $1,000
credit limit, agreement/promissory note is monetized
to $10,000.00. $1,000.00 is credited to the "credit
card" company's bank account. And the rest,
$9,000.00, is gravy. (Did you get a kiss? A
thank-you? $100.00 on the dresser?)
The banks use the attributes of the Federal Reserve
“deposit multiplier,” to enrich themselves by a
factor of 9 times the amount of the “deposit.”
($9,000.00 in the example above). (This “multiplier”
factor can go as high as 23 times the deposit
amount).
And now, it gets even better for the banks, because
every time you use their "credit card" and sign a
purchase transaction "receipt" slip, as authorized
agent for the bank, you create another promissory
note, which the merchant deposits into his account
as cash. Then, the banks once again, use the
“deposit multiplier” money manufacturing scam to
enrich themselves by a factor of approximately 9
times the amount of the new deposit; the face value
amount of your “credit card” purchase transaction.
The Merchant’s bank deposits all of the signed
"credit card" slips and uses the “deposit
multiplier” money manufacturing scam to enrich
themselves by a factor of approximately 9 times the
amount of the deposit. And on, and on, and on.
How many times does this happen? How many times have
you and many others used a credit card?
The criminal banks could not enrich themselves
without YOU signing the notes, in ignorance, playing
their fools’ game.
And not only that, in the example above, it is a
fact that the credit card company gained a full
$1,000 from the original agreement that was signed
by YOU.
Even if you never use the credit card, the “credit
card” company has received unjust enrichment of
$1000 + $9000 (deposit multiplier) on the operation
of the scam based upon your participation, by your
signature on the promissory note or credit card
agreement.
The credit card company is paid in full by the value
of YOUR signature on all those promissory notes YOU
generate. The credit card company is never at any
risk and never loses a penny even if YOU never pay.
YOU were robbed. Non-disclosure of the facts is
fraud!
BACKGROUND BRIEF
The Federal Reserve has been very clear in their
circulars that banks do not really lend or “loan”
money.
Federal Reserve official publications reveal one
example in the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), which
governs all negotiable instruments, and every state
in the union has adopted and codified the UCC into
their state statutes.
Two examples to prove the point about what the FED
says about banks lending money.
FIRST: Federal Reserve Publication, Modern Money
Mechanics states on pg 6:
“Of course they
[Banks] do not really pay out loans from the
money they receive as deposits. If they did
this, no additional money would be created.”
So if banks do not
“really” pay out loans from the money that they
receive as deposits, where do they get the money to
payout “loans?”
The FED reveals in such a manner that it would take
professional “help” to fail to comprehend:
"What they do
when they make loans is to accept promissory
notes in exchange for credit to the borrower’s
transaction accounts.”
In reality an
exchange has occurred …
So, the banks and the “credit card” companies are
lying when they stipulate in their “agreements” that
you are receiving a loan. And then they charge you
interest on a “loan?!”
The agreement never mentions the real nature of the
transaction, an “exchange” founded in fraud, relying
upon your ignorance.
SECOND: The FED adds fuel to the argument in their
publication "Two faces of Debt,” pg. 19:
“depositor's
balance rises when the depository institution
extends credit either by granting a loan to or
by buying securities from the depositor in
exchange for the note or security, the lending
or investing institution credits the depositors
or gives a check that can be deposited at yet
another depository institution. In this case no
one else loses a deposit and the money supply is
increased. “New money” has been brought into
existence.”
Again, the FED uses
the word “exchange,” which is being associated with
the so called “loan.”
Notice the quote clearly says that a “depositors”
balance “rises,” (evidence the promise to pay is
deposited) when a “depository institution extends
credit either by granting a loan to or by buying
securities from a depositor. . .”
How does that happen?
According to the circular, “In exchange for the
note,” the lending institution credits your account.
Then, the FED reveals something that proves the bank
or financial institution really did not lend their
money as they implied or agreed – the FED discloses
that as a result of this “transaction,” “no one
loses a deposit” (thus no other person who had money
deposited at the institution lost any deposit) — and
actually “the money supply is increased;” “New
money” has been brought into existence.
In truth, the “new money” brought into existence was
done so by the deposit of the promissory note,
predicated upon your signature.
CRITICAL ISSUE: for an agreement or a
contract to be valid, both parties to the agreement
must fully disclose all of the facts relevant to the
transaction. Without full disclosure YOU have no way
to competently authenticate by validation all of the
terms of the agreement.
The indication that you have “authenticated” by
attestation, all of the terms of an agreement, is
evidenced by YOUR SIGNATURE. There are actually two
(2) elements or attributes of your signature. Most
people only have comprehension of one element or
attribute: a particular scratching pattern, etching,
or style of mechanical writing peculiar to a certain
individual, made with pen and ink on paper.
Here is the most important attribute of your
signature:
When a signature is affixed to a promissory note,
the signer is normally required to state a variety
of private information. It is quite common for the
signer-in-waiting to volunteer an address, phone
number, social insecurity number and other
information. At the bottom of the agreement is a
line where the signer applies their “Signature.”
Before the word “signature,” is used again, a short
review of the legal definition of signature, as well
as some other definitions that are relevant to
initiating an agreement or contract meeting the
stipulations of laws intended to protect the rights
of the parties to the agreement in the eyes of the
law/courts.
Signature.
1. A person’s
name or mark written by that person or at the
person’s direction.
2. Commercial law. Any name, mark, or writing
used with the intention of authenticating a
document. UCC §§ 1-201(37),* 3-401(b).**
(Black’s Law Dictionary, 7th Edition)
*UCC § 1-201(37).
"Signed" includes any symbol executed or adopted by
a party with present intention to authenticate a
writing.
**UCC § 3-401(b).
A signature may be made
(i) manually or by means of a device or machine, and
(ii) by the use of any name, including a trade or
assumed name, or by a word, mark, or symbol executed
or adopted by a person with present intention to
authenticate a writing.
signatory.
A party that
signs a document, personally or through an
agent, and thereby becomes a party to an
agreement.
Signature.
By signature is
understood the act of putting down a man's name,
at the end of an instrument, to attest its
validity. The name thus written is also called a
signature. Vide to Sign. Bouvier's Law
Dictionary, Revised 6th Ed (1856).
The generally
accepted legal definition of signature is very
broad:
“[t]he act of
putting one’s name on the end of any instrument
to attest its validity; the name thus written.”
(Black’s Law Dictionary p. 1381(6th ed.
1990) (BLD6-1381)).
See also
Webster’s New International Dictionary (2d ed.
1934)
(defining signature as “the name of any
person, written with his own hand to signify
that the writing which precedes accords with his
wishes or intentions”).
Attestation:
The act of attesting; testimony; witness; a solemn
or official declaration, verbal or written, in
support of a fact; evidence. The truth appears from
the attestation of witnesses, or of the proper
officer. The subscription of a name to a writing as
a witness, is an attestation. [1913 Webster]
Authentic:
genuine; true; real; pure; reliable; trustworthy;
having the character and authority of an original;
duly vested with all necessary formalities and
legally attested. Competent, credible, and reliable
as evidence. (BLD6-132).
Authentication:
Authentication of a writing means (a) the
introduction of evidence sufficient to sustain a
finding that it is the writing that the proponent of
the evidence claims it is or (b) the establishment
of such facts by any other means provided by law.
(BLD6-132).
Intention:
Determination to act in a certain way or to do a
certain thing. Meaning; will; purpose; design.
“Intention,” when used with reference to the
construction of wills and other documents, means the
sense and meaning of it, as gathered from the words
used therein. (BLD6-810).
Verification:
Confirmation of correctness, truth, or authenticity,
by affidavit, oath, or deposition. Affidavit of
truth of matter stated and object of verification is
to assure good faith in averments or statements of
party. (BLD6-1561).
Every effort imaginable is being made by those
operating the Federal Reserve scam, to disconnect
the individual from the notion that your “SIGNATURE”
attests to the validity and authenticity of all the
terms of whatever it is that you are signing. This
is so, because a flesh-and-blood individual is a
living soul, and his signature represents, among
other things, the individuals intentions either/or
his informed consent to the terms of the writing.
The deceivers would rather that your only
comprehension of the meaning of the term
“signature,” remain confined to “a particular
scratching pattern, etching, or style of mechanical
writing.”
“Signature” indicates that the signer agrees that
the matters committed to a writing are within his
wishes.
The concept of “within his wishes,” is a VERY
important issue. If someone has ‘forced’ you to
sign, or used “false representations” of the facts
relevant to an agreement, or has deliberately
withheld facts relevant to the agreement, the signer
cannot be held liable for the matter if it can be
proven that the party taking the unfair advantage,
has acted with such intentionally false
representations.
“Signature” places in motion many unique events:
1. It boldly
states that the signer has consented to the full
terms of the agreement, and becomes a party to
that agreement. By doing so, the full
stipulations (if any) as to how matters of
conflict and dispute are treated apply; these
administrative or remedial solutions are not
always handled through standard court
proceedings.
2. Many credit applications have a stipulation
or inclusion, that by applying your “Signature,”
ALL of the information provided to be reviewed
for “credit worthiness” is true, complete, and
certain. (or “The Truth, The whole Truth, and
nothing but the Truth”). In essence a swearing
that the individual providing the information
has NOT lied, deceived, or entered into the
agreement with any preconceived intent to commit
any fraud or other nefarious means.
Usually, there is
really NOTHING in these so-called “agreements” that
holds the alleged creditor liable if THEY were to
commit a fraud or other nefarious act. That is
because the signer has the free-will to EXIT the
agreement if it can be proven that the alleged
creditor (the bank) has not acted in good faith.
True to the criminal aspects of their “business,”
the bank’s representative(s) will never discuss the
signer’s (YOUR) options if you determine that the
bank has committed wrong-doing with respect to the
transaction: this is no accident.
3. In relation to
the claimed “loan,” and the “agreement,” the
signature is the origin and the beginning of the
‘promise-to-pay’ creation process.
4. With the application of the signature to the
promissory note, without full disclosure, the
signer has unwittingly participated in a scheme
to create money out of thin air. The NEW
obligation created the PRINCIPAL, just not the
interest money that is allegedly owed.
The bottom line on
signatures is this:
A signature
that was provided pursuant to false
representations, fraud, is voidable upon
discovery of the fraud perpetrated in order to
acquire the signature.
A ‘hand writing
analysis’ can only determine that a signature is a
particular scratching pattern, etching, or style of
mechanical writing peculiar to a certain individual.
No inference as to the intent of the signer, or the
circumstances under which the signature was acquired
can be determined by a “hand writing expert.”
A “signature,” (particular scratching pattern,
etching, style, etc.), is NOT the important point of
relevance — FULLY INFORMED CONSENT is the most
important element signified by a “signature,” and
that issue has significant intrinsic value with
respect to the fraud perpetrated by the “money
interests”.
WHAT DID THE BANK BRING TO THE TRANSACTION?
Another related issue, which may be more difficult
to prove, considering that the courts will do
everything in their power to protect the bank
instead of you, is that the bank never really
brought anything of value to the transaction.
In other words, for there to be a valid
contract/agreement, each party must provide
something of value in return for the thing of value
that they receive.
What was “loaned” to you that should be repaid?
If according to the FED, whose regulations the bank
must follow,
(1) the bank did
not use other depositor's money,
(2) the banks do not really payout loans from
its own money, or from money belonging to
depositors
(3) the banks accept promissory notes/agreements
in “exchange” for credits in a transaction
(checking) account
(4) the banks issue a check or wire transfer
from the money created by YOUR note;
approximately 10 times the face value amount
indicated on the note or instrument.
What did the bank
lend?
The bank issued a wire transfer, credit, or check
based upon the deposit of your promissory note
bearing YOUR SIGNATURE. The bank could not create
money without YOUR HELP.
Again, GAAP says, “Anything accepted by a bank as a
deposit is considered as cash.”
The promissory note is in fact an asset, and as an
asset it has value that can be bought and sold.
This explains why the FED says “New Money” is
brought into existence with the deposit of the
promissory note. It is “money” that was not in the
bank or financial institution prior to the deposit
of the promissory note.
Comprehend this, it is your SIGNATURE that allows
the FED to create vast resources of New Money, and
then use that money to control every aspect of your
life. Think about it.
As stated in “Two Faces of Debt” Pg. 19:
“such newly
created funds are in addition to funds that all
financial institutions provide in their
operations as intermediaries between savers and
users of savings.”
These funds are in
“addition” to the other funds.
In reality, your promissory note/agreement is an
increase of the financial institution's funds.
(Unjust enrichment by a factor of ~9).
Thus, from an economic standpoint you are far from
getting a loan; in fact, you are actually making a
deposit, but this has not been disclosed to you.
And what does the FED say about that?
Again, in “Two Faces of Debt,” Pg 19:
“A deposit
created through lending is a debt that has to be
paid on demand of the depositor, just the same
as the debt arising from a customer’s deposit of
checks in a bank.”
This is a very
powerful, clear, and concise statement. It means
that:
1) When a bank or
financial institution makes a “loan,” by
fraudulently acquiring your signature on a
promissory note, they (the bank) actually incurs
debt.
2) This debt is required to be paid on demand of
the depositor of the promissory note. (That’s
YOU).
3) It is the same as the debt the institution
owes a person who deposits checks or currency in
a bank.
When you deposit your
paycheck or cash into a bank or financial
institution, the institution has to record it as a
“debt” owed to you on their books. Gaining access to
the evidence of the banks detailed accounting that
will reveal the truth of the matter could be
difficult. If you were one of the criminals running
the scam, how far would you go to protect the scam?
MEETING OF THE MINDS
This element of contract law known as “meeting of
the minds,” must also be present in any valid
agreement. In other words, both parties must fully
comprehend all of the terms and conditions of the
agreement for there to be a “meeting of the minds.”
There must be full disclosure by both sides of all
relevant material facts so that everyone knows and
agrees with what is going on — it is called “full
disclosure.”
If you are not aware of all of the material terms
and conditions of an agreement, how could you
possibly agree to those terms and conditions with
your fully informed consent?
And if you did not agree to them because you were
not aware of them, how can there be a valid
agreement in place at all?
There has been no “meeting of the minds.” Therefore,
no valid, enforceable contract.
At this point, you should be able to comprehend
that:
(1) you did not
receive a “loan” from the “credit card” company;
(2) the “credit card” company profited from your
signature;
(3) every time you use the “credit card,” the
banks profit some more as you cause “new money”
to be created.
Why do you keep
enriching the bank?
As if that is not enough, the “credit card” company
demands that you pay them again, plus interest. If
you don’t, the bank will eventually acquire the
services of a court authorized goon with a warrant
to take your property, or your life, at the barrel
of a gun.
And if that is not enough, the banksters have all
credit cards securitized by insurance policies in
the event of default; they NEVER lose. (Credit
Default Swaps anyone?).
Furthermore, there is no way for you to have
understood all the terms of their contract, as full
disclosure was not made to you at the signing of the
contract.
Until you comprehend the scam, it is very difficult
to perceive how the banks and credit card companies
keep going when so many people with “credit cards”
file bankruptcy.
Once you do understand the scam, you can perceive
that “they” profit no matter what.
The “credit cards” are a godsend for the “credit
card” companies as they are free to create “new
money” out of thin air.
The foregoing answers the question, “Why do the
credit card companies seem eager to offer credit
cards like water?”
The “credit card” companies have the audacity, and
arrogance, to lie about their scam. They pretend
that the reason for the interest rate increases are
due to the large number of defaults and/or
bankruptcies … (It’s YOUR fault!).
Then, after all the money has been manufactured, and
squirreled away in their vaults, they have the
audacity to use the courts to ultimately authorize a
gun-toting goon to come to your property, stick a
gun in your face and demand you surrender your
property.
BANKERS, LAWYER-LIAR BANKER REPS, AND DEBT
COLLECTORS, ARE ALL LYING [expletive deleted]
THIEVES!
Must you continue doing business with them?
Stop the motor of the world with your power to
withhold your value from the people who are using
your life to effect your destruction.
After having been extremely useful to the “money
interests,” Edward Mandell House is reported to have
said the following in a private meeting with
President Woodrow Wilson:
“[Very] soon,
every American will be required to register
their biological property in a national system
designed to keep track of the people and that
will operate under the ancient system of
pledging. By such methodology, we can compel
people to submit to our agenda, which will
effect our security as a chargeback for our fiat
paper currency.
Every American will be forced to register or
suffer being unable to work and earn a living.
They will be our chattel, and we will hold the
security interest over them forever, by
operation of the law merchant under the scheme
of secured transactions.
Americans, by unknowingly or unwittingly
delivering the bills of lading to us [“berth”
certificate] will be rendered bankrupt and
insolvent, forever to remain economic slaves
through taxation, secured by their pledges.
They will be
stripped of their rights and given a commercial
value designed to make us a profit and they will
be none the wiser, for not one man in a million
could ever figure our plans and, if by accident
one or two should figure it out, we have in our
arsenal plausible deniability.
After all, this is the only logical way to fund
government, by floating liens and debt to the
REGISTRANTS in the form of benefits and
privileges.
This will inevitably reap to us huge profits
beyond our wildest expectations and leave every
American a contributor to this fraud which we
will call “Social Insurance.”
Without realizing it, every American will insure
us for any loss we may incur and in this manner,
every American will unknowingly be our servant,
however begrudgingly.
The people will become helpless and without any
hope for their redemption and, we will employ
the high office of the President of our dummy
corporation to foment this plot against
America.” [emphasis added].
