-- Posted Friday, 4 September 2009 | | Source: GoldSeek.com
By R. D. Bradshaw
Christian leader Milan Martin’s video on “Lucifer’s Children” gives a good summary of people’s habits and thinking (perhaps Martin was citing Plato or some other source). He noted that there are a few people out in the world who can be classified as doers. They are the people who will get up off of their duffs and do things—either for good or for bad. Some of them are different from most persons who believe “they don’t owe anything to others” or like to ask “what’s in it for me?” But the doers, both good and bad, are a very small group of people—perhaps 2-3% of the population.
There is a larger group (perhaps 4-6%) who can be defined as watchers. They watch what the doers are doing and critique the doers. Sometimes the watchers will do something but always with the selfish attitude of getting something out of it for themselves. And then, there are the all others (maybe around 92% of the population).
The all others usually don’t do anything and don’t care about anything. Perhaps their focus is more on who won this week’s football game; which movie star is dating whom at this time; what they are going to have for dinner tonight; what happened today with O. J. Simpson or Michael Jackson; and/or what color to paint their rooms/houses (as speaker David Wegener used to say).
And just like the all others don’t do anything or care about anything, most of them will never spend their own money on anything except their own, selfish, frivolous pursuits of nothing (the same thing on money is often true with the doers and watchers as well). If the all others do anything at all, it is selfishly to get something out of it in the way of personal gain for themselves (yes, the “what’s in it for me” thinking).
It’s too bad, but most Americans fit into this third category. That’s why the US faces so much trouble at this time. Of course, this apathy/don’t care has given the Rothschild Cabal a golden opportunity since 1913 to literally steal this nation and get away with it without any serious opposition. When one realizes that the Cabal controlled media directs and motivates the thinking of the average American, it is clear why the problems persist.
In trying to equate these postures to gold buyers and proponents, it is possible that many gold people are more in the first two categories rather than in the third definition. Thus, it is plausible that many gold proponents are either trying to do something about the problem or at least are watching what the doers are doing about it (but often, many gold proponents are like most other people--they are only interested in “what’s in it for me”). Many of these people, like with Ron Paul and his efforts to abolish or audit the Fed, are unhappy with the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank and the reappointment of Bernanke as Chairman of it. But they are not overly enthusiastic about personally doing anything about it. In other words, at most, they are only willing to be watchers.
Backdrop
While gold buyers and supporters probably have more interest in the problems in the US financial markets and system than the public at large (who are filled with apathy, indifference and don’t care), most end up doing very little about the problems because they conclude that the problems are hopeless and/or nothing can be done about them. The purpose of this Goldsmiths is to open the door to the possibility that indeed something can be done and that we don’t have to sit back and allow the alleged crooks running thing to continue with their actions without recourse.
While most of the general public hasn’t a clue about what is going on, some few people have awaken from their sleep and have begun to grasp the primary problem which is an alleged conspiracy among key government agents (like the Secretary of the Treasury and financial market regulatory agencies); quasi government activities (like the “Exchange Stabilization Fund or system and the Working Group on Financial Stability--per executive order 12631 on Mar 18, 1988); the owners, employees and managers of the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank; certain large private banks/financial companies and their hidden/unseen owners and directors; certain central banks in other nations (like the ECB, Bank of England, Bank of Israel, Bank of Canada, Switzerland’s National Bank, etc); the BIS and the IMF; certain large brokerage firms and their owners and primary directors; and other undefined parties.
The purpose of this alleged conspiracy is to rip off and steal from investors and people who have had financial dealings with the banking and financial services industries. These alleged conspirators have used threats, intimidation, extortion, bribery, theft, lies, deceit, dishonesty, fraud, news manipulation, acts of prostitute politicians in unconstitutional laws and executive orders, and on and on to take money illegally from honest, law-abiding, American people who believed that they were acting in a free market without the presence of collusion, conspiracy and fraud.
For the last year, a large number of people (including gold investors) have lost huge sums of money in the financial markets because the markets are manipulated and controlled by a gang of alleged conspirators who have rigged the system to make gobs of money for their own benefit and screw everybody else.
Washington Mutual
There is too the fact that numbers of people (including gold proponents) have lost money from some of their investments/accounts when the rigged system brought about the bankruptcy or collapse of companies they invested in or gave credit to (like Washington Mutual and Bear Stearns). The Washington Mutual thing is a classic illustration of how the Cabal ripped off the stockholders and creditors of Washington Mutual to make a fire-sale rip off with the aid and assistance of the FDIC, the Fed and others.
On Sep 25, 2009, JP Morgan Chase acquired all of the Washington Mutual Bank’s assets of $307 billion for $1.88 billion from the FDIC (JPMC offered WM shareholders $7 billion earlier; they refused). JPMC also did assume most of WM’s deposit liabilities of something under $188 billion (it is not clear to me if JPMC accepted any of the remaining debt of $91 billion but it is doubtful). And except for those liabilities assumed by JPMC, the other creditors are going to lose much before it’s over (to likely include the liabilities not absorbed by JPMC and the $8 billion debt of the holding company which is now in bankruptcy court). From the work of the Cabal, WM stockholders saw their stock rapidly crash from $30-$45 a share to around nine cents a share.
In any case, JPMC, with the aid of the FDIC, made off with not only the chickens but also the chicken house at WM. There are now a number of lawsuits pending in Federal courts in Delaware (case 08-12229), Texas, Washington State and possibly two in the DC alleging fraud and corruption in the seizure (one DC suit, case 1-09-cv-00533, asks for $40 billion in damages). A class action lawsuit is now in progress. Interested persons can check these websites: WaMuTruth.com; WaMuEquity.org; and WaMuCoup.com. The WaMuEquity.org site gives this backdrop on the JPMC acquisition of WM:
“JPMorgan Chase is one of the primary stockholders of the Federal Reserve which means they have the power to force favors from the Federal Reserve. The CEO of JPMorgan Chase, Jaime Dimon, sits on The Board of Directors of the Federal Reserve Bank of NY. Citigroup is also a stock holder of the Federal Reserve. It is the Federal Reserve’s job to insure that its member banks have the liquidity to transact business. The member banks borrow and lend among themselves electronically every night to keep each other liquid. This is called the Federal Funds. If need be a bank can also borrow directly from the Federal Reserve itself through a process known as the Discount Window. The FDIC was in a jam in that if WaMu was ever deprived of funds from the Federal Reserve, say for fear of not being paid back, and a bank run ensued, the FDIC would not be able to cover the insured deposits without borrowing from the Treasury. There (are) some slight differences in the amount the FDIC would have had to cover. Some estimates leave the FDIC with a nominal balance. Apparently the thought of having to borrow funds from the Treasury so early in the credit crisis was considered too much of a defeat for the FDIC to be comfortable with.
“Unknown to anyone in the public the FDIC was working on a secret solution deal. On one hand they were talking with WaMu about helping them find a buyer and the valuation of its loan portfolio, and secretly on the other hand they were allowing JPMorgan Chase and the other banks to have complete access to WaMu’s books and were offering to seize the bank and sell it to them in a private auction, which would free the purchaser from all liabilities to the debt holders, and all claims from shareholders. This would get the FDIC out of their jam. The words Toxic Paper, Toxic Debt, Toxic Loans etc suddenly were all over the newspapers and the internet. The idea that the FDIC’s cash balances could not make good on its insurance liabilities was being well advertised, but their credit line and credit abilities with the Treasury were seldom mentioned.
“Though borrowing from the Treasury would make the FDIC solvent, accounts over $100,000 would still lose everything above $100,000. These accounts read the writing on the wall and began silently electronically removing their funds from WaMu. As mentioned the Federal Reserve inspectors would be on hand to witness this day by day. WaMu’s cash on hand and hence liquidity was being drawn down. Did the Federal Reserve step in and loan them this liquidity as the system is set up to do for just these types of incidents. No they did not... Was the reason because WaMu still had plenty of liquidity left, or was there some cooperation going on between the Federal Reserve, the FDIC and the Treasury? This all occurred as the Congressional bailout meetings were underway.
“Once the bailout was completed, the plan being discussed would have WaMu’s bad subprime loans swapped out for good government paper, maybe some at 100%, maybe some at a discounted level, maybe some at market level. WaMu’s improved condition in any case would make it a much more solid purchase after the bailout then before. WaMu was being set-up in a triangulation of cross fire, between the Federal Reserve, the Treasury Department’s OTS, and the FDIC, to affect a seizure and a fire sale at auction. The beneficiary’s of this would be the FDIC, which would be removed of the potential problem of having to go into debt to the Treasury if it ever needed to pay the insurance on WaMu’s deposits, the Treasury which would now not have to considering ever loaning the FDIC any money to cover the deposits, and the big winner the Federal Reserve/JPMorgan Chase which ended up owning WaMu, its loan portfolio, its badly needed cash deposits, and its jewel of branch networks, free of all bondholder obligations and claims of shareholders.
“There is also the consideration that JPMorgan badly needed the cash from the deposit base of WaMu to help shore-up its very leveraged derivatives trading transactions. JPMorgan’s acquisition of Bear Stearns, also done with the government’s help, is thought to have been done for this same reason. If JPMorgan were ever unable to fulfill their ends of their derivatives trades, and collapse, it is thought it would bring down all of Wall St and the economy. Some of these trades were with WaMu and these trades would self cover and cancel, just as it was done with their Bear Stearns trades. Thus the actions of the OTS, FDIC and Federal Reserve may not be entirely about money, but also about their reputation and their performance of duty, and that they chose to kill off WaMu to save their own necks by helping to save JPMorgan’s neck. WaMu’s parent company Washington Mutual Inc shareholders and bondholders though were forced into taking an unjustified catastrophic and total loss. The investors of Lehman Brothers have also pointed the finger at JP Morgan and accused them of withholding liquidity from Lehman causing their collapse.”
The WaMuTruth.com site compared WM’s fate with Bear Stearns as follows: “From the book 'House Of Cards: A Tale Of Hubris And Wretched Excess On Wall Street' by Cohan, William D. This book includes proof that Chase/JP Morgan acted in concert with the US Treasury and the Fed to acquire Bear Stearns for a pittance which then set the stage for a repeat-performance when Chase/JP Morgan was allowed to buy Washington Mutual banks at a fire sale price. Here is a small peek into the inner workings that brought WaMu down:
“A final decision had just been made by the US Treasury, i.e., Hank Paulson, in tandem with the Fed and major firms on Wall Street, that there would be no bailout of Lehman Brothers and that Lehman Brothers would be forced into bankruptcy. After Thain, Paulson and Geithner had left the New York Fed Sunday morning, the following exchange ensued, according to several sources that were there. John Mack, the CEO of Morgan Stanley, spoke up. 'Maybe we should let Merrill [Lynch] go down, too.’ he said.
“Aghast, JPMorgan Chase's [Jamie] Dimon pointed out how shortsighted that was of Mack because Morgan Stanley might be the next firm that counterparties lost faith in. 'John, if we do that, how many hours do you think it would be before Fidelity would call you up and tell you it was no longer willing to roll your paper?'
“Dimon's comment quieted Mack. 'We thought Mack said that because he might be buying Merrill,' someone who heard Mack's statement said, and wanted to buy the firm on the cheap. (Mack denied he made the comment through a spokesman. A spokesman for Dimon said Dimon did not remember having the conversation with Mack).” Of course, when people like this get caught, they conveniently have a memory problem.
More Parties Ripped Off
Otherwise, there is the general economic environment caused by the alleged conspiratorial actions (like the withdrawal of credit from the economy to bring on a recession/depression and collapse the value of real estate; the crash of commodities; the manipulation of currencies; and the work of the Cabal’s controlled media to inform and motivate the public that things are bad in real estate, mortgages and the economy) which has encouraged and brought on losses of jobs, losses of income, foreclosures of mortgages, withdrawal of credit, losses on investments, etc (all of which caused losses of money, property and assets without due process of law and denied damaged parties equal protection of the law).
Of course, there have been some people who have believed that they could change things through the US political system. Some Third Party people and Ron Paul and his few supporters are examples of Americans who have actually tried to change the inherent corruption in the system through the political process. They have so far failed and my take is that they will continue to fail because the Cabal is in firm control of North America, Europe and parts of the rest of the world.
My position is that the American people lost its ability to control the political process in the early 20th century. In the Goldsmiths (Part 76), I have written at length about the words of Benjamin H. Friedman/Freedman on how the Rothschild Cabal took over the US political system. Since they own and control the media, they only allow “Cabal approved” candidates to achieve any measure of success in national elections.
So while it is manifestly clear to many of us that we cannot successfully change the political system, there is something overlooked that we can do. And that’s the purpose of this Goldsmiths—to broach an option which has not really had much if any exposure in America. It must be said that the Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee (GATA) has possibly worked somewhat on this option. But there are things which could be done and are not being done to right some of the wrongs perpetrated by the alleged conspirators. Here, I refer to one or more class action lawsuits against the alleged conspirators (in a jury trial before independent Americans and not before judges who are often controlled by the Cabal).
The Legal Option
While I am not a lawyer and don’t want the bar associations with their monopoly over legal thinking to oppress and persecute me (and don’t be so naïve to think that they wouldn’t do it), I can read and I can cite the obvious. While many of us lose sight of the US Constitution, since our government leaders regularly violate it and get away with it, it does contain some marvelous language which opens the doors to some lawsuits. Many state constitutions have some of these same words and options. For example, Wikipedia gives some of the profound rights to US citizens as follows:
Per the Fifth Amendment—“No person shall be ... deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” And per the Fourteenth Amendment—“nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law” (here, this clause also adds “nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law.”
In support of these Constitutional provisions, there has been a host of laws passed by Congress. While it appears that there are limitations in suing the US government in some of these laws, the door is often opened to sue individual people in their individual and personal capacities. Perhaps the most noteworthy has been the Civil Rights laws of 1964 (in title 42 of the USC, Sections 1981-2000). While most of these may have some limitations, I can cite section 1983 from Cornell University Law School as follows:
“Civil action for deprivation of rights. Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.”
But there is a jewel in 42 USC, Section 1985. Cornell gives it: “Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights (2) Obstructing justice; intimidating party, witness, or juror…or if two or more persons conspire for the purpose of impeding, hindering, obstructing, or defeating, in any manner, the due course of justice in any State or Territory, with intent to deny to any citizen the equal protection of the laws, or to injure him or his property for lawfully enforcing, or attempting to enforce, the right of any person, or class of persons, to the equal protection of the laws;
“(3) Depriving persons of rights or privileges. If two or more persons in any State or Territory conspire or go in disguise on the highway or on the premises of another, for the purpose of depriving, either directly or indirectly, any person or class of persons of the equal protection of the laws, or of equal privileges and immunities under the laws; or for the purpose of preventing or hindering the constituted authorities of any State or Territory from giving or securing to all persons within such State or Territory the equal protection of the laws; or if two or more persons conspire to prevent by force, intimidation, or threat, any citizen who is lawfully entitled to vote, from giving his support or advocacy in a legal manner, toward or in favor of the election of any lawfully qualified person as an elector for President or Vice President, or as a Member of Congress of the United States; or to injure any citizen in person or property on account of such support or advocacy; in any case of conspiracy set forth in this section, if one or more persons engaged therein do, or cause to be done, any act in furtherance of the object of such conspiracy, whereby another is injured in his person or property, or deprived of having and exercising any right or privilege of a citizen of the United States, the party so injured or deprived may have an action for the recovery of damages occasioned by such injury or deprivation, against any one or more of the conspirators.”
There is another interesting law in title 18 of the USC, Section 241 which is related to 42 USC 1985. This one, per Cornell, gives it as “Conspiracy against rights. If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or ‘If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured— They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.”
And when we are dealing with the possible crooks operating the alleged conspiracy to rig the financial markets and defraud, steal and rip off people at large, Congress may have hit a home room when it passed the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act, 18 USC 1961-1964 (popularly called RICO) which can be pursued as a civil action in court. Wikipedia gives this for RICO:
“Under RICO, a person who is a member of an enterprise that has committed any two of 35 crimes—27 federal crimes and 8 state crimes—within a 10-year period can be charged with racketeering. Those found guilty of racketeering can be fined up to $250,000 and/or sentenced to 20 years in prison per racketeering count. In addition, the racketeer must forfeit all ill-gotten gains and interest in any business gained through a pattern of ‘racketeering activity.’ RICO also permits a private individual harmed by the actions of such an enterprise to file a civil suit; if successful, the individual can collect treble damages…
“There is also a provision for private parties to sue. A ‘person damaged in his business or property’ can sue one or more ‘racketeers.’ The plaintiff must prove the existence of a ‘criminal enterprise.’ The defendant(s) are not the enterprise; in other words, the defendant(s) and the enterprise are not one and the same. There must be one of four specified relationships between the defendant(s) and the enterprise. A civil RICO action, like many lawsuits based on federal law, can be filed in state or federal court. Both the federal and civil components allow for the recovery of treble damages (damages in triple the amount of actual/compensatory damages).
“Although its primary intent was to deal with organized crime, Blakey (G. Robert, law professor) said that Congress never intended it to merely apply to the Mob. He once told Time, ‘We don't want one set of rules for people whose collars are blue or whose names end in vowels, and another set for those whose collars are white and have Ivy League diplomas.’
“Under the law, racketeering activity means:
- Any violation of state statutes against gambling, murder, kidnapping, extortion, arson, robbery, bribery, dealing in obscene matter, or dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical (as defined in the Controlled Substances Act);
- Any act of bribery, counterfeiting, theft, embezzlement, fraud, dealing in obscene matter, obstruction of justice, slavery, racketeering, gambling, money laundering, commission of murder-for-hire, and several other offenses covered under the Federal criminal code (Title 18);
- Embezzlement of union funds;
- Bankruptcy or securities fraud;
- Drug trafficking;
- Money laundering and related offenses;
- Bringing in, aiding or assisting aliens in illegally entering the country (if the action was for financial gain);
- Acts of terrorism.
“Pattern of racketeering activity requires at least two acts of racketeering activity, one of which occurred after the effective date of this chapter and the last of which occurred within ten years (excluding any period of imprisonment) after the commission of a prior act of racketeering activity. The U.S. Supreme Court has instructed federal courts to follow the continuity-plus-relationship test in order to determine whether the facts of a specific case give rise to an established pattern. Predicate acts are related if they ‘have the same or similar purposes, results, participants, victims, or methods of commission, or otherwise are interrelated by distinguishing characteristics and are not isolated events.’ (H.J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co.). Continuity is both a closed and open ended concept, referring to either a closed period of conduct, or to past conduct that by its nature projects into the future with a threat of repetition.”
Let me just add that I have had some personal experience with RICO as I have sued some people in Federal Court on that basis. So it can be done. Since I sued pro se, I did spent much time looking at the issues. Every time I consider the alleged conspirators ripping off the financial markets for their own gains, I think of RICO.
Let me also mention the Sherman (covering restraint of trade) and Clayton Anti-Trust acts. On this, Wikipedia says: “The Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914, (October 15, 1914, ch. 323, 38 Stat. 730, codified at 15 U.S.C. § 12–27, 29 U.S.C. § 52–53), was enacted in the United States to add further substance to the U.S. antitrust law regime by seeking to prevent anticompetitive practices in their incipiency. That regime started with the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890, the first Federal law outlawing practices considered harmful to consumers (monopolies and cartels). The Clayton act specified particular prohibited conduct, the three-level enforcement scheme, the exemptions, and the remedial measures.”
Putting it all Together
In my search on RICO, I stumbled across one of the most incredible civil class action lawsuits perhaps ever filed in Federal Court. This one seems to have been put together by a man named James Dalton Bell. While the internet has made a number of unsubstantiated, wild allegations against Bell, his primary trouble seems to have surfaced over his run in with the IRS. His pro se class action suit (NO. 02-1052BR) was filed in 2003 in the US District Court of Oregon in Portland (James Dalton Bell et. al. vs U. S. A. et al.).
Bell was a brilliant chemist from MIT who was in Federal prison at the time. He did an outstanding job of covering the bases where a number of parties worked in collusion to allegedly rip him and others off wherein he claims that they did so by violating numerous laws. Cryptome.org/job vex use gives this Bell complaint with him versus the United States and numerous individual parties and government agencies. If any reader is interested, he can access the cryptome.org site and read the Bell case.
I mention it here because he charged his opponents with about everything possible in some 430 claims which involved alleged violation of Civil Rights, 42 USC 1983 and 1985; RICO USC 1964; Sherman Anti-Trust Act USC 1 and 2; Clayton Anti-Trust Act; Quit am action, 31 USC; False Claims Cad, 31 USC 3729; and International Terrorism, 18 USC 2333. His opening paragraphs on Jurisdiction and Venue say:
“This is a Civil Action authorized by Title 42 of the United States Codes §1983, §1985, §1986 and §1988 to redress the deprivation under color of State Laws, and due to a Civil Rights conspiracy, of rights, privileges, and immunities secured by the United States Constitution. The Court has original jurisdiction pursuant to Title 28 of the United States Code §§1331 (federal question jurisdiction), 1343 (civil rights), 1337 (anti-trust), 1361 (mandamus jurisdiction), 1402 (U.S. as defendant), 1494 (accounts), and 1495 (unjust correction and imprisonment). The Court has personal jurisdiction over Federal Government employees under 28 USC § 1391. There is additional jurisdiction under 5 USC §§ 504 (Equal Access to Justice Act), 551, 552a (Privacy Act) and 702 (Judicial Review). The Court has jurisdiction pursuant to Givens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 US 388, 29 Led. 2d 619, 91 Sect. 1999 (1971) otherwise known as a ‘Givens Action.’ The Court has additional jurisdiction under Title 18 USC §§1961, 1962, 1964, 1965 et seq. (‘Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act,’ hereinafter ‘RICO’). There is additional jurisdiction under 18 USC §§286 and 287, and 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729, 3730, et seq. (Civil False Claims Act), for False Claims against the Federal government. There is additional jurisdiction under 18 USC §§ 201, 241, 242, 1341(mail fraud), 1343 (wire fraud), 1503, 1509, 1510, 1512, 1513, 1514, 1951, 1952, 1589, 2314, 2510(6), 2520 and 2707. The Court also has jurisdiction under 28 USC §§ 1651 (writs), 1658 (limits), 1961 (interest), 2401(limits), 2412 (costs), 2514, 2671 et seq. (Tort claim), 18 USC §§ 1495 and 15 U.S.C. §§ 1 and 2 et sew (Sherman Anti-Trust Act); and 15 USC §§ 15, 16, 22, 26 (Clayton Anti-Trust Act).
“There is additional jurisdiction under 28 USC §§ 1332 (diversity of citizenship), 1346, 1357, 1367 (supplemental), 1395 (fines), 3072, 42 USC § 2000aa (Privacy Act), and 42 USC § 2000aa-(6) (Waiver of Immunities). Also 18 USC § 2261A, 2264 (Restitution). Plaintiff Bell claims a $500,000 award under 18 USC §§ 3071-3072 for reporting terrorism by government employees acting in various capacities. There is also jurisdiction under 18 USC § 2333, Civil remedies for international terrorism.”
The Bottom Line
I now bring these issues up because many readers of the Goldsmiths have discovered that they don’t have much recourse in the political arena to correct the injustices heaped on them. I have felt that way often over the years. But when a gang of alleged crooks rips you off, must you sit back and do nothing and let them continue their illegal, unfair and unjust acts? Well, I submit something can be done in the US and state courts.
I know if I had the money, I would immediately get a good lawyer and put together a class action lawsuit to go after them. I might lose, but I would have the satisfaction of having tried. In thinking about this possibility, I have wondered if there might be a good lawyer who could address the above issues in the vein of how so many of us have been ripped off by the Cabal over the years and would choose to take on the system. Possibly some gold organization, seller, producer or publisher (singularly or a joint work of several of them under the leadership of perhaps GATA) would be interested in advertising, promoting and coordinating such a lawsuit with a good lawyer.
It’s very plausible that investors at large who have lost money in the financial markets, because of the work of the Cabal, might want to join hands with investors and creditors at Washington Mutual and Bear Stearns (and maybe even Lehman Brothers, etc) to cooperate, coordinate or join-in with a move to go after the whole shooting match—the Fed, the Treasury, the Big Cabal Banks, the FDIC, other central banks (who helped manipulate the markets by altering the value of currencies), etc (in a US jury trial).
Possibly, one or more class action suits could address the alleged collusion and conspiracy of this crowd to withdraw credit from the economy and manipulate currencies in order to bring on the current depression, crash stocks and commodities, and cause the fall of banks and financial institutions which could be cheaply absorbed and taken over by big Cabal banks working on the inside.
Even the Cabal controlled media could be addressed. Many persons incorrectly assume that the large Cabal controlled corporate media has freedom of the press under the First Amendment. But no, not so. The Bill of Rights addresses the rights of individual people in America and not government created corporations. Individual people like you and I have those rights but not government made corporations. This means that NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN and large corporate newspapers are not even addressed in the freedoms of speech and/or press of the First Amendment.
And by all means, let us not forget the real plutocrats who own the big banks, media and the Fed and pull strings to make things happen. There is no reason in the world why a class action law suit could not include as defendants some of the Rockefellers, Rothschilds, Warburgs, etc. As a minimum, a complaint can be filed listing as defendants the unidentified owners, controllers or directors of the big banks, the Fed, other central banks, etc who do make the important decisions (with the provision that the parties will be identified during discovery).
Wouldn’t a tough attorney deposing Jamie Dimon and Ben Bernanke have a great time in asking questions about who really runs and controls JPMC and the Fed.? Moreover, in a deposition, it would be marvelous to be able to ask Bernanke and/or Dimon about when and how the gold, silver, commodity and currency markets have been manipulated. Of course, the illegal/unconstitutional work of the Plunge Protection Team could be fully explored.
There are a number of possibilities where we don’t have to sit back and allow these alleged crooks to get away with their continuous fraud, theft and rip off of the financial markets. With the James Dalton Bell case as a guide, surely some good lawyer could put together a great case and go after the alleged conspirators—maybe not the United States government (which has been involved and should be tried in open court before a jury); but at least the individuals on an individual/personal basis (plus a complaint can sue unidentified/unknown parties with an option of defining them upon discovery).
Next, let me say that I have complained vigorously in the last year over the practice by some investment advisory services to plagiarize and steal ideas, words and thinking from others without giving credit. I have been hurt by these thefts over the last year as is true with other writers who have had their own original ideas and thinking stolen by thieves. But now, if that’s what it takes to get some movement on a class action lawsuit, then fine. If you wish, take my presentation above and put the ideas out under your own name and ingenuity if it will bring on a suitable class action lawsuit to see some justice done in this crooked business.
Finally, anyone wanting to contact me about the above possibilities can check the Contact Me menu item at the left menu of www.analysis-news.com.
________________________________________________________________________
Besides the revelations contained in the Goldsmiths’ articles, the work of the plutocratic financial market manipulators to conspiratorially manipulate and control the financial markets (to make more profits and install a world government under their management) is also addressed at length in the periodic analysis of the news and in other articles produced at www.analysis-news.com. This website has an article of interest to any person interested in understanding the market Manipulators. It is the Hidden Secret of the Manipulators, why they succeed and how to follow their manipulations.
-- Posted Friday, 4 September 2009 | Digg This Article
| Source: GoldSeek.com
