LONDON ‘LOCK BOX’ RAIDS YIELDED THE DECISIVE EVIDENCE NEEDED
Flashback to 2nd June 2008, when the Metropolitan Police, headed by Deputy Assistant Police Commissioner John Yates, raided three ‘safety lock box’ centres in London (Mayfair, Edgeware and Hampstead), with the assistance of 300 heavily armed police.
• It will be recalled from our reports at the time that Yates made sure that the mainstream UK and foreign print and broadcast media were present with their TV camera assets and photographers to witness the scene when the police raided the Mayfair establishment.
He did this by careful prior design, in collaboration with 'other authorities', in order to send a clear signal to the geocriminal cadres that the game was up, and that the British authorities held all the evidence arising from the fact that Britain had been used as the Master Platform. The stolen and other collateral assets were therefore held in these London 'safety lock boxes', as well as with a number of selected financial institutions offering custodial services.
• FACT: The ‘safety lock boxes’ were used to store the stolen and other collateral and assets used as base for the geocriminal financial operations orchestrated by the Bush-Greenspan-CIA-1/DVD geocriminal octopus, using the United Kingdom as their Master Platform.
• We repeat: Britain has all along been used as the primary Master Platform from which these fraudulent finance operations were launched. This can only now be revealed.
The raids on the ‘safety lock boxes’ will have taken much careful preparation, especially given the presence of 300 armed police, indicating that the sheer momentum for the end-game triggered by our exposures could not be ignored and had to be acted upon in London, given that the criminal activities were run out of the British capital. And of course the fact that the Metropolitan Police needed 300 heavily armed police as cover SPEAKS FOR ITSELF.
• After all they were confronting the most ruthless gang of professional fraudsters in history.
The criminalist cadres miscalculated, on the assumption (a) that ‘none of this would ever come out’ (1) and (b) that in the unlikely event of exposure, a British Government, elements of which will have been compromised, would have preferred to adhere to the criminalists’ omertà regime, rather than to institute vigorous measures to cauterise the financial corruption.
Bad mistake. Because Deputy Assistant Metropolitan Police Commissioner John Yates was the top policeman who masterminded investigations into the notorious ‘cash for peerages’ scandal during the Blair era, bringing forward evidence of corruption which he was later prevented by political pressures from taking any further.
It is most unlikely that such a fine upstanding policeman would have been prepared to take this lying down. Accordingly, we suspect, Yates was all the more determined that the (probably linked) investigations into the ‘safety lock boxes’ would be pursued with great determination and that no steps would be spared in connection with this operation.
Hence the quite unprecedented presence of 300 armed police and the equally unprecedented UK and world media and TV presence, which was very deliberately intended to ensure that the whole world, ‘where it matters’, would be informed that the game was now well and truly up.
AND THAT IS PRECISELY THE CASE. Everything that has happened since the British ‘safety lock box raids’ has followed on directly from this historically unprecedented takedown, which has placed the irrefutably relevant evidence into the hands of judicial authorities in the relevant countries.
THE IMF'S HINT THAT THEY KNOW ALL ABOUT THE CORRUPTION (OF COURSE)
Following the inadvertent acknowledgement by Herr Peer Steinbrück, Germany's Finance Minister, at a German Press Conference on 10th October 2008 attended by your correspondent at the Annual Meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank Group, to the effect that he knew all about the Settlements crisis and the related criminality, the Editor picked up a further reference, somewhat more oblique, at a later Press Conference in the auditorium off the Press Room.
Specifically, Mr Lipsky, the First Deputy Managing Director of the IMF (the guy with the handlebar moustache), alluded, in the Editor’s presence, to ‘certain issues which for various reasons I won’t be discussing today’ – a reference which, of course, the somnolent ‘mainstream’ media hacks who were present, failed to pick up on: perhaps because they were mainly Germans.
At these so-called press conferences (actually, monologues), one is at the mercy of having to catch the eye of the convenor on the platform: and such people are notoriously wayward, indicating their assent by a nod and then calling on another journalist instead.
THE GEOFINANCIAL FRAUDS COULDN’T BE MENTIONED, OR THEY’D HAVE TO RESPOND
An interesting fact that has been drawn to our attention is that the authorities of countries that have been raped and pillaged by the cornered Bush-linked geocriminalists face the apparent problem that they ‘cannot’ mention the criminal activity in public, because if they do, they would have to take open measures to deal with this offensive.
Since so many foreigners have been corrupted by this vast DVD-sponsored operation, they are supposedly constrained in this respect (we are advised, although of course we do not agree with this feckless attitude). So, at the IMF/World Bank Annual Meetings, for instance, NO open reference to the true cause of the crisis was ‘permissible’: instead, the participants were all walking around the elephant. The one thing that COULD NOT BE MENTIONED was the US high-level corruption.
For ‘insider’ consumption among the corrupt élite, the excuse for not tackling the real cause of the crisis head-on, appears to have been that ‘this is a private matter between The Queen, the World Court and President George W. Bush Jr.’ (The Queen being the greatly injured party, of course). The Chinese parties, working closely with the British, also have a very severe grievance.
However this omertà convention (evident from the rude put-down of the Editor of this service delivered by the Banque de France representative, as previously reported) merely invites the justified accusation that every single one of these people on the stage is de facto (or in reality) a co-conspirator and an accessory to the fact of historically unprecedented financial criminality and of FINANCING TERRORISM. If they know about it, they are de facto a party to it.
That explains why so many of these people look terrified: and with good reason, as more and more of them are arrested without any warning. They are terrified, too, of the Editor of this service, whom they loathe, and likewise with ‘good’ reason. In the European arena, the arrested financial sector fraudsters have been convicted under ‘robust’ EU anti-terrorism legislation, which specifies that money laundering and financial fraud constitutes ‘financing terrorism’ [see below].
In an interesting confirmation that the British Anti-Terrorism Act is being extensively deployed to combat this financial corruption, the Act was used to freeze all accounts with Icelandic banks, and to order financial institutions to cease processing transactions connected with Iceland. The UK Government appropriated assets with Kaupthing two weeks ago. Geir Haarde, the Prime Minister of Iceland, said on 24th October 2008: 'We still do not know what prompted the British Government's shameful decision to put Iceland on a 'terror list' and apply terrorist law to freeze Icelandic assets in Britain'. His Government is considering suing Britain over the appropriation. However it will get nowhere, since as previously reported here, the anti-terrorism legislation is the primary weapon that has been and continues to be wielded against financial fraudsters and money launderers.
The Editor tried to attract the attention of another convenor at a press conference on Saturday 11th October given by Mr Dominique Strauss-Kahn, which was supposed to have started at 3.30pm. The Managing Director of the IMF appeared at 5.00pm, reminding many of us of an occasion at one of these meetings during the chaotic Clinton era, when President Clinton kept the entire international financial community waiting for an hour and a half, and when he finally made it, uttered no apology whatsoever. Half the auditorium had emptied by the time he arrived.
Had the Managing Director of the IMF had time, the Editor had intended to ask him a question in the broad context of the Fund’s enthusiastic ‘endorsement of exceptional measures’ in the face of this unprecedented financial crisis (unstated: brought about exclusively by the serial criminality of the President of the United States, his father, and their criminalist cronies holding high office).
The question would have been as follows: ‘Does the proposed constellation of measures reiterated by the international financial community include the G-7-Approved Refunding Program, involving fully taxable, 100% transparent limited private sector Capital Markets trading operations on the books, yielding substantial ongoing windfall tax accruals to the US Treasury?’ |
