EU Confirms Plan For Cyprus-Style Theft of Bank Deposits

6 Jul

As warned here repeatedly…

G20 Governments All Agreed To Cyprus-Style Theft Of Bank Deposits… In 2010

Federal Reserve Governor Confirms – Bank Depositors Will Be Cyprused

Growing Political Deception On Bank Deposits Theft

The Bankers’ Net Is Closing

Federal Reserve Says Bank Bail-Ins Coming To The USA

… the internationalist banksters’ plan to set up a global regime for “resolution” of failing banks, wherein governments will give themselves free reign to “bail-in” the banks using depositors’ savings, is now slowly but surely being enacted by governments worldwide.

From The Telegraph (UK):

EU makes bank creditors bear losses as Cyprus bail-in becomes blue-print for rescues

New European Union “bail-in” rules to impose the losses of failed banks on shareholders, bondholders and some large depositors were agreed early this morning by Europe’s finance ministers.

…Jeroen Dijsselbloem, the chairman of the Eurogroup of finance ministers, hailed the agreement as a major step towards a “banking union” and away from state funded aid to recapitalise or bailout troubled banks across Europe.

…Greg Clark, the financial secretary to the Treasury, declared that Britain was happy with the new rules after securing concessions allowing governments flexibility on how to tailor bank “resolution” to national circumstances and existing British arrangements on banking levies.

…Under the deal, after 2018 bank shareholders will be first in line for assuming the losses of a failed bank before bondholders and certain large depositors. Insured deposits under £85,000 (€100,000) are exempt and, with specific exemptions, uninsured deposits of individuals and small companies are given preferred status in the bail-in pecking order for taking losses.

It is most important to recall what we have shown previously.

Do not be fooled into believing that, because Australia’s government has “guaranteed” (ie, insured) bank deposits up to $250,000, that this means your savings are safe, and that a failing Aussie bank will not be “bailed-in” using your money.

The government’s “guarantee” is limited, to just $20 billion per failed bank.

That’s less than one-tenth of the total amount of customer deposits — digital bookkeeping entries — actually “held” by Australian banks.

(see The Bank Deposits Guarantee Is No Guarantee At All )

To the best of my knowledge, Australia’s politicians have not yet begun to legislate the new, FSB-mandated and G20-agreed bank “bail-in” regime here.

But when they do, your savings will be exposed to confiscation.

Just as intended:

Earlier on Monday, Bank of England Deputy Governor Paul Tucker said the EU law on bank recovery and resolution would be a milestone towards a global system.

Advertisements

8 Responses to “EU Confirms Plan For Cyprus-Style Theft of Bank Deposits”

  1. mick July 6, 2013 at 9:11 am #

    Any decision for a bail-in should be made by voters via a referendum. Any other decision of this kind is corruption. What scares me is that this appears to be a global decision made in the interests of the banking system, a system which already has shown itself to be corrupt and for the most part beyond the reach of governments.

    On a brighter note ankind is innovative by nature and I might suggest that if this sort of legislation becomes law then a system avoiding banks will be found. A digital system similar to bitcoin system may well become the money system of the future.

    Depositors should never be held to account for the failure banks as they have in no way contributed to this. This is corruption on a grand scale.

  2. Kevin Moore July 6, 2013 at 9:26 am #

    I enjoy seeing how the minds of the ruling class works –
    .
    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/07/04/nickola-tesla-calling-all-freethinkers-part-three/
    .
    Some other telling quotes from the SWQW document:
    .
    “…in the interest of future world order, peace, and tranquility, [4] [5] it was decided to privately wage a quiet war against the American public with an ultimate objective of permanently shifting the natural and social energy (wealth) of the undisciplined and irresponsible many into the hands of the self-disciplined, responsible, and worthy few.”
    .
    “…the objective of economic research, as conducted by the magnates of capital (banking) and the industries of commodities (goods) and services, is the establishment of an economy which is totally predictable and manipulatable.”
    .
    “In order to achieve a totally predictable economy, the low-class elements of society must be brought under total control, i.e., must be housebroken, trained, and assigned a yoke and long-term social duties from a very early age, before they have an opportunity to question the propriety of the matter. In order to achieve such conformity, the lower-class family unit must be disintegrated by a process of increasing preoccupation of the parents and the establishment of government-operated day-care centers for the occupationally orphaned children.”
    .
    “The quality of education given to the lower class must be of the poorest sort, so that the moat of ignorance isolating the inferior class from the superior class is and remains incomprehensible to the inferior class. With such an initial handicap, even bright lower class individuals have little if any hope of extricating themselves from their assigned lot in life. This form of slavery is essential to maintain some measure of social order, peace, and tranquillity for the ruling upper class.”
    .
    “Since energy is the key to all activity on the face of the earth, it follows that in order to attain a monopoly of energy, raw materials, goods, and services and to establish a world system of slave labor, it is necessary to have a first strike capability in the field of economics. In order to maintain our position, it is necessary that we have absolute first knowledge of the science of control over all economic factors and the first experience at engineering the world economy.”
    .
    “Experience has proven that the simplest method of securing a silent weapon and gaining control of the public is to keep the public undisciplined and ignorant of the basic system principles on the one hand, while keeping them confused, disorganized, and distracted with matters of no real importance on the other hand.”
    .
    “This is achieved by:
    .
    — disengaging their minds; sabotaging their mental activities; providing a low-quality program of public education in mathematics, logic, systems design and economics; and discouraging technical creativity.
    .
    — engaging their emotions, increasing their self-indulgence and their indulgence in emotional and physical activities by: unrelenting emotional affrontations and attacks (mental and emotional rape) by way of constant barrage of sex, violence, and wars in the media – especially the T.V. and the newspapers. Giving them what they desire – in excess – “junk food for thought” – and depriving them of what they really need. Rewriting history and law and subjecting the public to the deviant creation, thus being able to shift their thinking from personal needs to highly fabricated outside priorities. These preclude their interest in and discovery of the silent weapons of social automation technology. The general rule is that there is a profit in confusion; the more confusion, the more profit. Therefore, the best approach is to create problems and then offer solutions.”
    .
    “Diversion Summary:
    .
    Media: Keep the adult public attention diverted away from the real social issues, and captivated by matters of no real importance.
    .
    Schools: Keep the young public ignorant of real mathematics, real economics, real law, and real history.
    .
    Entertainment: Keep the public entertainment below a sixth-grade level.
    .
    Work: Keep the public busy, busy, busy, with no time to think; back on the farm with the other animals.”
    .
    “The next step in the process of designing an economic amplifier is discovering the energy sources. The energy sources which support any primitive economic system are, of course, a supply of raw materials, and the consent of the people to labor and consequently assume a certain rank, position, level, or class in the social structure, i.e., to provide labor at various levels in the pecking order.”
    .
    “Each class, in guaranteeing its own level of income, controls the class immediately below it, hence preserves the class structure. This provides stability and security, but also government from the top.”
    .
    “As time goes on and communication and education improve, the lower-class elements of the social labor structure become knowledgeable and envious of the good things that the upper-class members have. They also begin to attain a knowledge of energy systems and the ability to enforce their rise through the class structure.
    .
    “This threatens the sovereignty of the elite.
    .
    “If this rise of the lower classes can be postponed long enough, the elite can achieve energy dominance, and labor by consent no longer will hold a position of an essential energy source.
    .
    “Until such energy dominance is absolutely established, the consent of people to labor and let others handle their affairs must be taken into consideration, since failure to do so could cause the people to interfere in the final transfer of energy sources to the control of the elite.”
    .
    “The primary reason why the individual citizens of a country create a political structure is a subconscious wish or desire to perpetuate their own dependency relationship of childhood. Simply put, they want a human god to eliminate all risk from their life, pat them on the head, kiss their bruises, put a chicken on every dinner table, clothe their bodies, tuck them into bed at night, and tell them that everything will be alright when they wake up in the morning.
    .
    “This public demand is incredible, so the human god, the politician, meets incredibility with incredibility by promising the world and delivering nothing. So who is the bigger liar? the public? or the “godfather”?
    .
    “This public behavior is surrender born of fear, laziness, and expediency. It is the basis of the welfare state as a strategic weapon, useful against a disgusting public.”
    .
    How interesting, their use of the term, “…a disgusting public.” The entire SWQW document is a blueprint for making the public ever more disgusting. For people inclined to think that anyone not of the PSQ is not an enemy of the PSQ—in other words, that the common good is anything but competition of the PSQ—reading of SWQW document is crucial. As for authenticity…please, simply look around and pay attention; authentication is everywhere.
    .
    Anything serving the“Common Good” is something taken away from the PSQ. It’s a zero sum game. If there’s any good going around, and it does not nourish PSQ power, it’s power that got away. Not only is the PSQ public enemy number one, the public is enemy number one of the PSQ. What stacks this situation in PSQ favor is their understanding of the situation, while the public hallucinates about government “…of the People, by the People, for the People.” The public can’t seem to fathom the evil of the PSQ, can’t even imagine having zero conscience. Meanwhile, the PSQ keeps the public so busy with defense that the public can rally no offense. The term, “For the good of humanity” is a joke diseased beyond humor, into the realm of epitaph.
    .
    “Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac,” and “The elderly are useless eaters.”
    — Henry Kissinger (Nobel Peace Prize, 1973)

    • The Blissful Ignoramus July 6, 2013 at 11:19 am #

      Thanks Kevin. Never came across that one before.

      That article (and the quoted document, here) should be required reading for everyone.

      [EDIT: I’ve only skimmed the linked document, but what I’ve read so far rings true. Loudly.]

    • mick July 6, 2013 at 1:09 pm #

      Compelling reading Kevin. The article explains much of the frustration I feel in life and the helplessness of dealing with average Australians who are willing sheep to the slaughter.

      Time for another French revolution me thinks.

  3. mick July 6, 2013 at 12:56 pm #

    And while I remember: why are directors and CEOs not brought into the web. If they are the cause then they should also pay. But then business looks after its own interests pretty well.

  4. Kevin Moore July 6, 2013 at 3:13 pm #

    Mick,
    .
    In answer to your call for another French Revolution I’ve got to do a bit more preaching –
    .
    From Protocol 3,
    “…….Remember the French Revolution, to which it was we who gave the name of “Great”: the secrets of its preparation are well known to us for it was wholly the work of our hands.”
    .
    In my view to form a warring mob would be simply playing into their hands. Everything is under control see Habukkuk ch.2 NASB.
    .
    Luke 6:27-36
    .
    27 But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you,
    .
    28 Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you.
    .
    29 And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloak forbid not to take thy coat also.
    .
    30 Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again.
    .
    31 And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.
    .
    32 For if ye love them which love you, what thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them.
    .
    33 And if ye do good to them which do good to you, what thank have ye? for sinners also do even the same.
    .
    34 And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? for sinners also lend to sinners, to receive as much again.
    .
    35 But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil.
    .
    36 Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful.

  5. Silvio Gesell July 10, 2013 at 11:16 pm #

    It isn’t theft. Depositing your money in the bank is loaning it to the bank. You earn interest for the risk of doing this. If you don’t want to risk your money you don’t lend it to the bank.

    • The Blissful Ignoramus July 10, 2013 at 11:27 pm #

      Disagree. It is theft. If I loan you (say) my lawnmower, and you give it away, permanently, to someone else, that’s theft. Even if you offer me something else instead — like “shares”, per the bail-in regime — it is still theft. Especially if I have no prior say in the matter. If you check the specifics of the FSB regime, bank depositors have no choice; the issue of depositors’ “consent” is specifically addressed, and the regime calls for legislation to ensure that politicians, bank executives et al cannot be held liable for simply taking (stealing) people’s money, and doing with it what they will.

      Agree with the rest of your comment … and love your username 😉

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: