ALERT: BART CHILTON…”I’m Back!”!

Talk about stoking the fire under the London Bankster’s “arses”!

Statement of Commissioner Bart Chilton Before the International Roundtable on Financial Benchmarks, Washington, DC

February 26, 2013

I’m pleased we are discussing the critically important topic of benchmarks.  We’ve witnessed blatant and brazen monkeying with the marks.  The LIBOR (London Interbank Offered Rate), for instance, impacts virtually anything consumers purchase on credit from a car to a home mortgage to a student loan.  When marks are manipulated, it affects us all.

I’ve heard many suggest that lots of banks were submitting false rates, so therefore it was acceptable.  That is, in no way, cool or copacetic. It violates the law and can hurt consumers and customers around the globe.  Rather, the idea that pervasive manipulation, or attempted manipulation, is so widespread should make us all query the veracity of the other key marks.  What about energy, swaps, the gold and silver fixes in London and the whole litany of “bors?”  Why would they be any different in the minds of those that may have sought to push or pull rates?  For me, this means every single mark needs to be reviewed, and potentially investigated.

Finally, these benchmarks need to be based upon real, transparent trades, and not in the control of any individual or entity which may have a profit motive. That means government; quasi-government or an appropriate not-for-profit entity should oversee the circumstances surrounding how marks are established.

I hope today’s discussion moves us in a direction that restores credibility and confidence to the marks and markets.

Last Updated: February 26, 2013

 
I’m sure that Bart is relieved that he doesn’t have to PRETEND to be a weak,non-entity anymore. The game is back on!
 
Go Bart!
 
Go GATA!
 
Go SILVER BUGS!
 
May the Road you choose be the Right Road.
 
Bix Weir
 
 

Britain’s colonial shame: Slave-owners given huge payouts after abolition

Britain’s colonial shame: Slave-owners given huge payouts after abolition

Posted: 25 Feb 2013 01:33 PM PST


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/britains-colonial-shame-slaveowners-given-huge-payouts-after-abolition-8508358.html

Britain’s colonial shame: Slave-owners given huge payouts after abolition
David Cameron’s ancestors were among the wealthy families who received generous reparation payments that would be worth millions of pounds in today’s money
SANCHEZ MANNING   SUNDAY 24 FEBRUARY 2013

The true scale of Britain’s involvement in the slave trade has been laid bare in documents revealing how the country’s wealthiest families received the modern equivalent of billions of pounds in compensation after slavery was abolished.

The previously unseen records show exactly who received what in payouts from the Government when slave ownership was abolished by Britain – much to the potential embarrassment of their descendants. Dr Nick Draper from University College London, who has studied the compensation papers, says as many as one-fifth of wealthy Victorian Britons derived all or part of their fortunes from the slave economy.

As a result, there are now wealthy families all around the UK still indirectly enjoying the proceeds of slavery where it has been passed on to them. Dr Draper said: “There was a feeding frenzy around the compensation.” A John Austin, for instance, owned 415 slaves, and got compensation of £20,511, a sum worth nearly £17m today. And there were many who received far more.

Academics from UCL, led by Dr Draper, spent three years drawing together 46,000 records of compensation given to British slave-owners into an internet database to be launched for public use on Wednesday. But he emphasised that the claims set to be unveiled were not just from rich families but included many “very ordinary men and women” and covered the entire spectrum of society.

Dr Draper added that the database’s findings may have implications for the “reparations debate”. Barbados is currently leading the way in calling for reparations from former colonial powers for the injustices suffered by slaves and their families.


Among those revealed to have benefited from slavery are ancestors of the Prime Minister, David Cameron, former minister Douglas Hogg, authors Graham Greene and George Orwell, poet Elizabeth Barrett Browning, and the new chairman of the Arts Council, Peter Bazalgette. Other prominent names which feature in the records include scions of one of the nation’s oldest banking families, the Barings, and the second Earl of Harewood, Henry Lascelles, an ancestor of the Queen’s cousin. Some families used the money to invest in the railways and other aspects of the industrial revolution; others bought or maintained their country houses, and some used the money for philanthropy. George Orwell’s great-grandfather, Charles Blair, received £4,442, equal to £3m today, for the 218 slaves he owned.

The British government paid out £20m to compensate some 3,000 families that owned slaves for the loss of their “property” when slave-ownership was abolished in Britain’s colonies in 1833. This figure represented a staggering 40 per cent of the Treasury’s annual spending budget and, in today’s terms, calculated as wage values, equates to around £16.5bn.

A total of £10m went to slave-owning families in the Caribbean and Africa, while the other half went to absentee owners living in Britain. The biggest single payout went to James Blair (no relation to Orwell), an MP who had homes in Marylebone, central London, and Scotland. He was awarded £83,530, the equivalent of £65m today, for 1,598 slaves he owned on the plantation he had inherited in British Guyana.

But this amount was dwarfed by the amount paid to John Gladstone, the father of 19th-century prime minister William Gladstone. He received £106,769 (modern equivalent £83m) for the 2,508 slaves he owned across nine plantations. His son, who served as prime minister four times during his 60-year career, was heavily involved in his father’s claim.

Mr Cameron, too, is revealed to have slave owners in his family background on his father’s side. The compensation records show that General Sir James Duff, an army officer and MP for Banffshire in Scotland during the late 1700s, was Mr Cameron’s first cousin six times removed. Sir James, who was the son of one of Mr Cameron’s great-grand-uncle’s, the second Earl of Fife, was awarded £4,101, equal to more than £3m today, to compensate him for the 202 slaves he forfeited on the Grange Sugar Estate in Jamaica.

Another illustrious political family that it appears still carries the name of a major slave owner is the Hogg dynasty, which includes the former cabinet minister Douglas Hogg. They are the descendants of Charles McGarel, a merchant who made a fortune from slave ownership. Between 1835 and 1837 he received £129,464, about £101m in today’s terms, for the 2,489 slaves he owned. McGarel later went on to bring his younger brother-in-law Quintin Hogg into his hugely successful sugar firm, which still used indentured labour on plantations in British Guyana established under slavery. And it was Quintin’s descendants that continued to keep the family name in the limelight, with both his son, Douglas McGarel Hogg, and his grandson, Quintin McGarel Hogg, becoming Lord Chancellor.

Dr Draper said: “Seeing the names of the slave-owners repeated in 20th‑century family naming practices is a very stark reminder about where those families saw their origins being from. In this case I’m thinking about the Hogg family. To have two Lord Chancellors in Britain in the 20th century bearing the name of a slave-owner from British Guiana, who went penniless to British Guyana, came back a very wealthy man and contributed to the formation of this political dynasty, which incorporated his name into their children in recognition – it seems to me to be an illuminating story and a potent example.”

Mr Hogg refused to comment yesterday, saying he “didn’t know anything about it”. Mr Cameron declined to comment after a request was made to the No 10 press office.

Another demonstration of the extent to which slavery links stretch into modern Britain is Evelyn Bazalgette, the uncle of one of the giants of Victorian engineering, Sir Joseph Bazalgette and ancestor of Arts Council boss Sir Peter Bazalgette. He was paid £7,352 (£5.7m in today’s money) for 420 slaves from two estates in Jamaica. Sir Peter said yesterday: “It had always been rumoured that his father had some interests in the Caribbean and I suspect Evelyn inherited that. So I heard rumours but this confirms it, and guess it’s the sort of thing wealthy people on the make did in the 1800s. He could have put his money elsewhere but regrettably he put it in the Caribbean.”

The TV chef Ainsley Harriott, who had slave-owners in his family on his grandfather’s side, said yesterday he was shocked by the amount paid out by the government to the slave-owners. “You would think the government would have given at least some money to the freed slaves who need to find homes and start new lives,” he said. “It seems a bit barbaric. It’s like the rich protecting the rich.”

The database is available from Wednesday at: ucl.ac.uk/lbs.

Cruel trade

Slavery on an industrial scale was a major source of the wealth of the British empire, being the exploitation upon which the West Indies sugar trade and cotton crop in North America was based. Those who made money from it were not only the slave-owners, but also the investors in those who transported Africans to enslavement. In the century to 1810, British ships carried about three million to a life of forced labour.

Campaigning against slavery began in the late 18th century as revulsion against the trade spread. This led, first, to the abolition of the trade in slaves, which came into law in 1808, and then, some 26 years later, to the Act of Parliament that would emancipate slaves. This legislation made provision for the staggering levels of compensation for slave-owners, but gave the former slaves not a penny in reparation.

More than that, it said that only children under six would be immediately free; the rest being regarded as “apprentices” who would, in exchange for free board and lodging, have to work for their “owners” 40 and a half hours for nothing until 1840. Several large disturbances meant that the deadline was brought forward and so, in 1838, 700,000 slaves in the West Indies, 40,000 in South Africa and 20,000 in Mauritius were finally liberated.

David Randall

Nathan Rothschild Loses Libel Suit

Nathan Rothschild Loses Libel Suit

Posted: 25 Feb 2013 01:28 PM PST

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/rothschild-loses-libel-case-and-reveals-secret-world-of-money-and-politics-6720015.html

Rothschild loses libel case, and reveals secret world of money and politics
Thanks to billionaire’s legal battle, we now know a lot more about how the super-rich work
TOM PECK    SATURDAY 11 FEBRUARY 2012

With his long limbs and delicate gait, Lord Mandelson could no doubt manage a quite convincing turn in Thunderbirds.

He’d find Jeff Tracy most convivial: a billionaire astronaut with his own Pacific island, and now, it seems, he even has his own camera-shy friend to pull the strings.

According to the High Court, Nathaniel Rothschild, scion of the banking dynasty and friend of seemingly everyone in the spheres of finance, business and politics, is indeed “puppet master” to the Baron of Hartlepool and Foy.

The banker and Bullingdon boy has lost his libel case against the Daily Mail, which he sued for “substantial damages” over its account of his and Mr Mandelson’s extraordinary trip to Russia in January 2005.

Mr Rothschild claimed he was subjected to “sustained and unjustified” attacks in the May 2010 article, which portrayed him as a “puppet master”, dangling his friend Lord Mandelson in front of the Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska to ease the passage of colossal business deals.

Messrs Rothschild and Mandelson’s Russian trip would certainly have made entertaining viewing, but maybe not for Thunderbirds fans. Nobody needed rescuing, that’s for certain.

It began on Mr Rothschild’s private jet from the World Economic Forum in Davos to Moscow, where they met Mr Deripaska, the aluminium plant manager who became the richest oligarch of them all, and continued on Mr Deripaska’s private jet to his chalet in Siberia, where “to beat jet lag” they were whipped with birch leaves before plunging themselves into icy water – a traditional Siberian banya.


Less salacious, but seemingly more sordid, was an earlier dinner at Cantinetta Antinori, a fashionable Tuscan restaurant in Moscow. Mr Deripaska, the Mail had claimed, was dining with executives from the US aluminium giant Alcoa, negotiating a £250m deal to buy two of Mr Deripaska’s aluminium plants, at which a stumbling block was an EU import tariff on Russian aluminium. Enter Lord Mandelson, then a lowly Mister, but at the time the EU Trade Commissioner. The deal is done, costing several hundred British jobs, and the tariffs come down.

Mr Rothschild claimed the trip was “purely recreational”, and Associated Newspapers had to admit during litigation that it couldn’t be sure that Mr Mandelson had joined Mr Deripaska at dinner or whether aluminium tariffs were discussed, and in fact the deal had been struck before Mr Mandelson and Mr Rothschild arrived in Moscow. But for Mr Justice Tugenhadt, recreation it was not.

“So far as Lord Mandelson was concerned the benefit was the trip and the hospitality itself. So far as Mr Deripaska was concerned it was a relationship with the EU Trade Commissioner,” he said in his ruling. The judge rejected the notion that Mr Rothschild and Mr Mandelson had flown out as friends, not business associates, and said Mr Rothschild’s behaviour had in part been “inappropriate”. “That conduct foreseeably brought Lord Mandelson’s public office and personal integrity into disrepute,” the judge said.

Mr Rothschild’s “different and developing” accounts of the Siberia trip were confusing, he continued, adding that on this subject the banker had not been entirely candid.

Mr Rothschild said he was disappointed with the judgement and intended to appeal. “The truth is, as the Daily Mail has now accepted, that I had nothing whatsoever to do with this deal and that it had in any event been completed before Lord Mandelson and I even arrived in Moscow,” he said in a statement. Disputing the judge’s findings, he added: “Lord Mandelson’s trip to Russia was entirely recreational – as the court has accepted – and Lord Mandelson had obtained clearance for the trip from his office before undertaking it.”

Puppet masters, of course, do not like the limelight, but when one pulls quite as many strings as Mr Rothschild would appear to, things will inevitably go wrong. Indeed, it is not the first time this seemingly unlikely trio has conspired to make the headlines. When Mr Deripaska moored his yacht next to the Rothschild family villa in the summer of 2008, they, along with George Osborne, managed to tie themselves up in an even more spectacular imbroglio.

Either on the yacht or in the villa, Lord Mandelson might have said unkind things about Gordon Brown and Mr Rothschild is alleged to have suggested that Mr Deripaska might be interested in making a donation to the Tories. Via the two politicians it all ended up in the press – the last place their two hosts like seeing themselves.

That leading politicians, bankers and businessmen associate with each other in fashions that blur the boundaries between work and pleasure is a secret too great to be maintained with any success, but it doesn’t make the details, on the rare occasions they actually emerge, any more palatable.

A spokesman for the Daily Mail said: “This case is a reminder, at a time when newspapers are under attack for invading privacy, that the rich and powerful regularly use the law to prevent legitimate scrutiny of their activities. Had the Mail lost this case, it could have incurred costs of more than one million pounds.

“Not many news organisations, however committed they are to free speech, can afford to risk a loss of that magnitude. As Lord Justice Leveson’s inquiry considers the balance between privacy and freedom of expression, the chilling effect on free speech that court cases like this one exert needs to be borne in mind.”

OPPT Terminology Defined

OPPT Terminology Defined

Posted: 26 Feb 2013 11:21 AM PST

OPPT Terminology Defined
by Heather Ann Tucci-Jarraf
I realize this may bring up just as many questions as it does answers. So, I suggest these words BE used as a tool to go within, where we can all find what we already KNOW.
– Brian
DEFINITIONS

Source = First Source of all that IS, also known as Creator, Universal Father, God, Allah, Yahweh, and any other title, label or limitation given to First Source by the creations of First Source.

Co-Creator = Eternal Heart created by and from Source, BE’ing.

Universal Contract = Agreement by and between Co-Creator, Eternal Heart, and Source to experience separation, or otherwise contrasts of the whole, Absolute, Source.

Bondservant = Temporary Designation of Co-Creator, Eternal Heart as party to a Universal Contract with Source.

State of Body = the Co-Creator’s chosen manifestation, vehicle, transmitting utility, created to carry out the terms and conditions of the Universal Contract.

CVAC = creation’s value asset centers and each BE’ing in Source’s Universe is a CVAC, individually and equally to all others, with each CVAC granted and guaranteed the right to BE and DO what they BE by their free will choice and the opportunity to exercise that right without prejudice and without damage to any other CVAC, UILO UCC Doc. No. 2012128325.

CVAC SYSTEM (registered as “GOVERNMENT”) = a stationary and consistent planetary system to provide assistance without prejudice to any CVAC in their BE’ing and DO’ing what they BE, but only providing assistance to the CVAC when and in the manner the CVAC chooses by their free will, UILO UCC Doc. No. 2012128324.

CVAC BRANCH = a local stationary BRANCH of the CVAC SYSTEM that can provide customized assistance (language, cultural, etc.) immediately without prejudice to any CVAC that asks for assistance, but only providing assistance to the CVAC when and in the manner the CVAC chooses by their free will, UILO UCC Doc. No. 2012128325.

CVAC SYSTEM’S (registered as “GOVERNMENT”) SYSTEMS OF ASSISTANCE = systems of assistance that PAY focused ATTENTION to specific areas, such as treasury, technology, education, health, and other areas, in order to bring the Absolute Data of that specific area on to the table of Transparency for the sole purpose of assisting any CVAC so that any CVAC has the opportunity to make informed choices by their free will. Each of the focused and specific areas work transparently and interdependently to bring forth Absolute Data and to give assistance to any CVAC as the CVAC chooses by their free will, UILO UCC Doc. No. 2012128324/2012128325.

UILO = UNIVERSAL and INTERNATIONAL LAW ORDINANCE, a part and sub-section of LAW ORDINANCE and its records, that are issued by Co-Creators with full responsibility and under full liability of the Co-Creator that issues it… Universal Law Ordinance is noticed by action or inaction while International Law Ordinance, inclusive of its National, and State departments, is noticed by public registration.

Judge guilty of Corruption & Treason- Let the Enforcement Begin!

Judge guilty of Corruption & Treason- Let the Enforcement Begin!

Posted: 26 Feb 2013 11:32 AM PST

File:Lynn Nettleton Hughes.jpg
Judge Lynn Nettleton Hughes

Judge guilty of Corruption & Treason- Let the Enforcement Begin!

Here is the original post from Removing the Shackles:
A MAN PURPORTING TO BE A PUBLIC OFFICIAL OF THE PEOPLE, WHO IS UNWILLING OR INCAPABLE OF PRODUCING DULY VERIFIED DOCUMENTATION OF HIS STANDING, AUTHORITY AND THE LAW HE IS USING TO OPERATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST ANOTHER WHO STANDS IN TRANSPARENCY, IN BE’ING, COMMITS ONGOING TREASON AND OTHER HEINOUS CRIMES AGAINST THAT BE’ING.  A MAN PURPORTING TO BE A PUBLIC OFFICER OF THE PEOPLE, AND TAKES PRE-PAYMENT FROM THOSE PEOPLE, WHO IS INCAPABLE AND UNWILLING TO BE TRANSPARENT AND OPERATE WITH FULL RESPONSIBILITY AND LIABILITY WHEN DEMANDED BY ANY ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE, COMMITS AN ONGOING FRAUD AGAINST THE VERY PEOPLE HE PURPORTS TO SERVE AND TAKES PAYMENT FROM.  A MAN WHO SPEWS PROCLAMATIONS THAT DULY VERIFIED SWORN DECLARATIONS REGISTERED AND RECORDED BY ANY BE’ING ARE GOBBLYGOOK, YET REFUSES TO DULY VERIFY, SWEAR, DECLARE AND REGISTER HIS OWN PROCLAMATIONS INTO THE RECORD WITH FULL RESPONSIBILITY IS THE VERY EVIDENCE OF THE TRUE UNLAWFUL AND ILLEGAL GOBBLYGOOK IN ACTION.  SUCH A MAN BE NO MAN AT ALL….SUCH A MAN BE GUILTY OF TREASON, FRAUD, AND OTHER HEINOUS CRIMES DUE TO HIS OWN FREE WILL CHOICE TO NOT BE RESPONSIBLE, AND LIABLE FOR HIS OWN ACTIONS PURPORTEDLY DONE AS A PUBLIC OFFICER OF THE PEOPLE HE DAMAGES, FORECLOSING ON ANY ABILITY TO CRY ANY DEFENCE FOR HIS KNOWING, WILLING AND INTENTIONAL CHOICES TO BE TRANSPARENTLY CORRUPT AS A MATTER OF LAW, MATTER OF FACT, AND AS A MATTER OF PUBLIC POLICY.  [JUDGE]’S SELF-JUDGEMENT BY HIS CHOSEN ACTIONS TO BE CORRUPT ARE NOW A MATTER OF RECORD…AND ALL HE HOPES FOR NOW IS THAT THERE IS NO ENFORCEMENT OF HIS CHOSEN SELF-JUDGEMENT FOR HIS ACTS OF CORRUPTION.  ENFORCEMENT BEGIN!

File:Lynn Nettleton Hughes.jpg

This is email that I received from Stacy,  Patrick Cody Morgan’s sister who has been keeping us updated on Cody’s illegal incarceration.

Yesterday, in a travesty of justice, Cody was sentenced to 27 years in prison for a crime he DID NOT COMMIT!!!!  The Pope, Queen and others got 25 years for GENOCIDE!!!  What is wrong with this picture??  My family is devastated – they do not know about you, WONDERFUL people.  They don’t have the hope that I do that this wrong will be righted.
Cody is on his way to a FEDERAL facility today, where, we have no idea.  I hope and pray we hear from him soon.  We will get the transcript in a day or so of yesterday’s proceedings.  They kept cutting off his mike and we know the recording, so we don’t know if EVERYTHING that was said by either the judge or Cody is completely on the transcript.  Cody was so eloquent and the judge was flustered because Cody called him on so many things.
Previously, in his trial, he would not even sit in the Defendant’s chair as he said, he was not consenting to being the defendant, as they had NO jurisdiction over a “living man”.  He never really defended himself at trial.  When the judge mentioned this, yesterday, Cody said, “I was NOT going to defend myself against fabricated fraud and lies.  That was what the jury was presiding over.  I let my paperwork stand as my defense.  I filed my Affidavit of Facts and backed it up with a Bond.  YOU have NEVER refuted ONE of my facts, you were defaulted out and you, still have never rebutted anything.  I find that very curious.”
I KNOW the judge was VERY surprised that Cody was so eloquent and KNEW what he was talking about and countered the judge at every turn with correct information, but the judge “glossed” over EVERYTHING.  Much of that info we know the other attorney’s had no idea what they were talking about.  They know about procedure, not law and not about what you and I now know and about what Heather uncovered.  These judges are “schooled” in it all and how to deal with people like Cody.  They just railroad them and try to make them out to be those “crazy sovereigns”.
Some of it was actually funny and I wonder if the judge just made it up as he went along – he said, according to jurisdiction, that when he woke up every morning he “poked” himself and there was his jurisdiction – ???  He also said that he ran an Article III court – only one in America is in New York – Court of International Trade, which Cody filed his case.  (We don’t know if they took it on because they said they had to see if THEY had jurisdiction).  Cody said, on the record – that is a lie!
Cody made his points and when asked by the judge if he had anything else to say before his sentencing, Cody turned to the courtroom and told EVERYONE that he was NOT acquiescing to ANY of the proceedings and would NOT plead to something that he HAD NOT DONE!!  He called the judge’s court a KANGAROO court several times.  He accepted for value everything they threw at him, for the record, several times, including his sentence.
It was so horrible to feel so helpless to not be able to help this incredible man.  I PROMISE I’m not saying that as his sister, but when you meet him you’ll know what I mean.  YES!!!! He will be an incredible force to have to help with paperwork, etc… for your organization.  He understands this probably as close as Heather does.
I don’t know what the next step is to get this overturned and those responsible BEHIND BARS for all of this, but I would PRAY that all of you help us.  I thank you from the bottom of my heart for what you have already shared with your readers and their help with their letters.
Sincerely,
Stacy