The Catastrophic Threat of Bail-Ins…”A “bail-in” is when a bank confiscates private property in its own possession, to indemnify itself for losses it has suffered.”
BullionBullsCanada.com
21 December 2015
It is now more than 2 ½ years since the Cyprus Steal: the first “bail-in” perpetrated in the Western world. Before reviewing the history of this newest, financial atrocity, it is necessary to begin with definition of terms.
A “bail-in” is when a bank confiscates private property in its own possession, to indemnify itself for losses it has suffered. It is a totally lawless theft of assets, as there is no principle of law (of any kind) which could authorize such a seizure of private property – and many principles of law which demonstrate the lawlessness at work here. As with much of this financial-crime jargon, it is simply another gibberish euphemism, like “quantitative easing” or “derivatives”.
As custodians of the financial assets of other people, namely their clients, banks represent a form of trustee. The purpose of any trust relationship is to provide absolute security to the beneficiary of the trust (i.e. the legal owner of the property). Thus one of the most-fundamental principles of our legal system is the principle of non-encroachment regarding the property held in the custody of a trustee.
From a legal standpoint; it is as if there is an invisible, impenetrable wall which surrounds the trust property. The only exceptions to this, ever, are when the trust beneficiary makes a legal request for some disbursement or related transaction, or when the trust itself directs some form of action (in the interests of the trust beneficiary), or where the trust allows the trustee to manage the trust assets on behalf of the beneficiary.
The idea of a trustee using assets for their own benefit, or (worse) claiming ownership of any/all trust assets represents one of the most-serious forms of financial crime in Western civilization, and banks had already been granted limited exemptions to this legal principle. Given this context; how did the government of Cyprus respond when its own Big Banks whined that they “needed” to confiscate the deposits of their own deposit-holders, in order to pay off the debts from their own, reckless gambling? It meekly rubber-stamped this lawless theft.
How did other Western governments react to the violation of one of the most-sacred legal principles in our entire financial system? They simply nodded their heads in unison, and, as a single chorus pronounced the Cyprus Steal to be “a precedent” – i.e. a template for future systemic financial crime in their own regimes.
How do we know that the Cyprus Steal was a scripted event (by the Big Banks), apart from the perfect choreography demonstrated by Western governments immediately after this act of theft? To begin with, all of the Big Money deposit-holders in Cyprus had already moved their money out of Cyprus banks, before the Big Banks began their raping-and-pillaging. The “fix” was in.
The Rest…HERE
