Newsletter 6th March. 2016

This newsletter has two topics:

Being your own Banker Part 1 of 2 (main item)

Live radio broadcast

On Wednesday 9th March at 7.30 p.m. New York (00.30 London, 01.30 Berling 10th March) I have, once again, been invited to be the "star guest" on the "Supernaturalgirlz" radio show on the Inception Radio Network. The theme this time is, I am told, abundance - a topic upon which I can claim some degree of expertise. The main topic of this newsletter and, especially, part 2 next week are in the same vein.

If you're not a regular newsletter reader, be sure to get your copy next week by using the sign-up form at the bottom of this page.

top

Being your own Banker
- a Merlin’s Solution

What is a contract?
Now, I only know this because I had to take law as part of my professional qualifications in international trade and shipping. Our lecturer (back in 1976) was a slightly mad Welshman with a sense of humour similar to my own so I remember a lot of what he taught us.

A contract is NOT a piece of paper; it is an agreement to exchange goods or services.

Most commonly, one of the parties agrees to give the other a sum of money upon delivery of whatever it is that the other is offering (i.e. selling, usually). Most contracts are, in fact, never written down.

When you go into a baker’s and ask for a piece of cake, the baker asks for a sum of money in exchange and you get your wallet out. That is a contract enforceable at law.

Sometimes, when the parties wish to be very clear about exactly what is being “sold” and how much and when is to be paid then they may well put this in writing which they both sign. The document, however, is not the contract but evidence of an intent to contract. Note this well, both parties put their name to the contract, i.e. sign it - this is very important.

Now, when you go to a bank with the intent to borrow money, the contract bears only one name, i.e. only you sign the “loan agreement”. If you read it very, very carefully, you should perceive that the reason that the banker doesn’t sign it is because he/she is not a party to the contract - only you are. In the loan agreement, you promise to pay the banker a very large commission for arranging a loan. (When purchasing a house, for example, this can easily be twice the price of the house itself.) So who, then, is the other party to the contract? Who is “lending” you the money?

Well, you are!

The other party to the contract is your future self. This is why only you are empowered to sign the loan agreement.

Well, if this is so, how come the seller gets $60,000.00 you may well ask? The truth is that he doesn’t! What he gets is a promise from your banker to his banker to try to get the $60,000.00 for him. His banker uses this promise as though it were money and adds it to his own nett assets. He, then, “creates” $60,000.00 out of thin air - the notorious “phantom money” - and gives the seller a credit line of $60,000.00.

So, a quick recap:
You “buy” a house for $60,000.00
You “borrow” this money from your future income.
You pay the banker $180,000.00 for arranging this loan.
The seller’s banker receives a promise from your banker to maybe, someday give him $60,000.00 from YOUR future income.
The seller’s banker uses this promise to create $60,000.00 of phantom money.
The seller gets a promise to make $60,000.00 credit available to him.
The seller can then give parts or all of this phantom money credit to other people from whom he is buying goods or services.

At no point in this process does any bank enter into any liability nor does any cash change hands!

It is only if the seller demands payment in cash that the banker has any liability to him.

At law, money on your bank “account” belongs not to you but to the banker! This follows a decision in the House of Lords in London in 1838 (I think) which was quickly followed by all other governments around the planet. It is only when you demand payment in cash that your banker has any liability to you. Until then you are, at best, an unsecured creditor, i.e. someone gambling at his/her own risk upon the integrity of a banker. Recent experience has shown very clearly that this is a very risky bet indeed but a gambler you are. That is your true status at law!

In order to eliminate all possible liability, bankers world-wide are presently trying to restrict you from demanding more than $5000.00 in cash. By 2018 they intend to eliminate all cash transactions thus turning their “business” from about 97% to 100% profit.

This is your present state of affairs

Now, it doesn’t take much intelligence or knowledge to see through the bluster and downright lies of the bankers to find out what is actually going on. So why, you may ask, do you, all your family members and everyone else that you know personally owe the bankers, via your government, around $42,000.00? (National "debt") Is your country really so poor that it can only continue to function as a “charitable act” of a banker?

There is a club, called the “Bilderberg Group”. It got this name because it first came into public gaze in 1954 when it met in the Bilderberg Hotel in Holland. Its origins are easily traceable to the late 19th century and there are strong indications that it was already active in mediaeval Europe.

The “owners” of the club are the bankers. The “Grand Master” is Rothschild. In all major countries, in order to attain any high public post, a pre-requisite is to be invited to a Bilderberg meeting. There you will be offered a job (president, prime minister, whatever) and swear upon pain of excruciating death and purgatory - yes, they do have techniques with which they can continue to torture you after death if you don’t know how to eliminate them - to follow the orders of the bankers.

In reality, therefore, the world is run by a dictator called Rothschild and all the “elected governments” are merely marionettes carrying out his orders. So, when Rothschild tells your government to “borrow” money from him to “rescue” the failing banks, they do it even though it is the worst possible choice for you and your fellow countrymen. The correct choice in 2008 would have been to confiscate all the banks and banker’s assets, cancel all bank debt, guarantee all bank account deposits and create a “people’s bank” owned by all citizens and to remove all legal immunities from the banks.

The charging of interest should be made a crime as this is the root cause of more than 70% of all civil and criminal strife.

Hey, what do you know? The Kingdom of Germany has already done all this!

Don’t miss next week’s exciting episode “Outbonking the Bankers”.

Blessed be

Karma

6th March 2016

top

Please forward this on to all friends and family using this link:

www.hecrl.com/bb1en

If you have german speaking friends, please use this link:

www.hecrl.com/bb1de (available from 8th March)

The moment in which mankind stands up and acts purposefully