A Short Preview:

“You’ll own nothing.”
~ World Economic Forum prediction

By Catherine Austin Fitts

Upon surviving a mass atrocity, you come to understand the criminal nature of the financial syndicates roaming the planet. Human rights are everywhere threatened. So are property rights.

Private property is important. It is family wealth that creates community wealth and stands between us and the abyss in emergencies or challenging times. Remove our assets and our access to wealth-building, and we lose our independence and the reserves that make the difference. We lose the entrepreneurial seed corn that creates an enlightened and productive society. If we own nothing in a world with central transaction control, we are no more than slaves.

For several decades, we have watched growing bubbles in the fixed-income markets. It became more than clear during the financial crisis of 2008–2012 that our collateral system was marked by high levels of fraud. Ultimately, the bailouts—supposedly necessitated by a collapse in the mortgage and housing markets—were more than 300% of the amount needed to retire all the single-family mortgages in the United States. In the process, we have experienced events that create serious questions about the ability of banking creditors and investors to compromise investor and depositor assets and the willingness of regulators and courts to allow them to do so. Such events include:

  • The collapse of the Madoff fraud controlled by JPMorgan Chase
  • The resolutions of Lehman, Bear Stearns, and MF Global
  • The HSBC settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice
  • The U.S. Treasury and New York Fed role in the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank
  • The acquisition of Credit Suisse by UBS

The result has been increased concerns about the dangers of bail-ins of our bank deposits in an engineered consolidation of the banking system. This is compounded by increased concerns regarding the potential destruction or confiscation of our real estate through regulation and taxation inspired by “climate change.” It also includes questions regarding the ownership and custody of securities described in a new book titled The Great Taking by retired hedge fund manager David Webb.

Originally from Cleveland, Ohio, David has studied the financial and human harm caused to several generations of his family by engineered pumps and dumps of the U.S. economy. Committed to protecting himself and his family, David had a successful career in the hedge fund business. Concerned by the corruption in the U.S. financial system (made clear during the financial crisis), David moved to Sweden, convinced that his assets would be safer in the Swedish securities, banking, and custodian systems. Then, as the Swedish and European systems aligned with U.S. practices, he continued to research the byzantine developments taking place in the legal and financial nuts and bolts being engineered in the backrooms of the global financial systems.

Persuaded that Mr. Global has now created a global mechanism to assert creditor rights over all securities, David lays out his case in The Great Taking. David bases his analysis on statements made by regulators as to what they can do. Carolyn and I still cannot document the legal pathway behind these statements. I believe that much of what David describes were mechanisms created to keep the collateral bubble going. David points to changes in the Uniform Commercial Code that we do not understand—more research here would be invaluable.

We do not agree with David’s analysis of money velocity. Centralization and criminality remove trust from the system, bringing on a drop in money velocity. Growth without inflation is more than possible, but it will require a change in the governance and central banking systems. Where we do agree is that the central bankers intend to strip us of our assets and property rights. If the central bankers achieve financial transaction control, they will indeed be able to engineer a “great taking.” The pandemic destruction of small businesses and family income was simply a small taste of what will then be possible.

This coming week, David joins Carolyn Betts and me to describe his journey from money manager to author, help us understand the documents and evidence supporting his conclusions (yes, this gets into lots of technical issues regarding securities) and the general assault on our property rights, and share his thoughts on what we do about it all. We are deeply grateful for David’s research and his willingness to share it broadly. His work proves once again that the deterioration in the integrity of our legal and financial systems creates unacceptable risks – including for the very wealthy.

I will review a list of “takings” covering all asset classes with Dr. Farrell in the Annual Wrap Up – News, Trends & Stories Part I in January, so stay tuned for that as well.

Get the Book

Related Solari Reports and Videos:

All the Plenary’s Men

JP Madoff with Helen Chaitman

Stopping the Steal with John Titus

Book Review: Bailout by Neil Barofsky


55 Comments

  1. The authority for any congressional law comes from the US Constitution. Likewise authority for any state law comes from the state constitution.

    Last year, agencies and special interests in my state worked together to write laws circumventing constitutions and common law. They were afraid they would have to give back PREP money and were fixing things for “the next time.” I learned this late in the session when I called an agency about an unconstitutional bill that involved them.

    Basically, the bills assumed powers the federal government doesn’t have. For example when the federal government “legally declares” a public health emergency (something they can’t do) certain state powers are triggered.

    There was a data privacy bill which appeared to protect privacy but enacted federal statutes in the bill. And those sneaky laws shred privacy.

    Another bill gave sovereign immunity to state contractors to “be more like the federal government.”

    The federal government has very limited authority. State authority is much broader. Their apparent strategy is to empower federal agencies and legitimize federal laws by reference in state law thus conferring state power. This is unconstitutional as it enlarges federal authority without amending the Constitution.

    Unfortunately, state legislators and the people believe federal law is the supreme law of the land. Many lawyers are conditioned to look at statutes, instead of constitutions and common law. Our understanding of the rule of law is being eroded. David Webb’s statement that they’re just acting as though this is the law is evident in my state. They’ll do it until someone stops them.

    There’s some good news. Every year over 1,000 bills are filed one month before session. Most bills are junk and it’s hard to read them all. A small group of citizens, with a retired attorney helping them, saw some of the bad bills and successfully blocked them by alerting a small group of honest legislators. They’re better organized this year.

    I believe each of us has more power than we know.

      1. I agree. Money is at the root of it. The lobbyists have conditioned legislators to believe they can’t do anything that interferes with the money. When constituents testified about the abusive treatment of relatives in hospitals and nursing homes during covid the lobbyists pleaded, oh don’t put us in the middle, that’s CMS, they’ll cut our money if we don’t do as told and we’re barely making it. The legislators dutifully made notes not to touch that issue. Total BS! The government can’t pay someone to violate our rights but they are. I heard this same money argument recently in testimony before Congress.

        I believe this will come down to the people remembering their rights – the sooner the better.

      2. Agree that the States are addicted to federal money. My state’s governor kept “covid emergency” going for months just for the federal money, as well as continuing to house major federal bases and agencies. Addicted to “free” money.

        1. Hi Hilda, good comments. Years ago, I remember my grandparents saying NO to free handouts. “I pay my own way,” they would say. Where is that mindset in today’s society?

  2. The Greatest Take Away of all is our ‘life’ through a Birth Certificate which we think is for us. Is that not ‘bondage’ for a wo/man to be held to a piece of paper? (curiously though, are these certificates traded on exchanges and cleared through DTCC? I’m sure David Webb knows …)

    The simple fix, and to bypass all UCC crap, is to recognize our creation began with fertilization [not the same as conception], which is 9 months before a DOB on birth certificates. Try NOT putting a birthday on a government form or retirement account and you’ll see what I mean.

    Simply stated, the birth certificate represents a piece of biology, the afterbirth, cut-off during mom’s delivery** of baby. It’s your godly origin that got you here – your Ark of Covenant. It’s then put into a trust and overseen by Catholic Church (fallen angel or ‘human creature’ referred to in Unam Sanctam of 1302) & State (as a ligan to be salvaged). All statutes are for it (Ens Legis or ‘creature of law’) and not the baby/man because again, that would be involuntary slavery or anti-13th amendment, right?

    This is not Anna Von Reitz stuff… this deprogramming information is too vital to leave it to the likes of Anna and her massive paperwork solutions. It’s much simpler to apply if we first learn the biological basics (which is encoded in the Bible). So if one wants to learn more, head over to Kurtis R. Kallenbach at https://www.buzzsprout.com/1867003. He’s on Facebook too.

    ** Medical definition of ‘delivery’ is baby and extra-embryonic remains. Imagine that the placenta is cut-off from baby before it can nourish the baby with 30% of its sustenance. That’s mayhem, larceny, and genocide in each instance where doctors cut the umbilical chord instead of letting placenta fall off naturally about 3 days later (aka Lotus Birth).

  3. Terrific discussion, exactly the kind of thing I rely on Solari for!

    Can some one help me with following this argument?

    Granted, that there have been bankruptcies in the US where customer accounts have been taken, so this does happen, whether it has been legal or not. So we can accept that this can happen.

    However; do I understand this discussion correctly?

    1. Brokers have individual customer records
    2. Individual customer records still exist at the custodian level
    3. Nevertheless, actual legal ownership of both bonds and equities have been swept into regional depositories, one for the US (and Canada?) and one for western Europe. Similar to customer deposits at a bank, owners of securities are creditors, not owners.
    4. Derivative liabilities are at a lower level, at the financial institutions. While they may be systemically important, they are not at the same level as the regional depository.

    Here is where I don’t understand the theory. At the regional level of the depositories, systemically important banks who lose on derivatives, can be bailed out through money creation.

    Money creation would be far more popular than taking everyone’s savings, and pension funds.

    Most importantly, a taking like that would end not only the derivatives markets, all financial institutions, but also all securities and collateral markets for centuries, perhaps millennia, to come. No one will trust his or her assets to a third party, there will be an immediate explosion of alternate currencies and black markets. See the Japanese emperors cancellation of the previous ruler’s currency, and he consequences of that, in the Middle Ages, for a parallel.

    I understand that global leaders want total centralized control, but doing this immediately dismantles their control system, and ends the world they rely on.

    So perhaps we ought to cheer it on? What am I missing?

    1. IMO not before they have complete transaction control and even then if I were Mr. Global I would continue to use the equity markets for a variety of purposes. I would not collapse them. So when it comes to remedies, this is the taking I am the least concerned about in the new to intermediate term. As I said to one person, why would a housewife give away here vacuum cleaner when she was only halfway done cleaning the house?

      1. Yes, complete control is needed to stop the impromptu markets, and I think you have said, and i agree, that is probably impossible to achieve.
        Well, were I someone who wanted to control all assets (and how exhausting that sounds!), I would pick off groups one by one, with an explanation of how that group deserved it, but it seems to me they don’t need new legislation to do that.
        Thanks for the answer!

  4. Let’s find out when this UCC code was passed in various states, and get to work. I have an old high school friend who worked at a caucus here in Washington– I will yey contacting her to figure out how to find when it came up and when it was voted on.

  5. Hi Catherine: you asked about how to bring about changes to the UCC. I don’t suggest going to a commercial attorney to do this. We focus on lawsuits. Not legislation. Rather, I suggest you go to a law school professor. All of the law schools teach the Uniform Commercial Code. The courses are required to graduate. So they’re all doing research on the subject, I’m sure you can find somebody who would be interested in researching and publishing.

  6. Catherine,

    I read David’s book this week and we appreciated the conversation with Carolyn & David, thank you for having it and making it available. A couple of things come to mind in terms of awareness and action.

    First, this strikes me as comparable to the early days of the pandemic. A few were already aware of and had well considered concerns about an unregulated pharmaceutical industry, but most were snoozing to the narrative’s tune. The in-your-face nature of the op woke a growing number, but many still slumber unperturbed. There is a lot of work to be done in order to rouse people to this issue.

    Your comment about the byzantine nature of the UCC was heartening; I was struggling just with the Fed’s response to the EC Legal Certainty group, let alone attempting to look at the underlying law. The comment about finding UCC attorneys who were were not already corrupted was sobering, but it sparks an idea. What about reaching out to folks like David Martin, Steve Kirsch, Ed Dowd and getting them involved in the conversations around this. Perhaps you have a better list of people to enlist. David Webb is a lone voice with little presence in the alternative media world, Solari is a potential amplifier.

    At a minimum, we can all raise this issue with our financial planners & brokers.

    Keep up the great work, we appreciate you & your associates!

    –Larry (& Jill)

    1. Martin and Kirsch are not the way to go. Will check in with Ed and his team. Have been working through attorneys who are less visible. Keep looking!

      1. We had also thought to suggest contacting attorney Aaron Siri as well law professor Francis Boyle; perhaps they might be so gracious as to offer referrals to UCC attorneys, and/or help with brainstorming ideas and extending awareness specific to Webb’s work?  ~Jill (of Larry & Jill)

          1. One more thought, Dr. Meryl Nass knows law really well (from my layperson perspective) ~Jill (of Larry & Jill)

  7. Catherine,
    I have seen David Webb‘s documentary. Also, I watched Heiko Schöning‘s interview on Austrian Alternative Media. He mentioned that biological or bacteria warfare will not start before spring 2025. Basically, Mr Global will wait until the next presidential election and inauguration. How feasible do you think this date is? How can I or all of us contribute this from happening? Best, Christian

    1. In my experience low grade bio warfare has been ongoing since at least 1995-96. Not sure why Heiko would be presenting at as the coming Big Bang. There are so many BIG BANGS predicted, I should make a list!

Comments are closed.