le 06032015 C4

Hello all;

Ron Paul is a member of the US Congress, where it is 14 ° District of Texas, and has a reputation for being one of the main defender of freedoms. It is counsel in Washington a govern limited, a very low tax, free markets, and a return to sound monetary practices based on a secured currency on a real asset. He was candidate for the US presidential election of 2008 (http://www.ronpaul.org/)

If the Fed has nothing to hide, it has nothing to fear

Since the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913 the dollar has lost more than 97% of its purchasing power, the U.S. economy has suffered a long series of heavy recessions and depressions generated by the Fed, and the Government has taken a dangerous extent thanks to the Fed debt monetization policies. And yet, the Federal Reserve continues to operate under a shroud of privacy created by Congress.

It is not surprising that 75% of the American public supports the requests for an audit of the Federal Reserve.

The new leaders of the Senate have promised to hold a vote this year in respect of the audit of the Fed, but despite the undeniable support of the public, the passage of this Act is in no way assured.

The reason why its passage could be difficult is that the 25% of Americans who oppose represent some of the most powerful political interests of the country. These interests are working behind the scenes to kill the bird in the egg or substitute a compromise without any value. This compromise could offer us limited transparency, but it would nevertheless prevent Americans learn the truth about the monetary policies of the Fed.

According to some opponents of the Bill, an audit would compromise the independence of the Fed. Those who see things thus are unable to point the finger any line in the text that gives Congress a new authority on the monetary policies of the Fed. More importantly, the idea that the Federal Reserve is independent of any political consideration is absurd. Economists often refers to economic cycles, which are nothing else than the adjustment of its policies by the Fed to help or put to lot of politicians. The former Governor of the Federal Reserve, Arthur Burns, exposed the truth behind the propaganda which includes the independence of the Federal Reserve saying that if he had not known what was president, the Federal Reserve would have « lost its independence.

Perhaps the Fed opposes an audit because of which was revealed by its operations in recent years. In 2010, under Act Dodd- Frank, Congress authorized an exceptional audit of its activities following the financial crisis of 208. This audit revealed that between 2007 and 2008, the Fed has lent more than 16 trillion – more than four times the annual budget of the US – foreign central banks and influential private companies.

In 2003, former officials of the Fed, Andrew Huszar, publicly apologized to the American people for his role in « the largest plan of rescue of Wall Street of all time » – the program of QE by the Fed. Can we still doubt that the Fed acts for the benefit of the elites?

Despite the improvements made by statistics economic (manipulated by the Government), the average American does not benefit by QE the Fed programs. The abysmal failure of QE in the United States is perhaps one reason that prompted Switzerland to untie its franc to the euro following the publication of reports according to which the ECB would be poised to launch its own QE programme.

EQ is the most recent chapter of a century of failures of the Federal Reserve. Despite this dark past, defenders of the Fed continue to proclaim the benefits of the federal reserve system. If it really existed, why they still refuse to let the Americans know more about its monetary policies? Why the Fed behaves as if it had something to hide, as if she was afraid an audit?

The American people has suffered enough monetary policies of its Central Bank. It is time to audit the Fed, to make it go away

independent against the Fed audit local banks , Why are they on the other hand, if they are on the other hand, there are shenanigans, and if there are scam, conbiem, is student scheming, and depending on the importance of the scam, the person will be fined, if one realizes that the scam dating from its creation, in this case, all banks have contact, are faulty

United States: independent local banks against the audit of the Fed by Congress

February 24, 2015 ·

Local banks begin to ally for combat the ‘Audit the Fed’ Bill proposal Republican Senator Rand Paul. This proposal, which would authorize an audit of the Federal Reserve (Fed) and its monetary policy by Congress, has already forced the Fed to deploy treasures of persuasion from banks, and should cause a still more intense lobbying work as it progresses politically.

Senator Rand Paul has reintroduced this proposal of law in January while a similar law had been passed by the House of representatives last year. Its text is not only to implement a comprehensive review of the Fed, it also intends to give Congress the right to look at the policies put in place by the latter, including the ability to create large amounts of currency. Since 1978, the Fed is indeed immune from any control of its monetary policy: some politicians think that transparency is time. Others are going to ask the total abolition of the institution.

Policies against the monetary policies of the Fed; It defends its independence
Designed secretly over 100 years ago by high finance, the Federal Reserve is poorly named. It is neither federal nor a reserve. It is an independent non-governmental organization, private, consisting of an office of Governors and 12 regional banks. It emits the ex nihilo currency it then lends to interest the Government and the country’s banks. The interest on several decades, and in fact several centuries, the process that began well before its creation, amounted to several thousands of billions of dollars.

The official role of this institution is to fight inflation and encourage economic growth. But it is referred by many critics. Notably accused the Fed to not perform its functions, including by incessant game of money – very definition of inflation.

The economic crisis of 2008 gave weight to this request for transparency of the Fed and the Americans massively support Senator Rand Paul in his fight. But the banking community resists. A Reuters survey of 24 banking groups shows that four of them are firmly opposed to this audit of the Fed. five other groups say that they will react probably against the audit if it was necessary.

Several banks local ‘beyond’ oppose strongly the proposal of Senator Rand Paul audit
Janet Yellen, President of the Fed, has strongly criticized this proposed legislation, like its predecessor before it, stressing the importance of the independence of his institution.

Local banks take up the argument and also fight the draft law: this is the case of the Ohio Bankers League group, which has sent 82 members in Washington this week while the draft law is in the agenda of the Congress. An example that shows that banks of all sizes are ready to fight against a review of the policy of the Fed, which they support independence. Meanwhile the Arizona Bankers Association spokesman also said that the Fed was « unnecessary ». Same thing for the banking associations of Iowa or Alabama.

Banking groups from Texas, Tennessee, Massachusetts, Virginia and Arkansas have not yet intervened because they think that the Act has no chance in Congress, but said they were ready to fight it if it were to be passed.

Control of the Fed on the entire financial system, and thus political system
This fight could be effective, these independent banking communities being very influential in Washington: they have provided over 1.3 million in political campaigns by 2013-2014. Indeed, some think that this proposal of Rand Paul could jeopardize his chances for the 2016 presidential.

« The Fed is the most important Central Bank in the world and no one wants to call it into question, » said an anonymous remained American financier.

All this sign the power and wealth of the owners of the Fed: they are such that the Fed is able to control directly or indirectly any of the financial system. And so to compel the policy.

The Motley Fool

Fear of Buffett is the opportunity

Advertorial | By David Hanson

Dear opportunistic investor,

Admitting fear is difficult.

You can therefore imagine how shocked I had know Warren Buffett recently said a number of investors on the technology that keeps him awake during the night.

In may, The Motley Fool sent 8 of its best stock analysts to Omaha, Nebraska to attend the meeting of shareholders annual Berkshire Hathaway.CEO Warren Buffett and Vice Chairman Charlie Munger answered questions for nearly 6 hours.

Catches were: participants were not allowed to save everything. No sound. No video.

Our team of analysts wrote each pronounced Word Buffett and Munger. More than 16 000 words. But only two words were out of me that I have read the transcript of the event: ‘real threat ‘.

This is how Buffett replied when asked about this new market which should already be more than $2 trillion in the United States alone. Google has already put some of its best engineers behind the technology powering this trend.

The amazing thing is, while Buffett may be nervous that the rest of us can invest in this new industry before the old money realizes what hit them.

KPMG recommends that we are « on the cusp of the revolutionary change » come much « earlier than you think. »

Even a professor from MIT legendary should renounce its position that the technology was « beyond the capacity of the computer. » (He recently confessed to the Wall Street Journal that he is now a believer and wonder « how quickly this technology caught on. »)

Think how many incredible technologies that you have watched soar to new heights, while you launch yourself into thinking, « I knew this technology before everyone talks about, but I sat on my hands. »

Do not let this happen again. This time, it should be your family saying, ‘ I can’t believe you know and invested in this technology therefore from the outset.  »

That is why I hope that you take a few minutes to access exclusive research, our team of analysts has implemented on this sector and one of the stocks positioned to take advantage of this major change.


Has bank customer you already sentenced for money laundering or failure in the monitoring of the risks it takes in the markets? She already paid fines or compensation in France, the United States and Germany? We counted the penalties and sanctions that since the 2008 crisis, hit fourteen major banks, including six major french institutions: BNP, Société Générale, Crédit agricole, BPCE, Crédit mutuel and Banque postale. An interactive table allows you to investigate their criminal records.

Since the financial crisis of 2008, the banking scandals multiply. And all kinds. There are those directly related to the commercialization of toxic financial products that led to the crisis of the subripmes. There are rate manipulation, fraud or faults in the « risk management ». Not to mention tax evasion or laundering money from drugs, terrorism or dictatorial regimes. The catalogue of banking abuses is almost as varied as that of the complex financial products they sell to their customers!

The severity of these financial crimes are obviously not of the same nature. Fines or penalties which must pay banks differ accordingly. JP Morgan thus paid an overall fine of EUR 683 million in September 2013 to the American and British authorities for having allowed a London trader play with $ 6 billion. HSBC, Credit Switzerland and UBS collect fines for tax evasion – helping wealthy taxpayers to escape the tax authorities – in the United States, Germany or France. These fraudulent practices go to HSBC, up to the laundering of dirty money from Mexican drug cartels: to stop prosecution in the United States, the British Bank performs in 2012 a fine of 1.9 billion dollars (1.48 billion euros) [1].

Money laundering, drugs, terrorism, tax evasion…

Basta! is interested in fourteen major banks, including six major banking groups french – BNP, Société Générale (and its subsidiary, the Credit du Nord), Crédit agricole (including LCL), BPCE (Banque populaire – Caisse d’Epargne, including Natixis), Crédit mutuel (including the CIC) and the Postal Bank. We identified the financial sanctions that they have had to pay between 2009 and 2014, and possible fines that threaten when current procedures will come to an end. In total, these 14 banks spent nearly 60 billion euros in penalties in five years! And the French banks are not outdone.

How to use the table:
– « Flying over » a line, you make appear underneath the description of the case, the logo of the Bank and the sources of the information.
– By clicking on the type of offence, you go to a classification according to the offence. We have grouped them into eight major families: bleach / evasion / diversion; Insider trading; Illegal agreement; Faults in the management of risk; unequal access; Manipulation of rates / prices; Sale of toxic financial products; Violation of embargoes.
– By clicking on the amount, you go to a ranking in descending or ascending order. The amount indicated is generally fine or compensation paid, the possible sanction if the case is in progress (the nature of the sanction is specified in the description). The fines paid to the United States in dollars were converted into euros in 2014, which can create a margin of error associated with the evolution of the euro/dollar parity based on years.
– By clicking on the date, you will find the sanctions by year (2008-2014). The reference to « in progress » reports a case which is not complete. The amount of the penalty is thus estimated.
– Finally, you can classify data according to the country where was pronounced the sanction: Germany, Europe (European Commission), United States, United States / Switzerland / United Kingdom (when sanctions common to several countries) and France.

The first French Bank, BNP-Paribas, is one of the three banks of our panel to having to pay higher fines, behind the US banks JP Morgan and Bank of America: 6.64 billion euros in total, equivalent to net income that BNP has realized in 2012. This is mainly due to the record fine which it was fined in the United States for having achieved between 2004 and 2009, payments in dollars in countries under U.S. embargo – Cuba, the Iran and Sudan [2]. Nearly three quarters transactions incriminated by the Department of justice relate to exchanges made in 2006 and 2007 with the Sudanese regime [3], North American target for support to terrorism and violations of human rights, in particular crimes against humanity and war crimes committed in Darfur [4].

More near the France, BNP is referred by a judicial investigation for money laundering in one of its subsidiaries monegasques, the case of the ‘African washing machine. November 12, 2013, the Sherpa association complaint against the BNP Paribas Wealth Management Monaco, installed in the Principality. The association is based on an internal report of the Inspectorate General of BNP dated October 25, 2011. The counts are consistent: aggravated fraud committed band organized, concealment of fraud, concealment of tax fraud and aggravated laundering committed in organized band of proceeds of criminal offences. The Attorney general of Monaco, Jean-Pierre Dréno, opens in February 2014 a judicial investigation against X for laundering, concealment of money laundering and omissions of reports of suspicious transactions. BNP is also attacked in France for having sold to thousands of customers of savings products very risky (‘BNP secured Jet 3’ or « Stat Immo »). Nearly 70 million euros of compensation are at stake.

By Jérôme Kerviel « London whaling.

Société Générale has also several pans to his credit, France and the United States. The most emblematic case obviously the case of trader Jérôme Kerviel. January 20, 2008, Société Générale executives realize that one of their traders took positions risky markets estimated at 50 billion euros. That is 1.5 times the own funds of the Bank! Positions that expose the Bank to huge losses, while the subprime crisis is looming. The direction of the Société Générale will « undo » – resell on the markets – emergency. The loss amounted to 4.9 billion euros.

The Bank accused the trader of being solely responsible for. Jérôme Kerviel was sentenced in 2010 to five years in prison including three farms. His obligation to repay the 4.9 billion euros to the Bank is however annulled by the Court of cassation in March 2014. The magistrates are reminiscent of « the existence of faults committed by Société Générale, having contributed to development of the fraud and its financial consequences ». A new complaint of Jérôme Kerviel against his former employer, for forgery, use of fake and scam in the judgment, a judicial investigation was opened in the summer 2014 against the Bank. Société Générale was, for the moment, fined a blame of the Banking Commission, and a fine of EUR 4 million in July 2008. Far from $ 920 million paid by JP Morgan for a similar case in the City (the case of the ‘London whale’) four years later [5]. The French authorities seem much more conciliatory.

Manipulation of markets and rates

Société Générale is also questioned in one of the major recent scandals of bank handling: Libor and Euribor rates. These obscure acronyms refer to the rates on the interbank monetary market: there where banks lend money to each other. Libor is the rate of reference of the monetary market in London, the Euribor of the European interbank monetary market. Both perform a basic function: they determine a series of interest rate for a multitude of transactions, loans to consumer savings, real estate derivatives appropriation performance.

For several years, at least a dozen major international banks have lied about their rates. And have thus largely distorted to their advantage the level of references Libor and Euribor rates. Therefore, for years, millions of borrowers paid a fake interest rate. The level of the fines imposed on banking institutions involved in this widespread fraud gives an idea of its magnitude. The European Commission has distributed in December 2013, fines to a total of EUR 1.7 billion in eight international banks for their participation in the handling of the Euribor. Among them, Société Générale, required to pay a penalty of EUR 446 million [6].

Illegal agreements

Société Générale could disburse up to 626 million euros in France, Europe and the United States to settle these cases. In addition to the Kerviel case, continued to sell dubious mortgage agencies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that guarantee this type of loans to the United States. In France, it is charged, along with the five other big national banks, with illegal agreement on commissions that will grant the banks on cheques. The six banks may pay a total penalty of € 375 million to the authority of the competition, the fines from 24 million to Credit mutuel/CIC to 103 million euros for the agricultural/LCL Credit. The folder is now in the Court of cassation.

Compared to the fraud committed by BNP and Société Générale, other mutualistic or public, French banks are very small offenders. Farm Credit however risk a heavy fine from the European Commission if its guilt in the handling of the Euribor is recognized. « After completing its inquiry, the European Commission proposed to Credit Agricole SA a transaction that has not been accepted by the Crédit Agricole Group, which has refused to recognize his involvement in alleged manipulation », replied Jean-Paul Chifflet, its Managing Director (writing, December 12, 2014). The Brussels investigation continues.

For his part, BPCE has provisioned EUR 351 million to face lawsuits in the United States. These proceedings are related to the scammer Bernard Madoff case in which Natixis, the Bank business of the group, appears on the dock. Finally, BNP and Société Générale are also suspected to be involved in another manipulation: that of Forex (for Foreign Exchange), the financial market where the currencies are traded. More than $ 5 trillion transiting each day. Six banks, including JP Morgan, UBS and HSBC, have already been punished by heavy fines, a total of EUR 4 billion. And BNP and Société Générale have just be assigned to appear by the financial controller of the State of New York for illegal practices alleged in the market Forex (read here)…

When banks pay more fines than taxes!

Facing these increasingly expensive stick returns, banks register provisions « for legal disputes » still important in their balance sheets. Société Générale has thus set aside 700 million euros in 2013 to deal with any judicial procedure. « To take account of the evolution of a set of legal risks including the investigations and proceedings with authorities American and European », explains it [7]. The figure will be increased to 900 million in June, 2014… Agricultural credit, the provisions for disputes amounted to 457 million euros in December 2013 [8]. And 840 million euros for the Group Banque Populaire – Caisse d’Epargne (BPCE). As for BNP-Paribas, she provisioned of€ 2.7 billion end of 2013 in anticipation of future fines. Not enough, given the amount finally claimed by U.S. justice.

The major banks sometimes come to pay more in taxes and fines. In 2013, Société Générale has paid income taxes EUR 533 million, much less than what it has made provision for litigation legal [9]. About BNP Paribas, it spent 2.7 billion euros in taxes in 2013, as much as what she put aside for his troubles judicial [10]. Still worse. Swiss Bank UBS has paid 90 million euros in taxes in 2013, a mere 3% tax rate![11]. She has yet paid more than ten times this amount in 2012 to settle the charges brought against her in the Libor-Euribor [12] case.

Why so low fines in France?

Therefore, the fines seem not really dissuasive. Yet, they are very heavy to the United States. US banks, Swiss or German had to pay astronomical sums for have refourgué their customers of toxic financial products knowingly: 12.5 billion for Bank of America, 5.9 billion for Citigroup, $ 2.3 billion for Goldman Sachs, $ 1.3 billion for Deutsche Bank!

But these are mostly transactional agreements: banks agree to pay high prices to put an end to prosecutions and avoid a trial. « The transaction prevents any investigation and trial, which are in fact the opportunity to a scrutiny of the facts.» The truth remains buried, lack of public exposure of facts », regret the financial crime specialist Jean-François Gayraud. These fines « akin to the final right to defraud, or to a tax fraud. Experience, this device proves unable to deter the large financial institutions to defraud when he incentives not to reoffend », critical (read here).

In France, their level remains very low compared to what is practised in the Anglo-Saxon countries. A wide range of sanctions exists yet. The authority of prudential and resolution (ACPR), backed by the Bank of France, has a whole arsenal: warning, reprimand, prohibition to perform certain operations for a maximum duration of 10 years, temporary suspension of leaders for 10 years MAX, resignation of office for leaders, withdrawal or partial approval or authorization, and fines that can go up to 100 million euros. Ditto for the Commission des marchés financiers (AMF) AMF sanctions. Pecuniary or disciplinary sanctions could take effect if they were fully used. Problem: AMF sanctions Committee is composed partly of representatives of banks, not necessarily likely, therefore, to a great severity towards their colleagues…

[3] 6.4 of the $ 8.8 billion of transactions at issue in the decision of the United States Department of Justice are indeed Sudan, including 4 billion on behalf of a financial institution owned by the Sudanese State. Source.

[4] the United Nations Security Council before the International Criminal Court (ICC) of the situation in Sudan in 2005. Several arrest warrants have been issued since by the ICC against the Sudanese leaders, including one against president Béchir for crimes against humanity, war crimes (2009) and crime of genocide (2010)

[5] $ 200 million to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)fine, U.S. federal agency, 300 million by theOffice of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), 200 million from the Fed (US Federal Reserve), and $ 220 million paid to the British stock market authority CFA.

[6] source. Société Générale has disputed the amount of the fine.

[7] reference document 2014 Bank, p 382

[8] reference document 2013 Bank, p 430

[9] reference document 2014 Bank, p 268

[10] reference document 2013 Bank, p 116

[11] see the report by audit firm KPMG, « Challenge to transparency, financial Communication of European banks in 2013 », June 2014.

[12] $ 1.1 billion $ 1.4 billion Swiss francs. Source.

[13] the offices of HSBC in Manhattan (New York) protected by police at a rally of the movement Occupy in February 2013. The protesters demand that bank officials be imprisoned once they have recognized the involvement of HSBC in the laundering of money from drug and terrorism

Our records

Capitalism That deal with the financial crisis?
• Raw materials French banks continue to ‘speculate on hunger’?
• Tax evasion After HSBC, rearrest citizen in an agency of BNP in Brussels

Your comments

1 on 19 February at 08:29by InfectiondesFinances

Finally! Finally!
Your article, dear drafting of Basta! is a precious start but that deserves to become a permanent topic better documented factually so the issue is fundamental:
First prioritizing issues and not confusing the millions and billions, or trillions.
This first hierarchy encrypted factually will lead quickly to stop diversions derisory in princely or exotic – confetti Monaco, Andorra, Lichtenstein, Jersey Bahamas,… – to focus attention and effort of understanding and action activist, political and public on the three epicenters of systemic in Europe financial crime: Luxembourg for tax evasion of multinational companies, Switzerland for the evasion of the worldwide family dynastiesCity of London-Canary Wharf for systemic manipulation of global financial markets, fixing the price of money: rate inter-bank Libor and Euribor, exchange rate of currencies on the Foreign Exchange Market ForeX, precious metals Gold Fix price,… In these three capitals, one in the heart of the Eurozone, the other in the heart of Europe but outside the Eurozone, the third in the heart of Europe but especially non-EU27, this division of labour should nothing to chance, the stakes are in hundreds of billions of euros per year, for people as for the Free financial and their manipulations of the Free Markets.
The second fundamental factual enormity to document is determined action and the factual results of judicial institutions in the USA since 2008, especially since 2012 and first confession of Barclays on mid-August 2012 Libor who changes the balance of power between US and the multinational banks judicial institutions
– The third factual enormity to document is the difference between the actions of the public authorities: A secret transaction with a secret penalty is an opaque arbitrary, typical TTIP. It is the permanent practice of finance in France at Bercy inspectors because it prevents them to punishment to their comrades in body, or even their future employer. A public transaction with a public document documenting the criminal practices and the confessions of the penalized Bank is what has been practiced to this day by the US judicial authorities. The penalized Bank is too happy to buy cheap – compared to its decennial profits – that there be no public trial. But at least after their confessions in the USA, Switzerland and BNP-Paribas Credit acknowledged the criminal nature of some of their activities under US law: BNP-Paribas: http://www.dfs.ny.gov/about/ea/ea140630.pdf
Credit Switzerland: http://www.dfs.ny.gov/about/ea/ea140519.pdf

When a public trial in France of UBS and HSBC for their industrialization of tax evasion? No multinational Bank has so far had to face a public trial. Yet public at the BP USA trial and its irresponsibility documented in Deepwater Horizon, which ends in the USA this week, proves that a public trial – same civil – allows you to learn and understand practices of multinationals. And the Big Oil Majors include the difference between documented $43 or 53 billion, penalties that cost Deepwater BP, and their impunity in Nigeria, in the Amazon, to the Mexico… Those who are fighting against the arbitral tribunals under the TTIP could at least factually document when a Big Oil Major meets a public authority and a public trial that pay the fair price damage and harm to people and the environment…
Langue source

Et pourtant, la Réserve fédérale continue d’opérer sous un linceul de confidentialité créé par le Congrès.


Laisser un commentaire

Entrez vos coordonnées ci-dessous ou cliquez sur une icône pour vous connecter:

Logo WordPress.com

Vous commentez à l'aide de votre compte WordPress.com. Déconnexion /  Changer )

Photo Google+

Vous commentez à l'aide de votre compte Google+. Déconnexion /  Changer )

Image Twitter

Vous commentez à l'aide de votre compte Twitter. Déconnexion /  Changer )

Photo Facebook

Vous commentez à l'aide de votre compte Facebook. Déconnexion /  Changer )


Connexion à %s