The Reason Peter has been quiet is because he has spent time writing this rubbish, sorry its rather long!!m taken straight of their forum,its called his bank-response-rebuttall
Issued by Peter of England on behalf of WeRe Bank and Re-movement, 25th July 2015, Manchester, England
The Bank of England is a private bank
The Federal Reserve is a private bank
WeRe private too!
ALL ARE EXEMPT FROM STATUTORY REGULATION AND GOVERNMENTAL INTERFERENCE
THIS PRONOUNCEMENT HAS BEEN GIVEN THE WEIGHT OF INTERNATIONAL AS WELL AS NATIONAL COMMON LAND LAW BEHIND AND IS PRODUCED AS AN EVIDENTIARY DOCUMENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL COMMON LAW COURT OF [ICLCOR] RECORD 750181
THIS COMMUNICATION IS THE OFFICIAL RESPONSE AND REBUTTAL TO ANY BANK REPRESENTATIVE, CROWN OFFICIAL, JUDGE, MAGISTRATE, HMRC, IRS,CLEARING DEPARTMENT, BAILLIFF, SHERRIFF or OTHER LEGAL DEPARTMENT [INCLUDING THE CPS, FBI,FOR REFUSING to PROCESS a WeRe Bank cheque - backed by a Promissory Note - issued under the terms & tenor of The Bills of Exchange Act 1882 [the planetary parent banking legislation for all Commonwealth and former Commonwealth countries as well as those dependent upon UCC] and/or insisting that WeRe Bank send SWIFT payment(s).
SEE
http://freedom-school.com/bonds/interna ... change.pdf
http://www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/tex ... X_12_e.pdf
Black’s Law Dictionary, 5th Edition, page 133, defines a “Banker” as,
“In general sense, person that engages in business of banking. In narrower meaning, a private person .........; who is engaged in the business of banking without being incorporated. Under some statutes, an individual banker, as distinguished from a “private banker”, is a person who, having complied with the statutory requirements, has received authority from the state to engage in the business of banking, while a private banker is a person engaged in banking without having any special privileges or authority from the state”.
EVERY BULLET, EVERY SHELL, EVERY MUNITION, EVERY TANK AND GUN, EVERY KILO OF POISON GAS AND EVERY BOMB DROPPED…
EVERY DESPOT AND DICTATOR PAID FOR KEPT IN POWER AND HELPED TO BREAK AND ENSLAVE HIS POPULACE EVERY TORTURER HE EMPLOYED AND EVERY GENERAL AND BLACK-OPS AGENCY FUNDED…
THE HOLOCAUST MONEY HOLED UP IN SCHWEIZ BY THE BIS…
EVERY DRUG CARTEL, TERRORIST GROUP, PEDOPHILE RING, CHILD ABDUCTION RING, EVERY SATANTIC RING, ALL THE THEFT AND DECEIT ON WALL STREET AND THE LSE AND LIFFE, EVERY MOVIE EVER MADE, EVERY FASHION IDEA AND PORNOGRAPHIC MOVIE MADE,GUANTANAMO, ABU GHRAIB AND ALL OTHER TORTURE FACILITIES … HAVE ALL TO BE PAID FOR – THE ELECTRICITY AND WATER THE FOOD AND UPKEEP ETC…
ALL THE ABOVE HAS TO BE PAID FOR AND IT’S PAID FOR THROUGH BANK ACCOUNTS COURTESY OF BANKSERS
WW1 16MILLION DEATHS 20 MILLION CASUALTIES…
WW2 60-80MILLION KILLED APPROXIMATELY 2.5% OF THE GLOBAL POPULATION…240 MILLION WOUNDED/INJURED/MENTALLY SCARRED
MAO TSE TUNG KILLED OVER 15 MILLION…
STALIN BETWEEN 20 – 27 MILLION…
POL POT ACCOUNTED FOR OVER 20% OF THE ENTIRE POPULATION OF CAMBODIA
ALL THE ABOVE HAD TO HAVE BANK ACCOUNTS AND ALL THIS MURDER MAYHEM AND MONEY HAD TO BE PROVIDED TO THEM IN ORDER FOR THEIR REGIMES TO FUNCTION EFFECTIVELY
THE ONE COMMON DENOMINATOR IN ALL THE ABOVE IS THE WORD…
BANKER
MAYBE IT IS TIME TO QUESTION THIS EFFECTIVENESS AND HOW IT IS PROVIDED
Introduction: THE PROBLEM? IS YOU!
1. Of all the criminal activity and war, death, torture and destruction which this planet has seen and had to bear since 1800 the one thing that cannot be denied at any level or by anyone, other than a party to the crimes, is that all of it has had to be paid for with money, bank-rolled with money and this money has had to be collected and transferred from one side of an account to the other.
2. And we may now ask the question: “Who has paid for all of this?” “Who has facilitated the loans and the borrowing for the weapons factories to be built, for the munitions to be produced, for the covert ops money bags to be transferred around the globe at light speed?”
Answer: The banks and the bankers most certainly have as they, BY THEIR OWN TACIT ADMISSION AS MASTERS OF THE MONEY SUPPLY, are the only ones with the ability and capability to so do – the only ones who have the electronic payment and encryption systems to make such speedy and lucrative transfers! So we could say that they are the apex of the current tragedy which has become “planet terrorism” “planet death with the skulls everywhere emblazoned” and a monetized, empty culture.
3.The next question then is: “With what means and via what means has this been achieved?
And the answer to this is by using the SWIFT system of inter-bank transfers (as well as black-screen transfers) to facilitate the transfer of money/monies to those who have perpetrated these crimes against humanity, the planet and the biosphere upon which we all depend. The crimes list boggles the mind.
THE SOLUTION: The Reckoning
ANY JUDGE OR MEMBER OF THE JUDICIARY, ANY POLITICIAN OR MEMBER OF THE LEGISLATURE, ANY POLICE OFFICER OR COMMANDER OF POLICE OR MEMBER OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH OR MANDARIN SECRETING HIMSELF IN WHITEHALL NOW CLAIMING THAT BANKING IS NOT A RACKET AND THAT BANKERS ARE NOT INVOLVED IN PAYING FOR PROTECTING AND FUNDING MAFIA, YAKUZA,TRIAD AND ARMS DEALING, FUNDING THE DRUGS TRADE, HUMAN TRAFFICKING, CHILD ABDUCTIONS AND PEDOPHILE RINGS, FUNDING WARS, MUNITIONS AND DEATH AND TORTURE FACILITIES AND CAUSING MASS FINANCIAL SLAVERY TO THE POPULATIONS CAUSING IMMORAL DEBT BURDENS ARE TO BE LISTED FOR TRIAL. THEIR NAMES WILL BE ENTERED ONTO “THE LIST” AND THEY WILL KARMICALLY RECEIVE THAT WHICH THEY WERE DESTINED TO ATTEMPT TO GIVE.
SWIFT HAS BEEN SWALLOWED
The SWIFT payment system, run by the Belgian telecoms company, set up by incorporated in 1973, has been cited as being the principal conduit for money transfers which have paid for the: destabilization of countries, funding dictators such Augusto Pinochet, Pol Pot and Idi Amin as well as paying for arms shipments to pay for and set up wars of aggression [Gaza and Palestine], to fund acts of genocide, setting up bases for torture contrary to the Geneva Conventions, International Law as well as The 1998 Rome Statute of the ICC, to fund black-ops operations globally, as well as pay for weapons and bullets, guns explosives, shell cases, anti-personnel mines, depleted uranium weapons as well as slavery, kidnapping, human trafficking and human organ trafficking as well as the usual low level drug trade, mafia and so much more beyond – in short EVERYTHING THAT IS NOT RIGHT WITH THIS WORLD!
The Reckoning
No one is to be exempt – your responsibility is now crystallised as to which side you join. The Nuremberg defence is INVALID
The 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
The provision containing the superior orders defence can be found as a defence to international crimes in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. (The Rome Statute was agreed upon in 1998 as the foundational document of the International Criminal Court, established to try those individuals accused of serious international crimes.) Article 33, titled "Superior orders and prescription of law", [22] states:
1. The fact that a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been committed by a person pursuant to an order of a Government or of a superior, whether military or civilian shall not relieve that person of criminal responsibility unless:
• (a) The person was under a legal obligation to obey orders of the Government or the superior in question;
• (b) The person did not know that the order was unlawful; and
• (c) The order was not manifestly unlawful.
2. For the purposes of this article, orders to commit genocide or crimes against humanity are manifestly unlawful.
WARNING
ATTENTION JUDGES – THE POLICE AND POLICE COMMANDERS - ACPO – BAILLIFFS – HIGH COURT ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, LEFAL PRACTION.
A FORMAL WARNING TO ALL COURTS, COURT OFFICIALS, BANKING STAFF, CEO’S OF SAID BANKS, BOARDS OF DIRECTORS, CLEARING DEPARTMENTS, COUNCILS AND COUNTY COUNCILS, JUDGES, BAILLIFFS, HIGH COURT ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, LEGAL DEPARTMENTS, SHOOSMITHS [A PARTICULARY FOUL PRACTICE] AND SO ON
YOU ARE ABOUT TO FACE YOUR OWN WATERLOO – THE FINANCIAL SYTEMS OF THE WORLD ARE CHANGING AND MASSIVE RE-STRUCTURING IS UNDERWAY. THE PEOPLE ARE FAST BECOMING WEARY OF YOUR ARROGANCE AND PRATING. MUCH OF THIS YOU ARE UNAWARE OF MUCH OF IT YOU ARE. MANY OF YOU ARE OPENLY AND ACTIVELY DEFENDING CRIMINAL ENETERPRISES [KNOWN AS “THE HIGH STREET BANKS”] AS WELL as THEIR OVER SEER [THE BANK OF ENGLAND] CURRENTLY HEADED BY A NON UK NATIONAL FOR TH FIRST TIME IN ITS HISTORY.
ALL OF YOU ARE IMPLICATED IN WAR CRIMES AND CONTRAVENTIONS OF INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS, TREATIES AND LAWS – YOU ARE TO BE IDENTIFIED, NOTIFIED AND BROUGHT TO TRIAL FOR REPRESSIVE, AGGRESSIVE MONETISATION OF “life”. MANY OF YOU ARE ACTIVLEY SUPPORTING THOSE FUNDING WARS OR AGRESSION, GENOCIDE, TERRORIST ACTIVITIES AND FALSE-FLAG ATROCITIES PERPETRATED BY ROGUE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AGAINST THEIR VERY OWN PEOPLE. IF YOU DO NOT KNOW OF THESE FACTS THEN YOU ARE INCOMPETNENT TO HOLD OFFICE OR YOUR POSITION – IF YOU DO KNOW [OR SUSPECT] THEN YOU ARE AN “ACCESSORY BEFORE AND AFTER THE FACT”. EITHER WAY YOU CAN NO LONGER USE A DEFENCE OF “plausible deniability” OR INVOKE “THE NURENBERG DEFENCE” - IN ANY FUTURE PROCEEDINGS BROUGHT AGAINST YOU.
YOU ARE HEREBY WARNED…..
• THAT IF YOU REFUSE TO ALLOW THESE DEBT SETTLEMENT CERTIFIED CHEQUES [DSC] DRAWN ON WeRe Bank – WHEN DULY PRESENTED BY OUR REMEMBERS TO BE CREDITED TO THE ACCOUNT – TO PAY OFF THE DEBT(S) [SO CALLED ALLEGED AGAINST THEM], WHICH HAVE BEEN SPUN AROUND THEM LIKE STEEL WIRED TRAPS BY A DECEITFUL AND DEMONIC ZIONIST MASONIC BACKED CARTEL,THEN WHEN THE ACCOUNTING COMES, AS IT SOON WILL, THEN YOU WILL BE DRAGGED BEFORE A COURT, A COMMON LAND LAW COURT OF RECORD AND WILL BE DEALT WITH IN THE SAME MANNER IN WHICH YOU HAVE DEALT WITH THIS REMEMBER BEFORE YOU TODAY.
• IN YOUR CURRENT SHIELDED TOWER of ALOOFNESS AND NARCISSISTIC FROZEN STATE, YOU MAY THINK THAT THIS TIME WILL NEVER COME! YOU MAY THINK THAT THIS TIME CAN NEVER COME!
• HOWEVER MANY HAVE THOUGHT AS YOU DID ONLY TO SEE BITTER TEARS ROLL DOWN THEIR FACES WHEN THE TABLES WeRe TURNED. SO TAKE THIS AS A FRIENDLY WARNING – THE PEOPLE HAVE HAD ENOUGH. THEY ARE AS MAD AS HELL AND GETTING MADDER. WHEN THEY LOSE EVERYTHING THEN THEY LOSE IT! AND YOU WILL LOSE SOMETHING TOO!
“JUDGE DREAD”
Your high-handedness, BRUTAL aloofness, your refusal to listen to reason or common sense, your bullying and crass intimidation, your denying of a “fair and impartial hearing” as you stamp PEOPLE out of court not having listened to a word they proffered. You arrogant contemptuous creatures – who has given you the right to judge in these commercial courts? These monetized dens of iniquity? You’re not giving a care in the evening of the decimation and hurt you have caused and you thinking that you can continue with impunity on your harmful way!! Well, Peter of England informs you that you have the choice to change – I’d suggest you take it whilst you can – for if you do not then we’ll soon be a knocking on the hidden door you call HOME, and much sooner than you think!
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
REBUTTALS TO PRESUMPTIONS
The basis of all law relating to human interaction for settling a contract or an agreement between parties to exchange in commerce has to be the law of the land, of custom and common sense. This law is referred to as common law and you will see that, for example, in the 1997 International Convention on Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes, both the draft legislation as well as the enacted refers to Common Law as the fundamental platform for all dealings. Debt, obligation or promises to do something are fundamentally between two parties – human beings not corporate dead entities. The settlement or discharge is called finality of settlement on the spot of time and is the natural right and prerogative of every man to so conduct his affairs. Hence, all talk of statutory permissions, legislation, authority and licences is rubbish and simply not founded in reality. Man has always had the opportunity to deal with his financial affairs without government regulations and without a private commercial ”country club” group of elitists dominating the market via usury and generating immoral debt – immoral because even the Talmudic Principles of debt and forgiveness have been laid waste. Without forgiveness then cycles break because man wants to break them.
THESE DEFENCES - LISTED BELOW - WILL HAVE TO BE REBUTTED IN A DULY CONVENED COMMON LAW COURT - A COURT OF RECORD AND UNDER FULL COMMERCIAL LIABIILTY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY SO STEP FORWARD EVRY AND ANY MAN OR WOMAN WHO WOULD NOW REBUTT
DAMAGES DAMAGES DAMAGES DAMAGES DAMAGES DAMAGES
To all those making defamatory and inaccurate statements about WeRe Bank and its MONEY then be aware that we will begin to hold you accountable for your claims. A claim must be verifiable – if you make it then you will be made to stand your ground in a COURT OF LAW. You are under a “duty of care” to provide accurate and non-misleading advice to your clients
http://casebrief.me/casebriefs/hedley-byrne-v-heller/
A duty of care can arise with respect to careless statements that cause pure economic loss (obiter)
As noted later, in Queen v Cognos Inc, [1993] 1 SCR 87, the Hedley Byrne test has 5 general requirements:
→ 1. There must be a duty of care based on a “special relationship” between the representor and the representee.
→ 2. The representation in question must be untrue, inaccurate, or misleading.
→ 3. The representor must have acted negligently in making said misrepresentation.
→ 4. The representee must have relied in a reasonable manner, on said negligent misrepresentation.
→ 5. The reliance must have been detrimental to the representee in the sense that damages resulted.
PRECIS
1. For there to be any consensus to litigation there must be the 4 necessary components or a) defendant b) a claimant c) a competent witness and d) a valid claim. In order for there to be a valid claim then there must be provided the ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS AND ORIGINAL PARTIES to the contract. Failure of this head invalidates further proceedings. If the judge will allow the case to proceed with “photocopy evidence” then we will arrange for settlement in “photocopied” evidence.
2. Do you SANTANDER, BARCLAYS, LLOYDS, NAT WEST, RBC, RBS, AMERICAN EXPRESS BANK,HBSC,JP MORGAN, MELLON BANK NY,UBS, SOCIETE GENERAL, PARIBAS, CREDIT LYONNAIS, ETC [the banks] accept promissory notes? Yes or no? Rebuttal required:-
3. Are promissory notes legal tender within the UK commercial, banking and finance system?
4. Why does the Bank of England issue and your bank “supply” promissory notes as opposed to “the real thing?” What is the “real thing anyway?”
5. If it does issue/supply such then: “Does said bank hand over promissory notes via its counter tops and ATMs on an hourly basis?” Rebuttal required:-
6. If it does not, then what does it hand over in the form of cash/legal tender? Rebuttal required:-
7. Does a promise to pay always infer that the actual item is NOT available “at that precise moment in time” for if it was, then the promise would NOT have to be made, now would it? Rebuttal required:-
8. These promises it [your bank] hands over – are they ever completed or fulfilled? By this, I ask, “Is the “actual item” ever [later] delivered? If it is not then is this not an invalid promise, fraudulent and designed to misrepresent in order to deceive? Criminal in intent. Rebuttal required:-
9. WeRe Bank is not recognised by the Bank of England: Since when does the “Synagogue of Satan” a Zionist Private corporation owned by the Rothschild/Vatican with motto “Governor and Company of the Bank of England” printed upon its promissory notes, [an anti-trust, cabalistic monopoly], get to decide which other organizatiosn can compete with it? It’s like asking Mercedes Benz to give an engineering licence to a competitor such as BMW. Also there is no requirement in ANY UK LEGISLATION which suggests permissions are required for “banking”. Banking is implied from actions as it is a “natural act of man like working, defending, creative thought, manufacturing and cooking and providing for a family”: it is an instinctual and basic natural proclivity and is NOT to be allowed to fall only within the hands of a usurious criminal elite who profess to defend a “liberty” which they have no right to claim. Rebuttal required:-
10. Banking is a regulated industry. See supra. No it is NOT it is self-regulated and has been so for thousands of years before the Bank of England or the FCA came along. Banking is possibly the second oldest profession in the world and has been a commonly and acceptable practice for millennia between ANYONE WITH SUFFICIENT FUNDS TO MAKE OR CREATE LOANS TO FACILITATE COMMERCE TO ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL. Since when has the FCA, Prudential Regulatory Authority or the FSA ever been able to hold its head up as anything other than the paid whore of the Madame of Threadneedle Street? The FCA is bought and paid for by the banking industry to allow criminal gangs to profit from the misery enforced buy them upon the people and then further enforced by a bent and briefed judiciary and police force who are compromised and a disgrace to their office and uniform. Rebuttal required:-
11. WeRe Bank has no money! Look at the definition of “money” and you will see that we are far more solvent than nay bank in the world which is party to the global banking deceit and fraud of Fractional Reserve Lending – see the IMF – Chicago Plan Rebuttal required:-
12. WeRe Bank cheques are fraudulent – Fraud inherently means to “copy or approximate” with an intention to deceive, cause a loss or make a gain as a consequence. Please ask any bank racketeer to prove this and list why they spout such nonsense. A fraudulent act must have the intention to deceive and cause a loss to one party and a gain to the other. It comprises various elements namely deception, passing off, forgery, cheque kiting, or copying or making something look like an “original” or “valid” item or something that inherently is NOT. Is the WeRe Bank cheque anything other than a cheque? Can it possibly be said that WeRe Bank, with its most distinctive logo, it’s NON recognised sort code, it’s most unusual and attention drawing account number(s) and original address [not similar to ANY OTHER BANKs IN THE WORLD] – could be passing itself off as “to confuse” and “to deceive” the most surveyed industry in the UK? Rebuttal required:-
13. WeRe Bank cheques are in fact CERTIFIED CHEQUES!
A certified check or certified cheque is a form of check for which the bank verifies that sufficient funds exist in the account to cover the check, and so certifies, at the time the check is written. Those funds are then set aside in the bank's internal account until the check is cashed or returned by the payee. Thus, a certified check cannot "bounce", and, in this manner, its liquidity is similar to cash, absent failure of the bank or illegal act (such as the funds being based on a fraudulent loan, at which point the check will be disavowed).
In some countries, e.g. Germany, it is illegal for a regular bank to certify checks. This regulation is supposed to prevent certified checks from becoming a universal substitute for cash, which is considered the only legal tender. The Deutsche Bundesbank (Federal Bank) is the only financial institution authorized to issue certified checks.
The liquidity and certainty of payment of a certified cheque explains the fact that it is sometimes considered equivalent to cash, such as in the regulation of credit for casino gaming in Macau, where the law explicitly states that if a casino patron obtains casino chips and pays with a certified cheque, the transaction is not regarded as credit for gaming (see Law 5/2004, art. 2).
14. WeRe Bank is not recognised by the FCA. Since where and when does it state in any of the financial regulations that a group of individuals cannot come together collectively to arrange their own financial affairs? The FCA is nothing but a regulatory club to prevent the public seeing the corruption, lies, deceit and profit sharing for the “white-shoe boys” it has been set up to hide. FCA/FSA oversaw: pensions miss-selling, PPI miss-selling, mortgage and endowment fraud as well as LIBOR and all the lies and deceit which has resulted in the banking and financial “train crash” which is UK finance and commercial regulation. Where so ever you see the footprints of the FCA you see criminally inspired, sponsored and protected behaviour. And you expect us to sell our souls out to them? Rebuttal required:-
15. 75-01-81 is not a recognised sort code: Well recognised means “not identified or seen previously” so if they LOOK AGAIN then on this second passing they will “recognize” it will they not? And don’t forget they don’t recognize because they do NOT wish to – not because they can’t.
recognize (v.)
early 15c., "resume possession of land," back-formation from recognizance, or else from Old French reconoiss-, stem of reconoistre "to know again, identify, recognize," from Latin recognoscere "acknowledge, recall to mind, know again; examine; certify," from re- "again" (see re-) + cognoscere "know" (see cognizance). Meaning "know again, recall or recover the knowledge of, perceive an identity with something formerly known or felt" first recorded 1530s. Related: Recognized; recognizing.
16. No registered with UK Clearing – UK clearing [CCCC] has the same Satanic Parents and is the sister of the FCA, a club of the bankers set to protect their “anti-trust” cartel under the watch-full and protective eye of the Aldermen and Livery Men and Masonic Orders of The City. We have NOT registered with any of these criminal clubs and gangs as oil cannot mix with water – WeRe Bank remains transparent, open and free and does not practice usury, and immoral debt generation. We maintain that The City, the FCA, The Prudential Regulatory Authority, the Bank of England and UK Treasury are corrupt criminal racketeering enterprises: Rebuttal required:-
17. WeRe Bank does not use Sterling – Our promissory notes are issued in sterling.
Rebuttal required:-
18. Are the banks in the nature of wanting money or not? Our question to these banksters! The question then is DO THEY WANT MONEY OR DO THEY NOT? A very simple question requiring a very simple answer – Yes, or no? If they do so “want money” then what’s wrong with our money? If it is NOT money they are “involved in wanting” then this opens a completely different chapter and interpretation.If the institutions refuse our money then this is tantamount to “financial apartheid” – are we the black-man on the block, where whitey’s money is the only acceptable form of money?Ask the bank or financial institution to define money?
19. WeRe Bank is NOT registered with the banking industry. No it is not as “the banking industry” is a death industry. WeRe Bank stands for transparency and against everything this industry loads onto the backs of the common man – ergo, to align with them in any way would make us as bad as they and it would infer support for criminal, psychopathic and genocidal maniacs. Rebuttal required:-
20. SWIFT is not used by WeRe Bank. Correct. We use SWALLOW an equally efficacious and plausible telecoms system – non-fraudulent and fully taxable. WeRe Bank is NOT associated with the SWIFT, BACS, CHAPS, BarX clearing systems as these have been used to fund criminal activities, also involved in funding wars, genocide, narcotics trade, racketeering, as well as general criminal behavior and are currently subject to RICO investigation. It has been decided to "retire" this obsolete "rat-run and war facilitating mechanism" as it is nothing more than a conduit for illegal activity, covert financial dealings and for funding wars of aggression, creation of financial slavery and immoral debt entrapment.
TO SUMMARIZE SWIFTLY
SWIFT IS A TRANSACTIONAL CONDUIT FOR COVERT FUNDING OF MISERY, DESTRUCTION, TORTURE WARS OF AGRESSION,FACILITATING REGIME CHANGE, FUNDING DRUG RUNNING, PEOPLE TRAFICKING, PAYING FOR HUMAN SLAVERY, PAYING PEDOPHILE RINGS,AND FUNDING MAFIA, YAKUZA AND BLACK OP SECURITY AGENDAS. A GRAND JURY IS CONVENED TO LOOK INTO PROSECUTING THOSE INVOLVED, HOWEVER PERIPHERAL, NOW HAVING RECEIVED NOTICE OF ITS SAID ACTIVITIES - IF THEY CONTINUE TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH IT OR ITS PURVEYORS AFTER THE 1ST AUGUST 2015. RICO 1970* (see below) is to be used as well as other international convention
We know that you would NOT wish to be involved in supporting such agencies as not only is this amoral but illegal and subject to severe penalty under International Law. The defense of "plausible deniability” is hereby removed. [See RICO 1970 detailed below.]
Why do the bank staff continue to support and defend an organisation which supports terrorism, money laundering, gangsters and criminal activities, help to fund and pay for wars of aggression and weapons of destruction, anti-personnel mines and also every shell and bullet which rains down upon man-kind first has to be “bought and sold”. And through whose hands do you imagine does this money pass? Yes – the bankers who now tell you that the unjust enrichment for them is fair!
The international Zionist cabal have hijacked the souls of men by placing them upon the International Stateless Zone within which they scour the world for their energy theft.
FINALLY ON FRAUD
DEFINITION;
fraudulent (adj.)
early 15c., from Old French fraudulent, from Latin fraudulentus "cheating, deceitful, dishonest," from stem of fraus "deceit" (see fraud). Earlier was fraudful (c. 1400). The Old French word was fraudios. Related: Fraudulently.
WeRe Bank nor the ReMember is not cheating or passing off anything as anything it is NOT.
Everything is clear and regular on its face.
The instruments issued by WeRe Bank all comply with the tenure and interpretation of the Bills of Exchange Act 1882
No claims have been made BY WeRe Bank that WeRe Bank is a Regulated Business
WeRe Bank has not posted any VAT numbers or corporate registration information
No claim has been made that were bank is recognised by any statutory or governmental authority (so called) in the UK
A cheque is a cheque – it can be written upon anything whatsoever.
The DRAWEE BANK is clearly identified and in no way mistake-able for any other party in the banking or financial world.
There is no dishonesty as all parties have come to the table believing that a promissory note, the basis for all commercial activity upon the planet, is a valid and legal instrument.
This backing document produces a “chose in action”.
The cheque cannot be misleading or invalid – it can only be so if the DRAWER had exceeded his LIMIT. This is guarded against.
Making or supplying articles for use in frauds (Section 7)
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/d_to_g/fraud_act/#a03
The defendant:
• makes, adapts, supplies or offers to supply any article;
• for use in the course of or in connection with fraud;
• knowing that it is designed or adapted for use in the course of or in connection with fraud (Section 7 (1) (a)) or
• intending it to be used to commit or assist in the commission of fraud (Section 7 (1) (b).
"Knowledge" in Section 7 (1) (a) is a strict mens rea requirement. The House of Lords in Montila [2004] UKHL 50 said:
"A person may have reasonable grounds to suspect that property is one thing (A) when in fact it is something different (B). But that is not so when the question is what a person knows. A person cannot know that something is A when in fact it is B. The proposition that a person knows that something is A is based on the premise that it is true that it is A. The fact that the property is A provides the starting point. Then there is the question whether the person knows that the property is A."
In practice, the use to which the article can be put is likely to provide sufficient evidence of the defendant's state of mind. For example, articles such as:
• the kits that are attached to ATM machines to capture card details;
• forged credit cards or the equipment for making them;
• lists of credit card numbers;
• counterfeit goods presented as genuine;
• do not have an innocent purpose that readily springs to mind.
A person who makes an article specifically for use in fraud, for example, a software programme to create a phishing website or send phishing email, may be ambivalent about whether the person to whom it is supplied actually uses it for fraud. He will fall foul of Section 7 (1) (a) but will not have the necessary intention for Section 7 (1) (b).
The manufacturer of articles that are capable of being used in or in connection with fraud but have other innocent uses will not fall foul of this section unless he intends that it should be used in a dishonest way (Section 7 (1) (b)). The makers of credit card readers are one example. The readers have an innocent purpose they are commonly used by traders who "store up" the details of all the transactions carried out during a day and submit them all together at the end of the day. The card reader merely verifies the validity of the card at the point when it is read and stores all the necessary information about the transaction. The other, dishonest, use is by point of sale staff who use the readers to "skim" credit card details either for use or sale. The dishonest manufacturer who intended a dishonest use would be guilty of Section 7 (1) (b) offence.
RICO IS COMING TO TOWN
What is RICO Law? [*RICO 1970] The minds which created RICO are the minds of the criminal legal firms and legislators who are fully aware that by “misdirection” and pointing the spot light of justice” onto the counter party it will make it seem that it is NOT they themselves, The Wolves on Wall St. and Wall St bankers who are directly implicated in such heinous crimes. This is always the legislative protection used to ensure that their criminal mafia hench-men & goffers are allowed to do “the necessary” with impunity until and if there comes a time when they need to be “reigned in” or “someone decides to go postal” then they roll out the LAW.
RICO Law refers to the prosecution and defence of individuals who engage in organized crime. In 1970, Congress passed the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act in an effort to combat Mafia groups. Since that time, the law has been expanded and used to go after a variety of organizations, from corrupt police departments to motorcycle gangs. RICO law should not be thought of as a way to punish the commission of an isolated criminal act. Rather, the law establishes severe consequences for those who engage in a pattern of wrongdoing as a member of a criminal enterprise.
Title 18, Section 1961 of the United States Code [infra] sets forth a long list of racketeering activities, the repeated commission of which can form the basis of a RICO Act claim. These underlying federal and state offenses exist independently of the act, and include the crimes of homicide, kidnapping, extortion, and witness tampering. Racketeering activities also include property crimes such as robbery and arson. A number of financial crimes are also listed, such as money laundering, counterfeiting, securities violations, as well as mail and wire fraud, funding wars or aggression, funding and sponsoring terrorist cells, funding arms shipments, human trafficking, slavery and other covert activities.
Penalties in Criminal Court
The RICO Act provides both criminal and civil penalties. This means claims can be brought by prosecutors on behalf of the government, or by private individuals. In criminal prosecutions, the jury must be convinced of the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. This is the highest burden of proof that exists in the American legal system. Violations are punishable by up to 20 years in prison. The sentence can be increased to life in prison if authorized by the underlying crime. Offenders also face a fine of either $250,000, or double the amount of the proceeds earned from the activity.
As a tool for dismantling criminal enterprises, following a conviction the government is automatically given a forfeiture of all of the defendant’s interest in the organization. So not only do defendants lose all their money and property that can be traced back to the criminal conduct, but the organization itself can be severely crippled. And the government need not wait until after a guilty verdict, when the property expected to become subject to forfeiture may be difficult to locate. The rules of procedure in a RICO prosecution allow the government to freeze the defendant’s assets before the case even goes to trial.
Civil Remedies for Victims
For civil claims brought by private parties who have been victimized by a criminal organization, the burden of proof is less onerous than in criminal court. A preponderance of the evidence standard applies. This means the jury must find that it is at least slightly more likely than not that the racketeering activities did in fact happen as alleged. Despite the lower burden of proof, civil RICO lawsuits are difficult and expense for individuals to pursue. Those who win are rewarded, however. Successful plaintiffs can recover “treble damages,” or in other words, three times the amount of money they lost due to the defendant’s actions.
Specific Elements of a RICO Claim
Liability for a RICO violation requires that a person be involved in an enterprise that operates through a pattern of racketeering activity. This raises a couple of issues that will prove important to anyone defending or pursuing a RICO case. First, a controversy may arise as to what will satisfy the element requiring an enterprise. Corporations, partnerships, and other businesses will surely qualify as enterprises. But what about informal organizations, like street gangs?
The Supreme Court considered the issue, and determined that an enterprise can be any group with members who are associated in a relationship in order to achieve a common purpose, provided the relationship lasts long enough to allow them to pursue that purpose. In the terminology of RICO law, such groups are known as “association-in-fact” enterprises.
18 U.S. Code Chapter 96 - RACKETEER INFLUENCED AND CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS
18 U.S. Code § 1961 - Definitions
As used in this chapter—
(1) “racketeering activity” means (A) any act or threat involving murder, kidnapping, gambling, arson, robbery, bribery, extortion, dealing in obscene matter, or dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act), which is chargeable under State law and punishable by imprisonment for more than one year; (B) any act which is indictable under any of the following provisions of title 18, United States Code: Section 201 (relating to bribery), section 224 (relating to sports bribery), sections 471, 472, and 473 (relating to counterfeiting), section 659 (relating to theft from interstate shipment) if the act indictable under section 659 is felonious, section 664 (relating to embezzlement from pension and welfare funds), sections 891–894 (relating to extortionate credit transactions), section 1028 (relating to fraud and related activity in connection with identification documents), section 1029 (relating to fraud and related activity in connection with access devices), section 1084 (relating to the transmission of gambling information), section 1341 (relating to mail fraud), section 1343 (relating to wire fraud), section 1344 (relating to financial institution fraud), section 1351 (relating to fraud in foreign labor contracting), section 1425 (relating to the procurement of citizenship or nationalization unlawfully), section 1426 (relating to the reproduction of naturalization or citizenship papers), section 1427 (relating to the sale of naturalization or citizenship papers), sections 1461–1465 (relating to obscene matter), section 1503 (relating to obstruction of justice), section 1510 (relating to obstruction of criminal investigations), section 1511 (relating to the obstruction of State or local law enforcement), section 1512 (relating to tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant), section 1513 (relating to retaliating against a witness, victim, or an informant), section 1542 (relating to false statement in application and use of passport), section 1543 (relating to forgery or false use of passport), section 1544 (relating to misuse of passport), section 1546 (relating to fraud and misuse of visas, permits, and other documents), sections 1581–1592 (relating to peonage, slavery, and trafficking in persons)., [1] section 1951 (relating to interference with commerce, robbery, or extortion), section 1952 (relating to racketeering), section 1953 (relating to interstate transportation of wagering paraphernalia), section 1954 (relating to unlawful welfare fund payments), section 1955 (relating to the prohibition of illegal gambling businesses), section 1956 (relating to the laundering of monetary instruments), section 1957 (relating to engaging in monetary transactions in property derived from specified unlawful activity), section 1958 (relating to use of interstate commerce facilities in the commission of murder-for-hire), section 1960 (relating to illegal money transmitters), sections 2251, 2251A, 2252, and 2260 (relating to sexual exploitation of children), sections 2312 and 2313 (relating to interstate transportation of stolen motor vehicles), sections 2314 and 2315 (relating to interstate transportation of stolen property), section 2318 (relating to trafficking in counterfeit labels for phonorecords, computer programs or computer program documentation or packaging and copies of motion pictures or other audio-visual works), section 2319 (relating to criminal infringement of a copyright), section 2319A (relating to unauthorized fixation of and trafficking in sound recordings and music videos of live musical performances), section 2320 (relating to trafficking in goods or services bearing counterfeit marks), section 2321 (relating to trafficking in certain motor vehicles or motor vehicle parts), sections 2341–2346 (relating to trafficking in contraband cigarettes), sections 2421–24 (relating to white slave traffic), sections 175–178 (relating to biological weapons), sections 229–229F (relating to chemical weapons), section 831 (relating to nuclear materials), (C) any act which is indictable under title 29, United States Code, section 186 (dealing with restrictions on payments and loans to labour organizations) or section 501 (c) (relating to embezzlement from union funds), (D) any offense involving fraud connected with a case under title 11 (except a case under section 157 of this title), fraud in the sale of securities, or the felonious manufacture, importation, receiving, concealment, buying, selling, or otherwise dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act), punishable under any law of the United States, (E) any act which is indictable under the Currency and Foreign Transactions Reporting Act, (F) any act which is indictable under the Immigration and Nationality Act, section 274 (relating to bringing in and harboring certain aliens), section 277 (relating to aiding or assisting certain aliens to enter the United States), or section 278 (relating to importation of alien for immoral purpose) if the act indictable under such section of such Act was committed for the purpose of financial gain, or (G) any act that is indictable under any provision listed in section 2332b (g)(5)(B)
18 U.S. Code Chapter 96 - RACKETEER INFLUENCED AND CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS
(a) It shall be unlawful for any person who has received any income derived, directly or indirectly, from a pattern of racketeering activity or through collection of an unlawful debt in which such person has participated as a principal within the meaning of section 2, title 18, United States Code, to use or invest, directly or indirectly, any part of such income, or the proceeds of such income, in acquisition of any interest in, or the establishment or operation of, any enterprise which is engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce. A purchase of securities on the open market for purposes of investment, and without the intention of controlling or participating in the control of the issuer, or of assisting another to do so, shall not be unlawful under this subsection if the securities of the issuer held by the purchaser, the members of his immediate family, and his or their accomplices in any pattern or racketeering activity or the collection of an unlawful debt after such purchase do not amount in the aggregate to one percent of the outstanding securities of any one class, and do not confer, either in law or in fact, the power to elect one or more directors of the issuer.
(b) It shall be unlawful for any person through a pattern of racketeering activity or through collection of an unlawful debt to acquire or maintain, directly or indirectly, any interest in or control of any enterprise which is engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce.
(c) It shall be unlawful for any person employed by or associated with any enterprise engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce, to conduct or participate, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of such enterprise’s affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity or collection of unlawful debt.
(d) It shall be unlawful for any person to conspire to violate any of the provisions of subsection (a), (b), or (c) of this section.
Peter of England
On behalf of humanity
WeRe Bank, Re-Movement & ReMembers…. everywhere.
Responsible for all of it!
