Tony Johnson wrote:
>
> David Speakman wrote in message ...
> >On Fri, 1 Jan 1999 12:57:01 GMT, phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)
> >wrote:
> >
> >|
> >|Roper, FBI, and Census Bureau polls show, consistently, that slightly
> over
> >|half of all households state that firearm is present on the premises.
> >|
> >|What was that about the "will of the people"? ...
> >|
> >|
> >
> >
> >On ballots, voters usually vote for gun control.
>
> That's because "Gun Control" has become synonymous with "Crime Control"...
> Unfortunately that ain't the way it works. Just ask the Aussies....
The WINDS
http://www.TheWinds.org
Banking Institutions Lower the Boom on All Accounts
http://www.thewinds.org/archive/government/fdic12-98.html
�Know Your Customer" Part of Agenda for Global Control
On Monday, December 7 the Federal Depositors Insurance Corporation
(FDIC) as well as three other financial regulatory agencies published
their versions of the "Know Your Customer" (KYC) rules in the Federal
Register. When these rules go into effect after 90 days they will "level
the playing field" between institutions that have their own KYC policies
and those who don't. This will make the system of banking surveillance
universal and mandatory, effectively closing the gap to bank customers
who wish to avoid invasive snooping into their personal affairs.
Last week's entries into the Federal Register revealed a sweeping effort
to impose KYC regulations on U.S. banking institutions. "Know Your
Customer" is a laundered term for the practice of spying on bank
customers, although its ostensible purpose is to stop money laundering.
The new regulations will require bankers to develop profiles on their
customers, monitor their transactions and report any "suspicious" or
irregular transactions to the authorities. The new reporting
requirements will be in addition to the "Suspicious Activity Reports"
(SAR) that banks are already required to file on "suspicious" cash
transactions. "Suspicious" means whatever the bank decides it means. You
don't have to violate the law for the bank to report you to the Treasury
Department. It can be your looks, your demeanor, or a teller's bad hair
day that triggers a report on that cash you withdrew[1].
Cash is something used by criminals, we're told, and the new "Know Your
Customer" requirements will make it even harder for honest people to use
cash. Already bank patrons are criminalized if they "structure" their
bank withdrawals, taking out small amounts over time so as to avoid the
reporting requirements on cash transactions over $10,000. "Structuring"
is a federal crime.
As expected, the FDIC published its NPRM (Notice of Proposed Rulemaking)
which was brought to light last week. However, the Federal Reserve
(FRB), the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), and the Thrift Supervision
Office (OTS) also published similar NPRM's on Monday, each announcing
rules to enforce KYC in their particular jurisdictions of the banking
industry. While each rule is worded to enforce the KYC program, they are
based on varying legal authority, creating a multiplied tangle of legal
arguments that has effectively watered down any opposition.
The "Know Your Customer" program is not a recent innovation by federal
regulators. It didn't even originate in Congress at the behest of the
American public or the U.S. banking industry. It is a program that was
conceived on the international level at the Organization for Economic
Development and Cooperation (OECD), that secretive trade organization in
Paris that tried to ram through the neutron bomb of trade agreements,
the Multi-lateral Agreement on Investment (MAI). "Know Your Customer" is
more or less becoming law around the world.
The OECD is made up of the world's wealthiest nations. In 1989 OECD
delegates met in Paris and declared that money laundering was a threat
to democracy and that steps had to be taken to tighten banking
practices. They formed the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) which
produced a document containing forty Recommendations, a word capitalized
throughout their documentation. These Recommendations created the basis
for the "Know Your Customer" program.[2]
The Recommendations began by calling on all signatory nations to
implement steps called for in the 1988 United Nations Convention against
Illicit Traffic. The ostensible purpose of this convention was to combat
illegal drug and arms trafficking by cracking down on, among other
things, money laundering. The free and unmonitored movement of money was
identified as a serious threat to the rule of law in the world.
The U.S. government's response to the FATF's Recommendations seem to
imply they were more than, well--just recommendations. Following came
the typical Byzantine legislation and administrative rule making in
Washington in response to the international edict. Bills such as the
Crime Control Act of 1990 and the Banking Secrecy Act of 1992 contained
provisions that introduced "Know Your Customer" principles into U.S.
banking. Reporting requirements on cash transactions over $10,000 and
other "suspicious" financial activity are a product of the FATF's forty
Recommendations.
Even though KYC practices were encouraged by federal law, banking
regulators had not yet drafted rules requiring a universal
implementation. Some U.S. banks had developed their own KYC programs and
some had not, while a majority of the OECD countries had mandated KYC
rules for all their banks through a variety of legislation or
administrative fiats. The United States was falling dreadfully behind.
On April 28, 1998, ministers of the FATF held a meeting at the OECD in
Paris where they reaffirmed their purpose to build a strong global
alliance against money laundering. They announced a five year plan
(1999-2004) to introduce KYC into all regions of the world, a monumental
task that would include bringing other nations into the OECD's FATF, as
well as creating regional FATF's that would be plugged in to a global
money financial crimes network. [3] In other words, by the year 2004
they plan to have all the holes in the global financial system plugged
up, and that included the holes in the U.S. banking system.
Congress once again had its marching orders. On June 5, 1998, a little
over one month following the FATF meeting, Congressman Jim Leach
introduced H.R. 4005 entitled The Money Laundering Deterrence Act. This
bill would have required the Secretary of the Treasury to draft rules
that would make KYC practices universal and legally binding throughout
the United States banking system. H.R. 4005 has not yet been signed into
law, but a similar and more comprehensive bill entitled The Money
Laundering and Financial Crimes Strategy Act of 1998 (H.R. 1756) was
introduced on June 28 and later signed into law by the president. The
recent NPRM's issued by the FDIC, the Federal Reserve Board, the
Comptroller of the Currency, and the Thrift Supervision Office on
December 7 is the merely the end result of a policy that was conceived
on the international level, rubber stamped by Congress and passed down
to federal regulators for implementation. We are now at the final step.
Feds Hang "Sword of Damocles" Over U.S. Financial Institutions
Like other decrees that are issuing from the gilded palaces of
international finance, this one is accompanied by a media event
contrived to create public acceptance for the new regulations -- and to
make an example for all to see. On December 4, just a couple of days
before banking regulators published their NPRM's in the federal
register, bank officials everywhere as well as the rest of America woke
up to the morning news which announced that Citibank had been accused in
a congressional report of money laundering.[4]
Citibank has allegedly failed to abide by its own KYC procedures when it
handled $100 million for Raul Salinas, brother of former Mexican
President Carlos Salinas, from 1992 to 1995. There is no evidence that
the money was obtained illegally, and Raul claims he received the money
from rich Mexicans as part of an investment scheme. According to the
government's report the problem isn't that Raul's money was illegally
obtained, but that Citibank should have done a background check on him
when he opened his account. CNN announced on December 4 that Citicorp's
CEO informed stockholders that the company could be criminally indicted
and convicted for money laundering[5] -- that is, failure to identify
and determine the source of this customer's funds.
The point made to the banking industry is clear. It doesn't matter if
there is any proof that the customer's funds are illegally obtained.
Failure to "Know Your Customer" -- that is, intrude into the details of
their lives -- and you and your bank will suffer the consequences. We
can be sure that the lesson is not lost on the CEOs and officers of this
nation's financial institutions.
Of course, as representatives of international finance, the U.S.
government would like to spare every financial institution the
humiliation and expense of being charged with money laundering because
they failed to adequately spy on their customers. Because the government
cares so much it is moving forward now with universal and mandatory KYC
requirements. The FDIC's NPRM summary reads:
When transactions at financial institutions involving illicit funds are
revealed, these transactions invariably damage the reputation of the
financial institutions involved....
By requiring ... banks to determine the identity of their customers, as
well as to obtain knowledge regarding the legitimate activities of their
customers, the proposed regulation will reduce the likelihood that
insured nonmember banks will become unwitting participants in illicit
activities conducted or attempted by their customers....
The OCC's summary makes the same statement:
Illicit activities, such as money laundering, fraud, and other
transactions designed to assist criminals in their illegal ventures,
pose a serious threat to the integrity of banks. When transactions at
banks involving illicit funds are revealed, these transactions
invariably damage the reputation of the banks involved.
How thoughtful of the government to worry about the reputation of our
local bank in this manner, a reputation that could be easily smeared by
an ugly money laundering case spread across the headlines. No, a
criminal indictment would not be pretty, so making KYC procedures a
federal law will protect bankers from slipping up and letting someone
keep their privacy. How considerate.
So far the feigned concern over the "reputation" of this nation's banks
wears quite thin. The possible implications of a bank becoming an
"unwitting accomplice" to money launderers fail to justify such a
comprehensive surveillance network that will encompass everyone doing
business with a bank.
It's not just our banks reputation that federal regulators are concerned
about, but the problems they may have with angry customers who don't
care for being spied on. A Federal Reserve Board memo, released by
Congressman Ron Paul's office, puts it this way:
Banking organizations that already recognize the value of effective
"Know Your Customer" programs and have implemented such programs may
have found it difficult to convince customers of the need to provide
certain information, especially when other financial institutions do not
ask for such information. Because such programs will now be required by
regulation, financial institutions will not be prejudiced or criticized
for needlessly inquiring into the affairs of their customers. Moreover,
legitimate customers should be more willing to provide the information
requested by the financial institutions because they will be aware that
a similar legal responsibility exists for all banking organizations
supervised by the federal bank supervisory agencies.[6]
In other words, pulling personal information out of customers is an
unsavory task. The Fed will help by making all banks do it, that way
customers won't have any alternatives. In fact, when they see it is the
law they will comply like good little sheep. This memo also urges that
the "bank establish, to its own satisfaction, that it is dealing with a
legitimate person... " What in the world is a "legitimate person"? And
since when should the public accept something because it is universally
applied? Such statements reveal the incomprehensible logic of federal
banking manipulators.
The Global Crime Syndicate
The stated purpose of "Know Your Customer" policies is to prevent
criminals from using financial institutions to handle the proceeds from
their illicit activities -- a practice called "money laundering." While
there may be wisdom in targeting the proceeds of illegal activities,
does that merit putting the entire world under surveillance? There is a
saying in American jurisprudence that it is better for ten guilty men to
go free than for one man to be wrongly convicted, and yet this American
government wants to treat everyone like a criminal because just a few
people "launder their money" -- a phrase that really means nothing to
anyone but an army of bankers, accountants and government officials.
In America today we often think of crime as something that is against
the law, as though man-made laws were the highest arbiter of right and
wrong. We tend to view criminals in the same light -- those people who
have broken the laws of the land. But crime is more than breaking the
law, and a criminal more than someone who has violated the letter of the
law. A crime occurs when a person or a group of conspirators, by using
force or subterfuge, act to enrich themselves at the expense of others.
As the founders of the American republic agreed, the purpose of laws and
government was to protect the weak from the strong, the few from the
many, and thus ensure domestic tranquility.
But those high principles quickly faded as government became more and
more hostile to the governed and those principles that justify its
existence. Augustine wrote: "Justice being taken away, then, what are
kingdoms but great robberies?"[7] , and we must ask ourselves the same
question. When government becomes a tool of an influential group of
people who would enrich themselves at the expense of the less powerful
and influential, it becomes a system of organized crime. Every law is
passed for the purpose of increasing its profits and rubbing out the
competition. Law has become a tool of extortion and oppression. In many
cases the criminals are not those breaking the laws but those who are
making them.
The right to property and the freedom to conduct an economic
transaction is among the most fundamental of human rights. "Know Your
Customer" is an international spy network designed to restrict the
exercise of this right, first, by marginalizing and restricting cash
and, second, by monitoring and tracking every transaction. When economic
freedom is destroyed, every other freedom becomes meaningless.
"Give me control over a man's economic actions, and hence over his means
of survival, and except for a few occasional heroes, I'll promise to
deliver to you men who think and write and behave as I want them to."
Benjamine A. Rooge
RELATED ARTICLE:
FDIC to Force Banks to Spy on Customers
http://www.thewinds.org/archive/government/fdic11-98.html
Notes:
1.Don't Break The Law In Preparing for Y2K!, Jim Lord, December 7, 1998
2.Recommendations of the FINANCIAL ACTION TASK FORCE ON MONEY
LAUNDERING
3.OECD News Release Paris, 28 April 1998 FATF CALLS FOR WORLD-WIDE
ALLIANCE AGAINST MONEY
LAUNDERING
4.Report faults Citibank for Mexican transactions, 12-4-98
5.Money laundering probe targets Citibank, CNN's Businessday aired
12-4-98
6.Memo from the Federal Reserve's Division of Banking Supervision and
Regulation (Messrs. Biern and Small) to the Board
of Governors, dated September 28, 1998, forwarded by Rep. Ron Paul's
(R-TX) office
7.St. Augustine, The City of God
8.ScanThisNews, an email alert bulletin published by Scott McDonald of
Sovereign Citizens Against Numeration
Copyright � 1998, The WINDS. ALL
RIGHTS RESERVED.
http://www.TheWinds.org
--
http://www.imagemuse.com
http://www.cobweb.net/~hkahl/index.html
http://www.alankeyes.com/archive.html
|