Christopher Story, of www.worldreports.org has done much to uncover the games of deceit that are being played. The following is an excellent short definitive tutorial from World Reports:
LEGAL TUTORIAL: The Steps of Common Fraud:
Step 1: Fraud in the Inducement: “… is intended to and which does cause one to execute an instrument, or make an agreement… The misrepresentation involved does not mislead one as the paper he signs but rather misleads as to the true facts of a situation, and the false impression it causes is a basis of a decision to sign or render a judgement” Source: Steven H. Gifis, ‘Law Dictionary’, 5th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2003, s.v.: ‘Fraud’.
Step 2: Fraud in Fact by Deceit (Obfuscation and Denial) and Theft:
“ACTUAL FRAUD. Deceit. Concealing something or making a false representation with an evil intent scanter when it causes injury to another…”. Source: Steven H. Gifis, ‘Law Dictionary’, 5th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2003, s.v.: ‘Fraud’.
“THE TORT OF FRAUDULENT DECEIT… The elements of actionable deceit are: A false representation of a material fact made with knowledge of its falsity, or recklessly, or without reasonable grounds for believing its truth, and with intent to induce reliance thereon, on which plaintiff justifiably relies on his injury…”. Source: Steven H. Gifis, ‘Law Dictionary’, 5th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2003, s.v.: ‘Deceit’.
Step 3: Theft by Deception and Fraudulent Conveyance:
THEFT BY DECEPTION:
“FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT… The hiding or suppression of a material fact or circumstance which the party is legally or morally bound to disclose…”.
“The test of whether failure to disclose material facts constitutes fraud is the existence of a duty, legal or equitable, arising from the relation of the parties: failure to disclose a material fact with intent to mislead or defraud under such circumstances being equivalent to an actual ‘fraudulent concealment’…”.
To suspend running of limitations, it means the employment of artifice, planned to prevent inquiry or escape investigation and mislead or hinder acquirement of information disclosing a right of action, and acts relied on must be of an affirmative character and fraudulent…”.
Source: Black, Henry Campbell, M.A., Black’s Law Dictionary’, Revised 4th Edition, St Paul: West Publishing Company, 1968, s.v. ‘Fraudulent Concealment’.
FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE:
‘FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE… A conveyance or transfer of property, the object of which is to defraud a creditor, or hinder or delay him, or to put such property beyond his reach…”.
“Conveyance made with intent to avoid some duty or debt due by or incumbent on person (entity) making transfer…”.
Source: Black, Henry Campbell, M.A., ‘Black’s Law Dictionary, Revised 4th Edition, St Paul: West Publishing Company, 1968, s.v. ‘Fraudulent Conveyance’.
Fraud in the Corridors of Power
There was an old lady1, she chartered a fraud,
I don't know why, she chartered a fraud,
Perhaps she'll die.
The act of chartering a bank or granting a bank license is itself an act of ultra vires – for one group of mortal men2 has no power to grant another group of men the privilege of lending money they do not have. Further, the system itself is an inducement to commit fraud, both on the part of the person who applies for a bank license/charter and for the person who grants it. It is an artifice for the chartered bank to suspend running of limitations, planned to prevent lawful inquiry, and to escape investigation.
The act of a chartered bank lending money they do not have is deceit; further it is deceit with evil intent3 to cause others to rely on the fraudulent substance as-if it were money.
The act of a bank in leading its depositors to believe that the units of its checking account liability are at par with the nominal “legal tender” units they represent is fraudulent concealment.
The act of a bank to monetize and circulate the promissory notes4 of its customers, by deceiving the borrower into thinking that he is borrowing money when he is executing a promissory note that is called a "loan" which funds a deposit account in the name of the borrower in the nominal units, is fraud in the inducement. Further, the act of concealing the existence of such deposit account, is fraudulent concealment; the act of stamping and taking the promissory note on deposit on the books of the bank is fraudulent conveyance; and the entire process is theft by fraudulent deception5 and duress6.
First by chartering a fraud, then by inducing the State to “borrow” funds at compound interest to create obligations it can never repay7, next by monetizing those fraudulent debt instruments and printing notes against it and inducing the commercial banks to “lend” to the retail banks and mortgage companies who further induce the retail clients to “borrow”, that is, write promissory notes that are then circulated as checking account liabilities payable in the printed notes above; the whole system would be found to be void ab initio under the law by any honest judge8 and jury that knows the distinction between what is law and what is but an act of ultra vires.
1Any inference that this is a particular person, is solely in your own imagination. Just as in the children's poem where the old lady swallows a fly, spider and so forth, this initial fraud of chartering a bank with the power to create money out of thin air requires the maintenance of an an endless array of regulators, compliance officers, crooked administrative courts and the “law” and order that flows from the barrel of a gun.
2Who represent themselves as the Head of State or their agents.
3The evil intent includes the inducement of others to write fraudulent promissory notes, to conspire to circulate those liabilities by fraudulent conveyance; and further to defraud the victims of their inherent sovereignty and liberty, and further to steal via fraudulent deception the gold and other treasure from the treasury of any remaining bastions of liberty; to obtain resources - such as a world dominating military force - that is beyond the ability of the perpetrators of the fraud to obtain by honest means.
4Fraudulently represented to be “loans” to the “borrower” who is the actual funder of the loan. A careful examination of the contract will show that it is not a loan but a “line of credit”. As such, no lawful consideration was loaned by the bank to the borrower. If the contract were examined in a court of law, and the question “should the funder of the account be repaid” be asked and the the books of the bank were opened as evidence, it would be discovered that there is a deposit account in the name of the borrower than is funded by the promissory note of the borrower. This note was stamped by the bank – received for deposit – which is fraudulent conversion. The lawful result is – a contract void ab initio. This is as true at the national and international level with “loans” being provided by the banks to countries as well as at the level of individual loans – mortgage contracts, lines of credit and credit cards.
5Deception, usage: Deception usually refers to the act, and deceit to the habit of the mind; hence we speak of a person as skilled in deception and addicted to deceit. The practice of deceit springs altogether from design, and that of the worst kind; but a deception does not always imply aim and intention. It may be undesigned or accidental. An imposition is an act of deception practised upon some one to his annoyance or injury; a fraud implies the use of stratagem, with a view to some unlawful gain or advantage. 1913 Webster
6Duress: An actual or a threatened violence or restraint of a man's person, contrary to law, to compel him to enter into a contract, or to discharge one. 1 Fairf. 325. Duress is present because the fearsome machinery of the State is what provides that contract any value whatsoever.
7If you lend your money to the local community sponge, you would be the laughing stock of the town when you insist on repayment. You would hold bad debt. By definition, all current national governments are parasites - they consume more than they produce - in other words the individuals that run the national government are simply the aggregate of all sponges who imagine themselves to be in "national service". The government was fraudulently induced to borrow and the instruments are, in any system that is lawful - voidable. The only way such a government can repay is by involuntary confiscation of property, another form of legal plunder, i.e., theft by taxation. This is theft to justify fraud.
8In what is known as the Minnesota Credit River decision of 1969, Judge Martin V Mahoney found the currently circulating Federal Reserve Notes to be unconstitutional. He was killed within six months of that still standing judgement. More information is available at http://www.rayservers.com/frn and http://www.rayservers.com/fraud.