"Hello, Central!" Basal II Global Banking System vs. Access Of Funds (Updated Jan. 23, 2008)
Patrick H. Bellringer
From: CW
To: <bellringer@fourwinds10.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 9:36 AM
Subject: Siterun Contact Request from Linlar Services
Message:
With the proposed arrival of the "initial expense packages" which are to be delivered today Wednesday Janauary 23, 2008, as stated in the Casper 01-22-2008 Update, does the Basil II Global Banking System have to be completely live and operative before the contents of the packages can be activated and made liquid? That is if the major US banks such as B of A, Citibank and the others as well as Bush does not sign off on the Basil II system will this hold up the activation and thus liquidation of these expense packages even if deposited into a offshore financial institution.
I look forward to your reply
(Response)
FROM: Patrick H. Bellringer
TO: CW
DATE: Jan. 23, 2008
SUBJECT: Reply
Dear CW:
To answer your first question, yes! That is the present hold-up.
These bank packets will probably not arrive today. There must be money in the Global Banking System to back these packets, or it is banking fraud, and the money is still in process. The NESARA announcement must follow closely the delivery of the packets, because NESARA lawfully authorizes the new system and abolishes the old. Those banks not signed on to Basal II are goners, as are all banks not in possession of a gold charter.
As I have said earlier, we are still in the window to have the Global Banking System on line, the bank packets for the Prosperity Programs and Farm Claims delivered, the NESARA public announcement made, and the evil U.S. Corporate Government, the Federal Reserve System and the Internal Revenue Service abolished yet this month!
In Love and Light,
Patrick H. Bellringer
(Reply)
Response to "CW" inquiry from "S":
Dear "CW":
I completely agree with Patrick\'s response to your questions. In re: to the first one, I give reference to information published by CRISTOPHER STORY in one of his past updates. At the time that it was reported the FRB_Bernacke had finally delivered the executed docs to Basel II authorities, it was noted that the documents, although executed, lacked an "effective date" in the data field for that information. Thus, lacking such a critical piece of information inside of the contract under Basel II protocol, leaves one of the critical elments within commercial contract law lacking. This is commonly referred to as an "omission", "error", "defect", or "deficiency". Until or unless "cured", the FRB is not a party to Basel II and does not come under its regime.
I have no information as to whether or not FRB has \'cured\', even under alleged new ownership or sale of controlling interest to foreign principals. I do not have any information about the who', what', 'why', or 'when' of the FRB. That is way down the black hole, and I do not go there. That is someone else's work. Whoever is in control of the FRB is likely responsible for curing the deficiency or not.
S