Youngevity BTT 2.0 + Healthy Start Paks 2.0

Youngevity BTT 2.0 + Healthy Start Paks 2.0

Coffees from Youngevity

Coffees from Youngevity

Youngevity Be The Change

Youngevity Healthy Chocolate

GOFoods Youngevity

Join or Create a Ron Paul Meetup,.

Join or Create a Ron Paul Meetup,.

Ron Paul Forums

Ron Paul Forums

APFN Message Board

APFN Message Board

Leo Emil Wanta / Wantagate Links

++++++++++++++++++ EBAY ITEMS 4 SALE ++++++++++++++++++

« NH Primary JAN 8: OPERATION LIVE FREE OR DIE NEEDS OUR URGENT/IMMEDIATE ASSISTANCE!! HOW U CAN HELP. | Main | Ron Paul appeals to millions of Americans »

Lee Emil Wanta / Wantagate: 'Subprime' 'Slide' That Masks Fraudulent Finance



Wednesday 26 December 2007 21:31



By Christopher Story FRSA, Editor and Publisher, International Currency Review, World Reports Limited, London and New York: Press NEWS and the ARCHIVE Button on the Home Page for 'Wantagate' reports since April 2006. [Note: A new panel giving details of our latest publications as they are made available, has been added].

Please Make a Donation to help finance Christopher Story's ongoing financial global corruption investigations. Your assistance will be very sincerely appreciated and will make a real difference, hastening the necessary resolution of the worst financial corruption and global financial crisis in history. This website has been calling the shots, because of the hijacking of Wanta's Settlement.

The sudden widespread use of the catchphrase ‘subprime’ mortgages since July 2007 has served the same purpose as your typical CIA ‘slide’ – that is to say, a prepackaged, ‘politically correct’ obfuscatory ‘take’ on a given set of circumstances that is formulated in such a way as to preclude further thought and investigation. While of course the existence of ‘subprime’ mortgages is very real, the universal acceptance by the media of this phrase as a comprehensive ‘explanation’ for all the financial sector horrors that have ensued – from the credit crunch to mounting bankruptcies and systemic problems at money center banks – has served the same function as a ‘slide’, which is a cynical term developed by US criminalised intelligence to describe and justify a given Psy-Ops ‘product’ fed to the Goyim or the masses, who have no clue that what they are being told is either false or else ‘economical with the truth’.

It is true, however, that the value of US ‘subprime’ mortgages is estimated at $1.3 trillion, with over 7.5 million of such mortgages currently outstanding.

More than 320,000 foreclosures were initiated during each of the first two quarters of 2007, most of which were related to subprime property loans, compared with the typical annual foreclosure level of 225,000 over the past six years. Approximately 16% of ‘subprime’ loans having adjustable rate mortgages (ARMs) were 90 days into default or in foreclosure proceedings, as of October 2007, which was triple the rate observed in 2005.

It is likely (and should by now be becoming cystal clear) that tens of thousands of FRAUD IN THE INDUCEMENT complaints will be filed by US borrowers against lenders and mortgage brokers who have energetically sold adjustable mortgage arrangements without income verification and other checks, because the lenders and mortgage brokers possessed information on their prospective borrowers that the intended contracted mortgage loan would be unserviceable by the prospective borrower, on the basis of the lenders’ and brokers’ own financial due diligence that they did not share with the borrower. In such instances, if ruled, then a meeting of minds did not take place and accordingly, no contract ever existed.

This is exactly the line that some Judges are now taking: see Appendix A to this report.
Appendix B discusses the Law of Voids in the United States.

In such instances, the borrower will have to vacate the premises, which were never theirs anyway, but will not be responsible for making any payments on the property to anyone. The borrower should also be awarded repayment of any and all mortgage payments they may have made on the property, inclusive of all origination fees, property taxes, recording fees, mandatory insurance premia, plus multiple damages from both the lender and the mortgage broker. There would also need to be NO negative impact upon the borrower’s credit file and rating.

When these transactions are deconstructed, a horrific nexus of fraud becomes apparent. Once upon a time, the borrower sat down at the closing table at the escrow company. He did NOT own the property when he sat down at the table.

Yet, all of a sudden, he miraculously owns the property, free and clear of all encumbrances: otherwise, how could he mortgage it? The borrower has signed an agreement stating inter alia that ‘for good and valuable consideration, RECEIPT OF WHICH IS HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGED’, and being fully seized in the property (which means fully owning it without any encumbrance) ‘I, the borrower, do hereby enter into this agreement to mortgage said property as fullY described in this document by virtue of my appointment as trustor, and do appoint as trustee irrevocably for this purpose’ (the name of the trustee who works for the title company handling the transaction).

Let us pause here. A document has been written which clearly states that the buyer admits to having received ‘consideration’ of some type PRIOR to this point in time – in exchange for WHAT? He admits that he owns the property free of all debt, otherwise he could not mortgage it. The escrow company agrees with him that the property at this point is free and clear of debt, or else they could not serve as the intermediary fiduciary party certifying these assertions as facts.

But this begs the very obvious question: if the borrower already owns the property, why does he need the mortgage, unless he is borrowing money to be used for some other private purpose of his? If he uses the property as collateral for the loan, when does he receive the money? Has the borrower, or has any party involved, EVER received the money from the mortgagee?

The answer is NO!

What has actually happened is that the borrower’s promissory note was immediately monetised by stamping ‘Pay to the order of’ on the reverse of the promissory note, which was then deposited as cash into a deposit account at a bank. The borrower was never told that this occurred.

This ‘stamping’ procedure amounts to an ACT OF CONVERSION.

Furthermore, the very ACT OF ALTERING A NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT after the signature of the payer or original issuer, VOIDS THE INSTRUMENT.

The next thing that happens, again without the knowledge of the buyer, is that the bank opens a transaction account based on the cash deposit of the buyer, and from this transaction account, using the bank’s name on a bank check, the check is issued to the seller in the agreed amount according to the sale figures.

The numbers are of course all just bookkeeping entries, which simply debit the depositor’s account by the amount of the bank check.

The seller leaves the escrow office with check in hand, which he then proceeds to deposit in his checking account, whereupon his bank balance increases via bookkeeping entry, while the issuing bank’s transaction account is debited via a bookkeeping entry.

The next step in this fraudulent transaction occurs when the bank, now in possession of a large mortgage obligation, sells this mortgage obligation to a lender of some kind or other, usually the Government-Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) Fannie Mae (Federal National Mortgage Association) or Freddie Mac (Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation). The bank then receives full cash payment, again via a simple bookkeeping entry, and is appointed the ‘servicer’ of the loan for its entire period of existence. The seller is happy, and goes his merry way.

But the buyer possesses no knowledge that he actually funded his own transaction through his own promissory note, and is never told that this was the basis of the entire transaction, or that he still has a demand deposit account at the bank from which the check to the buyer originated via the transaction account.

So the entire arrangement is absolutely unconscionable from the outset. Very clearly, as some US courts are showing signs of realising, there was never any valid contract, so that no obligation could ever have arisen based upon its terms. The bank has clearly become unjustly enriched by means of the fraudulently prepared documents which have cleverly and most deviously concealed the true illegal nature of the transaction – wherein the bank was never in any danger of having incurred any risk whatsoever, and was enriched through the sale to the true purchaser of the mortgage, while not handing over the money to the actual issuer of the promissory note as the ‘consideration’ for the creation of the mortgage.

The bank’s charter will clearly reveal and confirm that such acts of concealment, conversion, misrepresentation etc constitute an act that is ultra vires, so that therefore the bank is fully liable for these transgressions, and should have its charter revoked.

Another crucial dimension arising from this skewed state of affairs is that, since the entire note of obligation has now been proven to be null and void ab initio, and the property ‘owner’ is still the trustor, he is entitled at this point to revoke trustee appointment of the title company’s trust document, since it was obtained through fraudulent misrepresentation.

Where does this state of affairs NOW leave all the parties? Since there is no valid mortgage, the property owner is now free to have the property reconveyanced into his name without any other names, hindrance or encumbrance applying to it. Specifically:

The bank has sold an invalid mortgage to Fannie Mae.

Fannie Mae is a true holder, since they took it for value as true, and as represented by the bank.

The mortgage is now worthless as collateral, and can no longer be used as a component of the mortgage-backed securities bundle that has already been sold into the marketplace by Fannie Mae.

The property owner has no obligation to Fannie Mae, as Fannie Mae was never a party to the sale. On the contrary, the bank is the party that benefited from the payment of cash provided by Fannie Mae, and the bank must therefore make Fannie Mae whole by return of the value by a legitimate means – either by paying cash, or else by the replacement of another fraudulently obtained mortgage.

That leaves the property owner in possession of a free and clear property, and the criminal bank holding the bag as the entity responsible to the actual lender (Fannie Mae, or whomever), for repayment of the funds advanced.

The bank cannot lay claim to any property interest, as the bank was engaged in a fraudulent transaction and had no valid contract with the buyer, and acknowledged that the property owner had no claim on this property at the time of the transaction.

Here, we need to take the law as it clearly stands, without second-guessing any dimension of its application, either in the United States or Britain. The law ‘leaves wrongdoers where it finds them’, and ‘they may not profit from their wrongdoings’ – a fact of life which is currently being forced into the depraved consciousness of the world-class financial fraudsters who have begun to be exposed via these Wantagate reports.

This reality opens a further can of worms for the banks, in that the law is also governed by a maxim that ‘any money you make from the illegal use of my money, is my money’.

This is why, to cite the related parallel Wanta case, Ambassador Wanta is entitled to 100% of ALL THE ACCRUALS that have been leveraged from off the back of his original underlying $27.5 trillion, and why he is entitled to all the interest and penalties so far demanded on the compromise $4.5 trillion that has been illegally withheld from him since June 2006 on the say-so of the criminal financial cheats identified in our reports (Paulson, the Bushes, the Clintons, Cheney, and all the other fraudsters whose names have appeared in this narrative).

Just in case the hard reality of this has not yet hit home in some minds, the Ambassador, having suffered the rifling and illegal ransacking of the bank accounts of which he is the sole principal, is also entitled to ownership and clear possession of the hundreds of trillions of US dollars that the criminal cadres have generated in the course of their open-ended fraudulent transactions based on the misuse of his compromise $4.5 trillion since it was illegally hijacked by Paulson in June 2006, as well. It might even emerge that the Ambassador is entitled to the physical possession of much of the cities of Dubai and Abu Dhabi, which have sprung up out of nowhere, thanks to the illegal use of untaxed fiat money wealth generated out of his stolen (diverted) funds.

It is precisely because of such unimaginable implications of what might be exposed, that it became urgently ‘necessary’ for the criminal intelligence cadres to reach that ‘compromise’ agreement with the Ambassador, when it became known in July 2005 that he had ‘ceased to be dead’.

However, because those concerned are serial criminal financial fraudsters, they entered into the compromise accord (the text of which, finalised in May 2006, is classified, so obviously the Editor has not seen it) in bad faith – making the crude and rash assumption that, on the basis of their past experience, they could with impunity continue perpetrating their frenetic fraudulent off-balance sheet financial transactions by exploiting Lee Emil Wanta’s compromise cash-cash real money $4.5 trillion – stringing the Ambassador along with the intention of using this compromise agreement as a shield behind which to conduct their fraudulent ‘business as usual’.

Although they have accordingly been able to generate trillions of additional fraudulently procured dollars and euros on the basis of that risky assumption, all that they have achieved is the creation of vast stocks of fiat money funds that belong to the Ambassador in toto, on the basis of the maxim that ‘any money you make from the illegal use of my money, is my money’.

The reality of the bind that these bumbling master financial fraudsters find themselves in as a direct and exclusive consequence of Wantagate is only now dawning upon them, against the background of arrests and other momentous developments that have not yet been reported.

The principal that ‘any money you make from the illegal use of my money, is my money’ means, of course, that deconstruction of such illegal financial transactions, as is now taking place given the proliferation of forensic investigations that Wantagate has triggered, leaves the banks at the absolute mercy of the investigators. In the context framed by this report, the illegal false mortgage transactions that the bank perpetrated can be traced back through the bank’s books, as can the profits that it made through the bank’s illegal use of the funds paid by Fannie Mae to the bank for the purchase of the mortgages.

Both the principal sum and the illegal profits generated by the bank can theoretically be reclaimed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (which, given the huge gaps in the accounts of these and other Government-Sponsored Enterprises, they urgently need to do), since it was their funds that were obtained by fraud in the first place.

Of course we are now well and truly through the Looking-Glass, because Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Federal Home Loan Bank System and other relevant Government-Sponsored Enterprises (or GSEs) and the banks themselves are all actually ‘government agencies’ – although the double-minded phrase Government-Sponsored Enterprise itself gives the lie to such obfuscation and the banks are independent organisations as well as being supervised ‘government agencies’.

The GSEs cannot ‘operate in the private sector’ and at the same time refrain from seeking the remedies due to them when they have been defrauded: and officials in Government who may seek to restrain them from so doing would be acting illegally. In any case, the books still need to be balanced, but that’s a problem for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; it’s not the buyer’s problem.

US case law already exists in which the banks concerned have been obliged by the courts to pay back all the money paid in by borrowers who were not informed in writing at the outset, that their payments would rise as soon as the Federal Reserve raised interest rates, so that through the banks’ failure to disclose, the contracts were shown to have been illegal.

The banks appealed against this outcome, and lost. As a consequence, thousands of home owners had millions in payments and fees returned to them. However the case in question did NOT bring up any of the issues discussed in our analysis.

When loans are extended, the party extending the loan MUST provide FULL DISCLOSURE, or the transaction is illegal. Another thorny problem facing banks is that once a banking corporation has committed an ultra vires action, their charter is required to be suspended and they are obliged to cease all business transactions immediately until reinstated by the State banking authority.

While in this condition, banks may not enter into any contracts, nor may they sue in court. What, then, does this mean for ALL THE BUSINESS that they have conducted SINCE the first ultra vires action was committed?

Does it not mean that all the transactions following the ultra vires action have been null and void? And if so, does that not mean that the trillions generated off the back of funds that are owned by others (e.g. Ambassador Wanta) are all not merely illegally procured, but also that the transactions themselves are null and void? And to complicate matters even further, the insurance companies’ contracts contain clauses which state that policies are in effect ONLY so long as corporate banking charters are in effect and/or the corporation is in good standing.

Nor can it be complacently taken for granted any longer by the criminalist classes that American Courts are now so notoriously corrupt, and the Judiciary so irrevocably compromised, that they can be relied upon to sustain the illegal status quo indefinitely.

Post-Wantagate, everything, by definition, is up in the air: and, as is shown below, an Ohio Federal Court has already insisted that no contacts underlay mortgage transactions associated recently with attempted foreclosures by Deutsche Bank.

All of which reveals how extremely grave is the situation facing banks which (a) have indulged in fraudulent finance operations along the lines described here in respect of mortgages, and (b) the big money-center banks which have illegally exploited, leveraged, hypothecated and otherwise abused funds belonging to Ambassador Lee Wanta, without his authority, thereby, from the moment they started engaging in such activity, undertaking further ultra vires operations which throw all their subsequent transactions into question – EVERY SINGLE SUBSEQUENT TRANSACTION, not just SELECTED TRANSACTIONS.

Given these broader considerations, one can now understand rather more clearly why the reckless criminal behaviour of Henry M. Paulson, Jr., working to guidelines corruptly approved by President George W. Bush Jr. and by Vice President Cheney, has had actual and prospectively catastrophic consequences and implications for the entire international banking system (given, for starters, that US banking collapses would plunge the entire world into financial and economic chaos).

And going further, one can understand rather more clearly why Mr Henry M. Paulson’s endlessly criminal behaviour in assuming that he and his blackmailed or blackmailable high-level colleagues could ‘play with’ Ambassador Wanta’s funds, represented an act of grossly reckless stupidity – not least given that, had Wanta’s funds been remitted in June 2006, when they should have been, the financial sins identified above could and would have been brushed under the huge metaphorical filthy carpet alluded to in an earlier report.

Finally, one can also appreciate why it is that when we describe Henry M. Paulson, Jr., President George W. Bush and his father, Vice President Cheney, the Clintons and other rogue ‘dark actors playing games’, as financial fraudsters and criminals, and Citibank, Bank of New York Mellon, and other institutions named in these reports, as criminal enterprises, nothing happens – because it’s all true. That accounts for why the vituperative antagonism expressed towards the Editor of this service for a year or more after we began these reports, is now more or less confined to fringe compartmentalised operatives and hacks who are isolated by their handlers from reality because their handlers themselves cannot acknowledge, of course, that they lied to them, and that the vat of tawdry lies in which they swim will not be refilled.

In the earlier stages of the multi-year research which led to Wantagate, the Editor encountered parties in the United States whose fear of exposure puzzled at times him greatly. These fears were expressed in terms of concerns about breaches of national security, and were accompanied by threats along the lines of ‘you will not testify’. It turns out that this paranoia was related NOT to anything to do with national security, but rather to anxiety that the line of investigation that the Editor was following might lead to the exposure of the financial criminality that has been duly described (actually, only touched upon, so far) in these reports.

As Appendix A to this analysis, we cite the case publicised last November when the Ohio Federal Court voided foreclosures demanded by Deutsche Bank, ruling that the de facto holders of the property in question ‘owe nothing’. This case shows that it is not yet quite accurate to assert, as many aggrieved and severely injured parties do these days (with good reason), that the Rule of Law in the United States has collapsed entirely (and we ourselves need to modify such statements to take account, at least, of the Ohio ruling in question against Deutsche Bank).

The basis for that ruling was as follows.

A borrower signs loan papers when a loan is made. A representative of the bank signs as well, but the ONLY capacity in which the bank’s representative signs is so as to certify that the borrower’s signature is valid and correct. Put another way, the representative of the bank does NOT append his signature in a mode or manner that creates a contract between the borrower and the bank. The reason that the bank’s representative does not sign in order to create a contract is that the bank is aware that it is not giving the borrower ANYTHING AT ALL.

When the borrower signs the documentation, what he or she is doing is creating a new negotiable piece of paper which, provided the bank or another party accepts it as such, can be converted into a LOAN. But it is a loan to the bank, not to the borrower.

The bank’s books will show the transaction as a credit, as banks are privileged institutions which enjoy the right to create money by monetising promissory notes. The bank then places the amount that THE BORROWER loaned to them via the loan document into the borrower’s account (deposit account), or else issues a certified check or some other payment method from the transaction book entry account. That process creates a debit on the bank’s books.

In other words, all of a sudden, the bank’s books are balanced, since the bank possesses a credit and a debit that suddenly match. But that process does not create a contract, which is what the court requires to be filed, in order to support any request for foreclosure PROVIDED A CONTRACT IS REQUESTED BY THE PERSON BEING FORECLOSED UPON, WHEN THE FORECLOSURE IS BEING CHALLENGED IN COURT.

The crucial point here is that when the person being foreclosed upon requests the contract when challenging the foreclosure in court, he or she will be able thereby to demonstrate to the court that the bank cannot provide any such document.

In the case cited in Appendix A, Deutsche Bank could not provide the contract because it did not possess a contract (see above). Accordingly, the court properly dismissed the foreclosure process.

So the message to all who are vexed by this fraudulent finance offensive is that no loan can be foreclosed upon without a contract to back it up: and no contract exists in these cases. However it is essential for the foreclosure to be challenged at the hearing and that the contract be requested. This is usually done in America by means of a motion lodged prior to the date of the hearing.

The Court will (perhaps surprisingly to some) usually do the right thing if the right documents are placed before it by means of the proper procedure, as it has no choice in the matter. On the other hand, the Court does not have to answer a question that it is not asked to adjudicate upon or to take into consideration. This means that even if the Judge may be aware that no contract exists to back up the foreclosure, UNLESS THE REQUEST FOR THE CONTRACT IS MADE, the foreclosure will be granted. Therefore those concerned must always ensure that a motion challenging the foreclosure and requesting the contract MUST be lodged prior to the hearing.

In the report cited in the Appendix, the author implies, but does not actually state, that the reason the bank did not possess the contract was that the contract had been collectivised as the bank had been a purchaser of some of the packaged subprime derivatives. It can now be seen that these so-called mortgage-backed, collectivised, synthetic derivatives that have been sold around the world which are based on loans, have nothing to back them up and are therefore worthless.

The ‘subprime crisis’ ‘slide’ is thus a verbal obfuscation designed by semantics experts aligned with US criminal intelligence cadres in order to obfuscate the true enormity of what has been going on for years behind the scenes – namely, that the banks have been ripping off Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Federal Home Loan Bank System. and other Government-Sponsored Enterprises and borrowers alike, and have been enriching themselves illegally at the expense of both.

(At the same time, the GSEs have been corruptly collaborating in this fraudulent activity, recycling what we suspect to be illegally procured cash into the banks, thus plugging huge gaps created by the ongoing illegal transfer of funds offshore and off-balance sheet: see below).

The value of such fraudulent financial transactions runs into multiple trillions of dollars. If the transactions were now to be properly marked on the banks’ books, every leading US bank and securities house, and thousands of US savings banks, would collapse in bankruptcy.

Moreover the General Managements of Fannie Mae and other affected GSEs are grossly negligent on two glaringly obvious counts, to begin with: first, they did not exercise proper due diligence when financing the banks’ transactions; and secondly, they have inexplicably failed, given their knowledge of this corruption, to reclaim the funds that were illegally extracted from them by the banks, back onto their books, by every means available to them – which means that these GSEs are themselves co-conspirators with the banks in this fraudulent finance, as well as being negligent in this respect, as well.

Examination of the US Office of Management and Budget’s ‘Analytical Perspectives’ document for Fiscal Year 2007 reveals (on pages 1229-1231) gigantic white spaces in the accounts of the Federal National Mortgage Association, the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Association, and the US Federal Home Loan Bank System. Specifically, crucial basic data for direct loan obligations outstanding, are blank for the years 2005, 2007, and 2007 (estimated).

The reason these tables (1) are blank is that these GSEs have chosen not to reveal that they have been ripped off by the banks, let alone the proportions of the rip-offs. An obfuscatory and deceitful rubric in six-point type states that ‘Consistent with Government-wide practice for GSEs, information for 2006 and 2007 was not required to be collected’. As noted, data for 2005 is missing as well. The Editor of this service has studied the US Federal Budget intensively at times since the 1970s, and this ‘practice’ was, of course, never at all in evidence before the corrupt ‘need’ to disguise the magnitude of the frauds became acute.

But of course, by publishing blank tables, the GSEs that have been exploited by the banks and that have therefore de facto been supporting banks that would otherwise clearly not be viable, have publicly revealed that a grave problem exists – without coming clean and explaining what it is.

The Office of Management and Budget’s ‘Analytical Perspectives’ document for Fiscal Year 2008 extends these BLANK data tables into FY 2008, adding the adjusted rubric:

‘‘Consistent with Government-wide practice for GSEs, information for 2007 and 2008 was not required to be collected’.

The tables for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are BLANK not just for FY2007 and FY 2008, but for FY2006 as well. However, all of a sudden, data that were missing in the 2006 column for the Federal Home Loan Bank System displayed in the Office of Management and Budget’s FY2007 ‘Analytical Perspectives’ has appeared in the FY 2008 documentation.

It shows actual Federal Home Loan Bank System direct loan obligations of $7,475,995,000,000. Separately, under the heading ‘Cumulative balance of direct loans outstanding’, transactions that are here labelled ‘Advances made to members and mortgage loans purchased from members’ of $7,475,995,000,000, are all but ‘matched’ by ‘Principal collected on advances and mortgage loans’ amounting $7,453,327,000,000. No explanation is provided as to how this ‘reconciliation’ suddenly materialised out of thin air. What has accordingly happened is the same as the relevant banks’ book-entry ‘reconciliation, described above, but in reverse.

Pages 98-100 of the current ‘Analytical Perspectives’ document shows blank data in a table purportedly displaying the face value of Government-Sponsored Lending for Fiscal Years 2005 and 2006, with the following rubrics:

‘‘Financial data for Fannie Mae is not presented here because following a restatement of financial data for 2001-2004, audited financial results for 2005 and 2006 have not been released’; and: ‘Financial data for Freddie Mac is not presented here because following the release of previous earnings restatements, audited financial statements for 2005 and 2006 have not been released’. These excuses, however, diverge from the explanation for the blank spaces given elsewhere in the Office of Management and Budget’s FY2008 documentation which, as noted above, states: ‘Consistent with Government-wide practice for GSEs, information for 2007 and 2008 (2006 and 2007) was not required to be collected’.

So, either relevant data ‘was not required to be collected’, or it couldn’t be released because audited financial statements are not available following financial data restatements for earlier years. Which excuse for hiding the truth is it to be?

Clearly, given that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which is part of the Office of the President, is concealing these crucial financial data, it is hiding something big: and what is being hidden are the colossal proportions of the fraudulent finance that has been perpetrated, the fact that the GSEs in question have been systematically ripped off by the banks, the fact that the GSEs are collaborating conduits for fraudulent finance, and that the GSEs have negligently allowed this state of affairs to continue for years – and, in the case of the Federal Home Loan Banks, the fact that the accounts have just been synthetically doctored by means of book entries to create an almost balancing double entry.

An appropriately cynical interpretation must be that the GSEs have been used to enrich the banks.

If we scratch deeper (beyond the scope of this report), we will find that this enrichment process has channelled pipelines of funds and assets into the lined pockets of a financial élite of organised criminal operatives and official fraudsters who, working in cahoots with the corrupt bankers, have been enriching themselves at the expense of US taxpayers, those unfortunates whose properties have been foreclosed upon, and foreign banks and other financial sector ‘takers’ who have failed to perform adequate (or any) due diligence when assessing whether the packaged, collectivised, synthetic derivatives ‘products’ are backed by real assets, or whether – as is the case – they are worthless. The GSEs in question have also been acting as pipelines of fraudulently procured funds to keep the banks and securities houses afloat, using inter alia funds stolen and generated from those belonging to Ambassador Wanta as sole principal, thus bringing the banks progressively under the de facto control of a small (Fascist) élite of master criminal operatives.

It was to draw a thick veil over this ghastly, criminal state of affairs, that the international and US domestic financial and intelligence communities needed to procure a means of refinancing the banks so that these aberrations would never catch up with the banking and intelligence and political community perpetrators, would never surface into the public domain, and so that the banks and agencies such as the US GSEs, could be refinanced without the banks having to be bailed out, or entities such as the GSEs having to be bailed out with printed money themselves.

The solution, designed by Ambassador Lee Emil Wanta, the financial engineering genius who orchestrated the Financial Warfare operation against the Soviet Union in accordance with President Reagan’s direct instructions, was and remains The Wanta Plan.

Under this scheme, which should have started up in June 2006 when Wanta should have taken economic receipt of his $4.5 trillion agreed-upon compromise Settlement, the high-yield financial trading techniques that have been applied illegally to exploit Wanta’s funds to generate untaxed fiat funds off-balance sheet, would be applied ON-BALANCE SHEET, with every dime taxed and paid onto the Treasury’s books.

This scheme was approved by the Group of Eight financial powers, the world’s leading central banks, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and finally, by the compromised and cooperating banks and securities houses themselves, once it was realised that no other solution was available – which has remained the case throughout. Even though all these generic parties have, to a greater or a lesser extent, participated in the serial financial criminality that has led the whole world to the brink of financial catastrophe as described here, each group knows that an actual collapse would be disastrous and contrary to its own fundamental interests.

In other words, we can now observe, deconstructed before our own eyes, a living example of the principle of double-mindedness that holds sway in these circles. On the one hand, the prospective and unravelling catastrophe has been brought about (as was predicted in these reports and in our printed intelligence publications) by the perverse financial criminality of the parties listed; while on the other hand, the cited parties are almost all united in their urgent insistence that The Wanta Plan be implemented, without further dangerous and damaging delay, in order to avert the prospective spectacle, for which they themselves are responsible, of banks and securities houses collapsing around the world, and the world financial economy being cast into the abyss.

Which highlights, once again, the extreme folly of Henry M. Paulson, Jr., the US Treasury Secretary, on behalf both of himself, and of President Bush, Vice-Presidnet Cheney, Godfather Bush, their Clinton criminal associates, and those elements of the corrupted US intelligence community that decided to ‘play with’ Ambassador Wanta’s compromise $4.5 trillion Settlement funds.

We repeat:

Had the Settlement been implemented in June 2006, the impact of The Wanta Plan would have been such that the gross financial sins of the past could have been covered up (however fundamentally unsatisfactory that would have been: but of course, that would not have been Ambassador Wanta’s problem). But Messrs Paulson, Bush Jr., Cheney et al, decided instead that they would continue corrupt ‘business as usual’. That is how arrogant, blind and stupid they were

Moreover, they failed to take account of the following three straightforward factors:

1. The faith and determination of Ambassador Lee Emil Wanta, strengthened in the furnace of a decade and a half of suffering in the horrible US GULAG and thereafter, giving rise to his certainty that his refusal to go along with the corruption would ultimately be vindicated.

2. The unequalled securities market expertise of Michael C. Cottrell, M.S., and his refusal to be compromised by these people, despite their numerous attempts to do so.

3. The global power of these Wantagate reports to break through the controlled inertia of the so-called ‘mainstream’ media*, which has been fatally compromised in the United States by Operation Mockingbird (a long-running CIA programme to muzzle and control the media) and its aftermath, and by a parallel surreptitious and subversive operation to muzzle and control the media in the United Kingdom., mainly by means lethal injections of ‘political correctness’ and the infection of narrow-mindedness and mind-control disseminated inter alia via the vacuous ‘Common Purpose’ programme (see the second posting in the Archive).

* The latest issue of The Economist, which ought to have been leading this story all along, has suddenly referred to the reported desire on the part of European parties for high-level arrests to take place in the United States. No doubt this publication has been compelled by 'the unfolding of events' (to cite a phrase often used by Lenin) to read these reports. If it hasn't yet got round to this, it should perhaps consider doing so straight away.

So what these fools have wound up with, from their perspective, is the very worst of all possible worlds. Their assets and illegal accounts have been frozen. The power they have abused has been, or is being, decisively thwarted. They face having to pay immense amounts of tax, with accumulated interest and penalties, followed by a requirement to account for all their ‘sources of funds’, which they cannot do, on pain of spending the rest of their lives in jail. Some are now marked down as war criminals – following the precedent set when Donald Rumsfeld had to flee France in October, with the assistance of the cowed American Embassy, when it became clear that he was in danger of being arrested for war crimes.

Meanwhile thousands of bankers have been arrested and have disappeared. Senior US officials have been arrested and/or ‘dealt with’ (in an operation that was ongoing as this report was being finalised). The most exposed American (and some British) banks have moved to the very edge of collapse, with the Securities and Exchange Commission reported in December to have threatened Citibank itself with closure. Detailed published investigations of the financial frauds have begun (with this analysis), threatening to impose irresistible pressure on the banks – since, for instance, victims of the real estate mortgage scams go to the courts, contest foreclosures and demand presentation of the underlying contracts by the banks.

And the, endless, inordinate criminal delays in completing the Wanta Settlement have paralleled an associated degradation of global economic financial and economic conditions which, by the end of 2007, was threatening to run irretrievably out of control.

In the United Kingdom, the collapse of Northern Rock, in the first high street banking collapse to have occurred in Great Britain for 150 years, was accompanied by the machine politician’s worst nightmare – press pictures of customers lining the streets to pull their savings from the bank: and it was a direct consequence of the type of mortgage frauds described in this report.

The bank’s assets consisted inordinately of packaged, collectivised mortgage-backed, synthetic derivatives composed of ‘assets’ that were worthless and dumped on Northern Rock by associates of the Bush-Clinton crime syndicate because, thanks to Wantagate, it had become apparent within the financial community that no underlying property contracts ever existed. With its balance sheet skewed, the bank relied excessively on the interbank market for funds, which dried up as the crisis of confidence arising from Henry M. Paulson’s deliberate hijacking of the Wanta Settlement, spread throughout the banking community. And the Bank of England picked up the tab – sending shivers down the spines of central bankers facing similar problems elsewhere (Japan, for instance).

Just before Christmas, knowledgeable sources were informing the Editor of this service that one reason that the high-level crook Paulson was still in place was that literally nobody could be found to replace him – reflecting the dogs’s dinner that he has made of his corrupt stewardship and the incalculable damage that he has inflicted upon the degraded reputation of the United States and its finances because of his and his colleagues’ unprincipled greed and folly.

So it can be understood why we have described this crisis, all along, as millennial – shorthand for the worst financial corruption crisis, and the most despicably stupid display of strutting, power-mad financial arrogance, ever recorded.


Deutsche Bank Foreclosures tossed out of Ohio United States District Court:
“They owe nothing”: Thursday, 15 November 2007.

Judge Christopher A. Boyko of the Eastern Ohio United States District Court, on October 31, 2007, dismissed 14 Deutsche Bank-filed foreclosures in a ruling based on lack of standing for not owning/holding the mortgage loan at the time the lawsuits were filed.

Judge Bokyo issued an order requiring the Plaintiffs in a number of pending foreclosure cases to file a copy of the executed Assignment demonstrating [that] Plaintiff (Deutsche Bank) was the holder and owner of the Note and Mortgage as of the date the Complaint was filed, or the Court would enter a dismissal.

The Court’s amended General Order No. 2006-16 requires Plaintiff (Deutsche Bank) to submit an Affidavit along with the complaint, which identifies Plaintiff as the original mortgage holder, or as an assignee, trustee, or successor-interest.

Apparently Deutsche Bank submitted several Affidavits that claim that Deutsche Bank was in fact the owner of the mortgage Note, but none of these Affidavits mention assignment or trust or successor-interest.

Thus, the Judge ruled that in every instance, these submissions create a “conflict” and they “do not satisfy” the burden of demonstrating at the time of filing the complaint, that Deutsche Bank was in fact the “legal” Note holder.

While the decision is great for homeowners in distress (due to providing a new escape hatch out of foreclosure), it is a bblow to the cause of sorting out the high-finance side of the mortgage mess.

Jacksonville Area Legal Aid Attorney, April Charney, made these comments in regard to the Ohio Federal Court Ruling:

‘This Court Order is what I have been saying in my cases. This is rampant fraud on every Court in America, or nonjudicial foreclosure fraud where the securitized trusts are filing foreclosures when they never own/hold the mortgage loan at the commencement of the foreclosure’.

‘That means that the loans are clearly in default at the time of any eventual transfer of the ownership of the mortgage loans to the trusts. This means that the loans are being held by the originating lenders after the alleged ‘sale’ to the trust, despite what it says per the pooling and servicing agreements and despite what the securities laws require’.

This means that many securitized trusts don’t really, legally, own these bad loans’.

‘In my cases, many of the trusts try to argue equitable assignment that predates the filing of the foreclosure, but a securitized trust cannot take an equitable assignment of a mortgage loan. It also means that the securitized trusts own nothing’.

‘So, with this decision, it appears confirmed that investors in the mortgage débacle may in fact own nothing – not even the bad loans that they funded. It seems that their right to the cash flow from the underlying properties does not extend to ownership of the properties themselves, thus clouding the recovery picture considerably’.

April Charney further remarked:

‘This opinion, once circulated and adopted by State and Federal Courts across the country, will stop the progress of foreclosures, at first in judicial foreclosure states, across America, dead in their tracks’.

APPENDIX B: Summary of the Law of Voids in the United States:

What follows is a brief summary giving details of how to stop a foreclosure or else to get one’s house back after it has been taken through the invalid Court process.

Before a Court (Judge) can proceed juridically, jurisdiction must be complete – consisting of two opposing parties (not their Attorneys: although Attorneys can enter an appearance on behalf of a party, only the parties can testify, and until the Plaintiff testifies, the Court has no basis upon which to rule juridically). The two halves of subject matter jurisdiction equate to the statutory or common law authority that the action is brought under (the theory of indemnity) and the sworn testimony of a competent fact witness concerning the injury suffered (= the cause of action). If a jurisdictional failing appears on the face of the record, the matter is void, subject to vacation with damages, and can never be time-barred. So a question that naturally occurs is:

‘If I successfully vacate a void judgment, can they just come back and try the case again?’

The answer to this is that a new suit must be filed, and that this can only be done within the time period allocated by the Statute of Limitations. Lack of jurisdiction cannot be corrected by an order nunc pro tunc. The only proper office of a nunc pro tunc court order is to correct a mistake in the records: it cannot be used to rewrite history (2). The number of probable void judgments on the books in America’s Courthouses is so great that there is no practical means of estimating how many there are.


How does this apply to the mortgage scams identified in this report? Here is the relevant equation:

Plaintiff with no contract in hand

= No Standing

= No jurisdiction

= No foreclosure action.

Therefore, the real issue in respect of void judgments is SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION.

Void judgments are judgments rendered by a Court that lacked jurisdiction, either of the subject matter or the parties (3).

The basic reality is that subject matter jurisdiction can never be presumed, can never be waived, and cannot be constructed, even by mutual consent of the parties.

Subject matter jurisdiction consists of two parts: the relevant statutory or common law authority for the Court to hear the case; and the appearance and testimony of a competent fact witness: in other words, sufficiency of pleadings


Ms April Carney and others stress that this Ohio decision has seriously adverse implications as they put it, for the prospects of any amicable financial workout for various investor communities holding mortgage-backed securities. This is because doubt is cast upon where the full write-downs will eventually land. The resulting uncertainty was expected, therefore, to harm the market values of so-called mortgage-backed securities and of mortgage-backed securities-based synthetic securities, which were already in chaos due to rising underlying delinquencies.

Investors in such securities allowed themselves to be misled into assuming, wrongly, that they actually owned some ‘real estate’ through holding these assets. At the same time, the wholesale marketing of such synthetic ‘assets’ by, for instance, the GSEs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, represented fraudulent transactions. These issues are addressed in the preceding analysis.

[Note: Government-Sponsored Enterprises are entities established by the federal Government but which ‘operate in the private sector’. These off-off-budget US Federal Government hybrids’ offer magnificent opportunities for officially-condoned fraudulent off-budget financial transactions, as has been shown to be the case].

It is probably now too late for compromised Judges to attempt purposefully to misinterpret (a.k.a. to reinterpret) some of the canons and specifics, so as to protect the false debt owners.

A financial sector and trading expert consulted for this analysis states that 15 or more years ago, he warned that the new customised derivative contracts that were backed by mere electronic debits and credits represented a grave prospective danger that could take the financial world down with them unless they were transparent, standardised, and backed by a well-capitalised clearing house similar to the commodity exchanges that have existed for a century and a half, or more. These fears have turned out to be prophetic and accurate.

Nor is it any coincidence that this hazardous financial sector activity ‘took off’ almost immediately that the criminal cadres had got their hands on Ambassador Wanta’s accumulated $27.5 trillion of financial assets held in his wholly owned corporate accounts, after he had been illegally ‘taken down’ in Lausanne, Switzerland, on 7th July 1993 (see, for instance, the ‘Wisconsingate’ report on dated 6th August 2007: Archive).

For these fraudulent transactions leveraged dud assets that were marketed by the Government-Sponsored Enterprises in collaboration with the corrupt US official financial fraudsters and their intelligence community and banking/securities sector co-conspirators, as one component of a vast infrastructure of fraudulent financial recycling mechanisms designed primarily, at the outset, to obfuscate the stealing and diversion of Ambassador Wanta’s funds.

Notes and References:

(1) International Currency Review, World Reports Limited [see this website] Volume 31, Numbers 3 & 4, Fourth Quarter 2006, pages 178-179; and International Currency Review, Volume 33, Numbers 1 and 2, September 2007, pages 383 and 285.

(2) E.g. Transamerica Insurance Co. v. South, 975 F. 2d 321, 325-326 (7th Circuit 1992); United States v. Daniels, 902 F. 2d 1238, 1240 (7th Circuit 1990); King v, Ionization International, Inc., 825 F. 2d 1180, 1188 (7th Circuit 1987); and: Central Laborer’s Pension and Annuity Funds v. Griffee, 198 F. 3d 642, 644 (7th Circuit 1999).

(3) Wahl v. Round Valley Bank 38 Ariz. 411, 300 P. 955 (1931); Tube City Mining & Milling Co. v. Otterson, 16 Ariz. 305, 146p 203 (1914); and Millken v. Meyer, 311 U.S. 457, 61 S. CT. 339, 85 L. Ed. 2d 278 (1940).

Editor's Note: We are still, from time to time, receiving emails from frustrated people seeking documentation to 'back up' what we publish in these reports. Such correspondents choose to overlook the well-known fact that we have published several huge issues of International Currency Review which contain hundreds of pages of facsimiles of relevant documents. Since we are a commercial operation, we cannot make these volumes available free of charge.

However copies are available in many university and other libraries around the world, and of course they can be ordered via this website at any time. But the main point here is that complaints along these lines reveal lack of knowledge of the background, which is that an immense volume of relevant documents has been published, while these reports are approved where necessary and appropriate either by the Principals or by Michael C. Cottrell, M.S., before being posted.

In the case of this presentation, the Editor conveyed a copy of the report for Mr Cottrell's attention as a courtesy and at the same time to ensure that what has now been published here does not 'cut across' matters of an intensified nature that are currently in hand.


We now repeat, yet again, our familiar summary of the Statutes, securities regulations and fraud information that we have appended to these reports for many months. The reason we append this information is to remind everyone of their clear responsibilities under the US Misprision of Felony legislation, and of course to provide a legal basis for these reports.

Reiteration of the fraudulent transactions involving Bank of New York Mellon – a bank so arrogant and conspicuously indifferent both to its tarnished reputation and to its grotesque breaches of US law and of N.A.S.D./S.E.C. Regulations, that it now takes first prize in the crowded competition for the title of ‘Most arrogant and corrupt financial institution in America’. At least, this was the case until the perpetration of the 'Saturday scam' described above and on 13th November:

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 judgment” 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:


“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… 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’.


NASD Rule 3120, et al.
NASD Rule 2330, et al
NASD Conduct Rules 2110 and 3040
NASD Conduct Rules 2110 and IM-2110-1
NASD Conduct Rules 2110 and SEC Rule 15c3-1
NASD Conduct Rules 2110 and 3110
SEC Rules 17a-3 and 17a-4
NASD Conduct Rules 2110 and Procedural Rule 8210
NASD Conduct Rules 2110 and 2330 and IM-2330
NASD Conduct Rules 2110 and IM-2110-5
NASD Systems and Programme Rules 6950 through 6957

In addition to which Bank of New York Mellon is in violation of:
97-13 Bank Secrecy Act, Recordkeeping Rule for funds transfers and transmittals of funds, et al.


Annunzio-Wylie Anti-Money Laundering Act
Anti-Drug Abuse Act
Applicable international money laundering restrictions
Bank Secrecy Act
Conspiracy to commit and cover up murder.
Crimes, General Provisions, Accessory After the Fact [Title 18, USC]
Currency and Foreign Transactions Reporting Act
Economic Espionage Act
Hobbs Act
Imparting or Conveying False Information [Title 18, USC]
Maloney Act
Misprision of Felony [Title 18, USC] (1)
Money-Laundering Control Act
Money-Laundering Suppression Act
Organized Crime Control Act of 1970
Perpetration of repeated egregious felonies by State and Federal public employees and their Departments and agencies, which are co-responsible with the said employees for ONGOING illegal and criminal actions, to sustain fraudulent operations and crimes in order to cover up criminal activities and High Crimes and Misdemeanours by present and former holders of high office under the United States
Provisions pertaining to private business transactions being protected under both private and criminal penalties [H.R. 3723]
Provisions prohibiting the bribing of foreign officials [F.I.S.A.]
Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act [R.I.C.O.]
Securities Act 1933
Securities Act 1934
Terrorism Prevention Act
Treason legislation, especially in time of war

This list shows to what extent the Bush II Administration condones one Rule of Law for the Rest of Us, and absolute contempt for domestic and international law for the officials and bankers who are illegally diverting and exploiting Wanta’s funds.

The Directors and others listed in Part 1 of the Wantagate Listing of Institution Directors and others posted on 11th June may likewise be Accessories to the Fact of, and/or co-conspirators in, wittingly or unwittingly, the egregious violation of the laws itemised above. This list is reproduced in International Currency Review, Volume 33, #s 1 & 2, September 2007, on pages 163-168.


‘Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some Judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both’.

Wicked Pedia Update dated 2nd December 2007:

As previously reported, the Editor’s attention was drawn, in the second half of November 2007, to a pack of old lies, diversionary claptrap and disinformation posted on Wikipedia under ‘Leo Wanta’.

Although this posting appeared FOR THE FIRST TIME on 12th November 2007, it consisted almost entirely of ancient lies, including disinformation dredged out of ‘Thieves’ World’, a hatchet job published in 1994 by Simon and Schuster by the late Claire Sterling, a CIA operative.

Mrs Sterling died suddenly after being summoned for her second meeting with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, under Clinton.

The fact that the OLD Wikipedia lies appeared for the first time as late as 12th November 2007, and consisted almost totally of old, discredited lies, omitting the Master Lie that the CIA retailed after the Ambassador had been taken down, namely that he was DEAD, indicated quite clearly to the Editor and his advisers that this latest evil display of regurgitated disinformation represented a deliberate operation by the US intelligence community’s disinformation and lie machine, to begin, all over again, the process of discrediting Ambassador Leo Wanta – so that they can relieve him of his funds by some false pretext or other after a ‘gag order’ has been signed.

The definitive up-to-date information on the Ambassador’s affairs has been published on this website, and in several issues of International Currency Review, Economic Intelligence Review, Soviet Analyst and Arab-Asian Affairs, all published by World Reports Limited, for several years. Copies of these publications are in official, institutional and library hands all over the world. Therefore, any posting about Ambassador Wanta that relies upon ancient lies and fails to take account of the accurate information that we have published, can easily be demonstrated to represent yet another US intelligence community and NSA discrediting operation.

We now understand that the Principals have been advised (for the past several weeks) that they will not be allowed to reveal that they have been paid. This loony state of affairs is designed to ‘set them up’ for a future discrediting operation whereby false witness will be deployed against them to the effect that they have stolen the money, or some such pack of lies, which they will be unable to refute because they will be bound by the ‘prerequisite’ gag order that is intended. Its purpose, of course, is to ‘legitimise’ the old and new lies that the US disinformation apparat will be preparing for future use. The likelihood is that the new discrediting operation will be extended to Michael C. Cottrell, M.S., as well. We are prepared for this intended onslaught.

On 19th November, the Editor posted on Wikipedia the accurate text about Leo Wanta that is now reproduced below. The Editor’s accurate text was then removed by Wikipedia, leaving the ‘old lies’ that had existed previously. When the Editor became aware of this, he reposted the accurate text below, and, given that his own copy had been deleted, he then deleted the pack of lies, leaving his own accurate text up on the Wikipedia site instead, without the lies.

On 2nd December, the Editor was advised by a monitor that the Editor’s accurate text had been removed and that the old discrediting lies had been reposted on the page by Wikipedia. When the Editor checked, he found that the page could no longer be edited because of what the site managers described as ‘vandalism’.

It was not ‘vandalism’ to delete the truth and to replace the truth by old lies, but it was ‘vandalism’ to delete ‘old lies’ and replace them by the truth.

We are therefore able to conclude from this Wicked Pedia outrage, as follows:

1. Wikipedia, which purports to ‘change the world’, prefers lies to the truth.

2. Wikipedia is therefore, by definition, a source of disinformation and lies, and cannot be trusted as a source of reliable information in any context.

3. The only category of sick society that would have any interest in disseminating lies about Ambassador Wanta, the United States’ greatest living patriot, rather than the truth, is the mentally disturbed US counterintelligence disinformation apparat (a.k.a. the US STUPIDITY COMMUNITY) which, by its actions in deleting the Editor’s ACCURATE information and replacing it with old lies, and by its illegal behaviour in ‘snipping’ our website texts as stated above, thereby reveals the desperation of its concerns, which all have to do with covering up official criminality.

4. It is now far too late for the US stupidity community to repair the damage that it has done since June 2006, when the Ambassador’s funds were first hijacked by the criminal financial operative Henry M. Paulson, US Treasury Secretary. So it is laying the groundwork for a renewed discrediting operation against Ambassador Wanta and his colleagues.

We and others will see to it that this intention is defeated, and that such nefarious scheming is exposed for the amoral and disgusting Luciferian behaviour that it represents.

The ACCURATE text that the Editor posted on the Wikipedia site, follows. (The Editor, after all, PAID FOR AMBASSADOR WANTA’S EXIT FROM PROBATION, FOR GOODNESS SAKE, SO HE CAN HARDLY BE A SOURCE OF DISINFORMATION, CAN HE?). This information will be very widely distributed by other means, in order to provide all concerned with the necessary ‘heads-up’ as to what these US Dark Forces have in mind. They are out of their minds and in Satan’s mind:

The disinformation about Leo Wanta (Lee Wanta) below was first posted on 12th November 2007. It contains ancient CIA disinformation and long since exposed lies going back to the early 1990s, and obfuscates the truth. The report appended immediately below was added on 19th November 2007, to correct the disinformation contained in the original stub.

It was subsequently removed and is hereby replaced. This sequence of events, which suggests that egregious lies are preferred to the truth, has been recorded on, which contains all the updated and breaking Wanta material, that was ignored and traduced in the stub at the foot of this report.

This is the correct information that we posted on 19th November 2007:

The 'information' posted below represents a deliberately malevolent, false disinformation picture which has no bearing on reality. It is a travesty of the truth of the matter and cites Christopher Story as the author of some of the disinformation, which is libellous and implies that Story, the veteran
Editor of International Currency Review of nearly 40 years' standing, is engaged in the egregious dissemination of lies, which is not the case.

This is such an egregiously malevolent stub of disinformation that readers should prudently dismiss it altogether; they should start afresh by accessing Christopher Story's website, which is:, reading from the Archive. is the authoritative source for all updated information on Ambassador Lee Emil Wanta. The source 'Thieves' World' was a CIA disinformation work prepared by the late CIA disinformation operative Claire Sterling, published in 1994.

This stub regurgitates ancient lies perpetrated by the CIA, which lied for many years that Lee (Leo being his intelligence community name) Wanta was dead. The CIA proclaimed that he was dead so that corrupt cadres could ransack his funds (see below).

He 'ceased to be dead' with effect from 21st July 2005 after Christopher Story, a British private citizen, had paid $35,000 from his scarce private funds pro bono publico by way of 'restitution' to an American lawyer for onward payment to the Wisconsin State Department of Corrections, to procure Mr Wanta's release from his illegal probation.

Despite his Ambassadorial status, Wanta had been illegally 'taken down' in Switzerland on 7th July 1993 without a warrant on a trumped-up Wisconsin State charge of having failed to pay $14,129 in falsely assessed Wisconsin State fabricated tax that he never owed because he had been resident in Vienna on US Presidential intelligence work since June 1988.

This data is all in the public domain, has been published for several years in International Currency Review, the Journal of the World Financial Community, and can be read on Mr Story's website.

International Currency Review is a banking and financial journal with a worldwide circulation:
ISSN 0020-6490. It is published by World Reports Limited, London.

Notwithstanding that this fabricated tax demand (orchestrated by US criminal intelligence) had been paid twice under protest by Lee Emil Wanta from abroad (in May and June 1992), the funds were improperly allocated by the Wisconsin State Department of Revenue and were never credited to the false account maintained by them for the Ambassador. (Christopher Story holds documentary
proof of both payments). They were paid a third time by Christopher Story in June 2005, which action duly procured Mr Wanta's release from illegal probation effective 14th November 2005.

As a consequence of Wanta thus ceasing to be dead, the CIA's lie that he was dead collapsed in chaos, and all the subsidiary old false witness lies that the CIA had perpetrated, including those assembled for disinformation purposes in the stub below (which, in line with the standard false witness used throughout by detractors, attempts to portray Christopher Story as a source of disinformation) were discredited as well.

Why was Wanta taken down? So that the criminal intelligence cadres running the US Government could ransack the $27.5 trillion of funds assembled by Leo Wanta on President Reagan's orders, in the course of his Financial Warfare operations against the USSR.

Under Reagan's Executive Order 12333 of 1981, US intelligence officers were permitted to establish corporations which could thereafter contract with the CIA/DIA/DEA/NSA et al for the purpose of fulfilling allotted intelligence tasks allocated to them.

The financial proceeds of operations conducted by such corporations were consequently the property of the corporations and thus of their shareholders, a legal fact of life which has never been, and cannot be, disputed. This was not a good idea because almost all US intelligence
operatives are liars and do not function on the basis of the Rule of Law at all, if they can help it.

Lee Wanta is the well-known patriotic exception to this rule: he operates solely in accordance with US law, in contrast to the behaviour of other US operatives, which is why the kakocracy* needed to remove him from the scene, as duly occurred July 1993.

Once Wanta had been illegally arrested (contrary to international law, as a diplomat) and then thrown into a stinking Swiss jail on 7th July 1993, the criminal cadres inside the US official structures immediately ransacked Mr Wanta's bank accounts according to plan.

The history of this matter is, and has been, elaborated in great depth on Christopher Story's website and has been extensively published, as mentioned, in International Currency Review and other World Reports Limited intelligence publications.

Students are advised perhaps to begin with the 'Wisconsingate' report dated 6th August 2007, which forensically dissects, with detailed documentary back-up, the Wisconsin Department of Revenue's tax fabrication operation against Wanta, stretching back for over 20 years, that has been exposed by Christopher Story in minute detail, and which formed the fabricated basis for Wanta's illegal takedown in 1993, despite the fact that Wisconsin has no jurisdiction beyond its borders.

The overall Wantagate crisis, which is the sole and continuing underlying cause of the prevailing global financial and economic day of reckoning that the world is now facing, has been triggered by the fact that the George W. Bush Jr. White House, aided and abetted by other senior office-holders, hijacked the compromise financial settlement of $4.5 trillion that the White House itself agreed (in a classified accord that was finalised in May 2006) should be paid over to Ambassador Wanta, so that the stolen and diverted remaining $23 trillion of his funds (and the many hundreds of trillions of dollars hypothecated upon them) could be released from a de facto lien arising from the collapse of the CIA's lie that Wanta was dead.

For clearly, since he had ceased to be dead, 100% of these funds (plus the hundreds of trillions of fiat ‘funny’ money generated by illegal leveraged operations from that base) belonged to Lee Wanta and to no-one else: a situation that the banks 'could not handle'.

The entire narrative of what has become the worst financial corruption crisis in world history (which this stub consisting of disinformation attempts to obfuscate) is set out in great detail on Christopher Story's website, to which all readers are directed in order for the accurate state of affairs to be understood. As indicated, this stub below is a travesty and a disgrace, as it regurgitates long since discredited CIA lies, presents a diversionary, distorted and misleading picture, and because it malevolently incorporates Christopher Story as a source for some of this disinformation.

It is a disgusting instance of ignorant and malevolent US counterintelligence disinformation and deceit at its very worst.

All the statements in the above commentary may be verified by reference to and International Currency Review. Another publication covering this matter in detail is Economic Intelligence Review, also published by World Reports Limited, London. Wanta students should access the Archive on the Home Page.

A book devoted to Ambassador Wanta and the Wantagate crisis is in preparation

The Wanta disinformation referred to above has been deleted from this page. ENDS.

The Ambassador and his colleagues now have special diplomatic status (conferred upon them by HM The Queen in 2007), which means that the Ambassador is now an Ambassador several times over. This factor greatly complicates the intended discrediting offensive that the mad US stupidity community’s Dark Forces contemplate, their sole objective being of course to cover up their own criminality, in line with pending ‘thought crime’ legislation which has the same Nazi-style objective.

*Note: ‘Kakocracy’: Governance by a clique representing the worst elements of society, in their interests and to the exclusion of all other interests, from the Greek, kakos, meaning foul, or filthy.

Ambassador Leo Emil Wanta: Diplomatic Passport Numbers 04362 & 12535 a.k.a. Frank B. Ingram [FBI] (Sector V) SA32NV; and a.k.a. Rick Reynolds, SA233MS. AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc: Federal EIN Number 20-3866855; Virginia State Corporation Identification Number: 0617454-4; Virginia State Department of Taxation Identification Number: 30203866855F001.

Please be advised that the Editor of International Currency Review cannot enter into email correspondence related to this or to any of the earlier Wantagate reports.

We are a private intelligence publishing house and have no connections to any outside parties including intelligence agencies. The word ‘intelligence’ on this website and in all our marketing material is used for marketing/sales purposes only and has no other connotations whatsoever: see ‘About Us’ on the red panels under the Notes on the Editor, Christopher Story FRSA, who has been solely and exclusively engaged as an investigative journalist, Editor, Author and private financial and current affairs Publisher since 1963 and is not and never has been an agent for a foreign power, suggestions to the contrary being actionable for libel in the English Court.



Teknosis Join us at EENG - Free Blogs,.

December 27, 2007 in Current Affairs | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Lee Emil Wanta / Wantagate: 'Subprime' 'Slide' That Masks Fraudulent Finance:


The comments to this entry are closed.