Usury as Cognitive-Dyslexia

by Timothy Paul Madden, forensic-financial-economist, and historian of equity, law, and policy.

What is usury?

If your answer is interest, then you are experiencing cognitive-dyslexia.

Usury is the pure exploitation of another’s necessity, and its most substantive and significant manifestation in credit and finance is everything that is not the interest.

“A man shall not have interest for his money and a collateral advantage besides for the loan of it…” – Jennings v. Ward [1705] 2 Vern. 520, 18 R.C. 365.

Every benefit taken indirectly by a creditor, for the granting of which no impulsive cause appears but the money lent, will be voided as extorted. (Principles of equity: Kames, Henry Home, Lord, 1696-1782).

If, for example, a money-lender would agree to loan £100 to the headmaster of a private school with interest at, say, 5% per annum, provided that the headmaster will also admit the money-lender’s son to the school even though he does not otherwise qualify, then that condition-of-access is the usury, while the interest-called-interest is not, even though the interest-called-interest can still itself be characterized as a less-concentrated-form of usury or background-radiation-like-usury).

A promissory-note is more properly and accurately a usury-note, because as a condition of access you must first unconditionally and gratuitously agree that you owe the named amount as “principal” to the bank, plus interest, and that you will pay the bank the same amount again on the named maturity date, all as a constructive or de facto application / entry-fee, before the bank / banker will even consider giving you anything in return.

Signing and delivering the promissory-note / usury-note, and giving-over-possession and legal-ownership of all of the real and financial assets so attached, to the bank, is an act and ritual of submission and subservience, and also the bank’s direct source of funds / secured-credit for the subsequent pretended-loan. It is a variation (and cross-leveraged-extension) of what the ancient Romans called paying-tribute to Caesar. 

What then is the difference between or among a promissory-note, a usury-note, and a tribute-note?

The label promissory-note allows the serf to normalize bowing-down before Caesar as a procedural-virtue, so as to perpetuate such servitude as a natural state of being, which in turn avoids other more overt and violent forms of repression and plunder.

Forensically, the business marketed to the public as banking-post-1913 (at the latest) has been and remains credit-reinsurance, compounded and leveraged by 100%-plus access-fees / tribute-payments. 

It is not like racketeering. It is racketeering.

The private-international-nominal-banking-system is a massively-efficient harvester of civilization-level-wealth because it is constructed from and comprised of, cross-leveraged-double-counting double-whammy devices. It is in fact two different but parallel businesses working in tandem. Nominal banking is credit-reinsurance-in-fact, piggy-backing (or vice versa) on a de facto separate business of charging and then further trafficking in 100%-plus application-fees / tribute-payments for access.

Then about 1980 that already-massively-fraudulent-and-anti-equitable business-model was wrapped in and by a larger leveraged-racketeering-business-model, that was then used to channel the proceeds of conversion into the further-access-restricted private-financial-markets.

Using the year 1900 as a convenient starting point for the unfolding of a more-or-less century-long process, up until then for all of human history we had only needed multiple millions (1,000,000’s) to account for the personal financial wealth of the world’s richest individual humans. Cecil Rhodes, for example, when he died in 1902 left an estate of about six million pounds.

Then after 1913, as and while the masses were gradually habituated and normalized to the double-counting business-model-of-credit-reinsurance / pretended-banking, the system eventually needed the word billion (1,000,000,000) to accommodate the individual members and aggregate big-winner’s-club in the game of surfing the latest wave of financial inflation.

Then when they added and incorporated false receipts (to misrepresent bare assumptions of liability as equity-investments), they needed the word trillion (1,000,000,000,000) to accommodate the aggregate winnings of the individual and aggregate (and ever-expanding) big-winner’s-club surfing the wave as ever-more self-induced and ever-more coordinated.

Then when they added their latest and super-cross-leveraged racketeering / wagering-wrapper and business-model, they needed and got the word quadrillion (1,000,000,000,000,000) to accommodate the resulting 1,000-fold exponential-increase in the amount of financial inflation.

Financial inflation works like this:

You are little people. You are told that there is an evil out there just waiting for us called inflation. You are told that, while tens of thousands of economists are stymied on what causes it, the monster is ever-increasing-prices for ordinary goods and services. You don’t need to concern yourselves with how much acquisition-capacity is being created in the form of ever-more purchasing-power-for-the wealthy who both own and manage their private feedback-loop system. As long as you are employed in the production of super-yachts, private-jets, luxury-resorts and golf-courses, Rolls-Royces or Rolexes, then everyone is happy. There’s a place for everyone, and everyone is in their place.

But we’re now into about the fifth-roll-over (or roll-overs-within-roll-overs) since the end of WW II and we’re soon going to need the word pentillion (as in $1,000,000,000,000,000,000) to explain it to the public – or rather to continue hiding it from them, and the spillage into the real world is starting to get as unconcealable as it is unmanageable.

Not money-lenders

Banks are not what you think they are. They are not money-lenders – they are credit-reinsurers, and they are asset-sinks. When you sign and deliver a promissory-note and mortgage you are underwriting and advancing real-estate-secured-credit to the bank.

The bank / banker strips-off and retains the financial and real-estate security as a premium for itself, and then returns or reinsures unsecured-credit back to you as an unsecured-deposit-credit that does not cost the bank anything material to produce. 

The money / credit for the alleged or pretended loan does not even exist unless and until you underwrite it by accepting the liability for it by agreeing that you owe it, normally under the promissory note / usury-note that is secured by the mortgage (and whether by separate-instrument or embedded in the nominal mortgage itself).

You then have to add or issue the same amount again in the form of a signed check / cheque (drawn on the bank, and which upon delivery becomes a financial asset of the bank)) to the seller of the real estate, who has to co-sign / endorse it and deliver it back to the bank as a ratification of the otherwise recoverable-loss of their property and legal-title to the bank in exchange for an unsecured deposit credit. Then the bank agrees that it owes the principal amount (selling price) to the seller instead of to you.

The nominal mortgage is a combination bill-of-sale that transfers all right, title, and interest in the property to the bank, plus an embedded repurchase-option that allows you to buy the property back from the bank by paying it all of the money (discharging all of the liabilities) required under all of the securities. When a bank forecloses it is not foreclosing on the house, because it already owns the house. The foreclosure is of the repurchase-option – sometimes referred to as a right of redemption (and another example of cognitive-dyslexia).

The pretended-banker arrives at the transaction with metaphoric empty-pockets, and leaves with all of the financial securities from the income-pre-qualified lead-underwriter / pretended-borrower in one hand, and the legal-title to the market-value-pre-qualified-real-estate property (and the endorsed check) from the seller in the other.

From the nominal bankers’ perspective there is only one material reality, and that is that pre-qualified-real-equity / secured-assets come in, and only unsecured-liabilities go out. They are real-asset-sinks, and they are unsecured-liability-kiters. The penultimate in balanced-and-leveraged feedback-loops.


To make it easy, assume that some previously unknown real-asset were to be discovered with a net present value of $100 trillion, or more than a year’s combined GDP of all the nations and people on Earth. Something like a deposit of the fictional-anti-gravity-element “Unobtainium” in the 2009 film Avatar.

The owners of the private banking system (the bank) are happy to purport to loan the discoverers / new-owners the money / credit they need to begin accessing and employing their new asset, and to take the asset itself under a mortgage-security for so-doing. 

Forensically, or by procedure, the discoverers / owners must first sign and issue a promissory-note / usury-note / tribute-note agreeing unconditionally that they owe the bank $100 trillion “For value received”, which is objectively nil as and when the note is executed and delivered in fact, and that they will pay the bank another $100 trillion on the named maturity-date, plus interest in the meantime.

The discoverers / owners must also just as unconditionally transfer legal ownership and deemed-legal-possession of the new real-asset to the bank under the mortgage said to secure their promissory-note / tribute-note, in exchange for a repurchase-option to buy it back from the bank by, again, converting / paying the bank (another) $100 trillion, plus interest, and by doing everything else that the bank requires of them on pain of forfeiture or foreclosure of their repurchase-option should they fail to do so. 

If the new real $100 trillion asset were discovered on Monday, then the private banking system could legally own it outright by Tuesday, and (as an added / leveraged bonus) be under no contractual obligation to reinsure the credit, nor do anything at all. 

That is the fundamental-change that has radically / exponentially-accelerated the process post-WWII, and which became effectively unstoppable after about 1980. The bankers and the people who own them effectively doubled the 100% tribute / access-fee by requiring the producer of the wealth and equity-lead-creditor / underwriter to also agree that the bank is not legally / contractually bound to give them anything in return – unless the pretended-lender wants to.

That is what has been fuelling the multi-quadrillion-dollar ballooning of the stock-and-financial markets worldwide. It’s all about leverage leverage leverage and double then triple then quadruple-counting of the insured-amounts underwritten by the lead-underwriters, supplies the rocket-fuel that powers the show.

As at close of business on Monday, the banker will have already added the $100 trillion promissory-note / usury-note / tribute-note to the bank’s balance sheet as its own property and increase in its financial wealth (and begun the process of making further / leveraged gains and profits from it in the financial markets). And the banker will have already added (on-book-or-otherwise) the new real asset (the Unobtainium-deposit) as its own property and an additional $100 trillion increase in its own combined physical and financial wealth. And all rolled-over directly into the bank’s de facto capital-asset-base so as to not show up as taxable income.

It is now Tuesday morning and the bank is $200 trillion richer than it was on Monday morning – literally for nothing. The bank and its owners are already experiencing the greatest inter-generational free-ride and gravy-train in the history of civilization.

But it is not enough. Power and domination always need and seek more power and more domination for its own sake.

The relatively-recent major financial innovation for more power is to require the lead-underwriter producers / real-owners / pretended-borrowers to also expose themselves to the risk of the bank choosing not to reinsure the credit after the bank has received the premiums / tribute payments. Basically, the wagering-format (or lottery-of-one where either you win the prize or you don’t) allows the bank to capitalize-it-twice-over (i.e., it goes from double-counting to quadruple-counting – and then channelled to the financial markets and / or in fraud of the financial markets).

That is why today virtually every nominal mortgage has a clause or provision to the effect:

8.11 The Borrower agrees that neither the execution nor registration of this mortgage …will oblige the Lender to advance any…money hereunder but the advance of money from time to time will be in the sole discretion of the Lender.


6 (13) The lender does not have to advance … the principal amount … to the borrower unless the lender wants to even though 

(a) the borrower has signed this mortgage,
(b) this mortgage is registered in the land title office,…


IN CONSIDERATION of VANCOUVER CITY SAVINGS CREDIT UNION (“VanCity”) agreeing to establish a Creditline on the Account Number and Type noted above (the “Account”) for the undersigned (the “Member”) and agreeing to lend to the Member up to the sum shown below as the Authorized Limit (the “Authorized Limit”), the Member and VanCity agree as follows:… [other terms set out]

NO OBLIGATION TO ADVANCE – The Member acknowledges and agrees that neither the execution of this Creditline Agreement nor execution and delivery of any security shall bind VanCity to advance or re-advance any unadvanced portion thereof, but nevertheless the estate conveyed to VanCity by any security shall take effect upon the execution and delivery of such security.

To grasp how in-your-face-racketeering that is, ask a banker to add a clause to your mortgage that states that you are not contractually or legally obligated to make any payments unless you want to. 

The larger obscenity and absurdity is likewise a naked-double-counting-fraud compounded by a bait-and-switch:

2 (1) In return for the lender agreeing to lend the principal amount to the borrower, …

6 (13) The lender does not have to advance… the principal amount …to the borrower

It is as if the pretended-bankers and their lawyers and solicitors are laughing in our faces while they rob us all blind and then add insult to injury by snickering among themselves that it is not their fault that we are all so stupefied as to fall for such a transparent fraud – or rather series of ongoing and cross-leveraged frauds. It will never stop escalating. If the music stops, the only chairs left in the game are inside prison cells.

Another way to see it (and although still a compounded felony in its own right) is that to use the financial securities / receipts as money / investments in the financial markets, the pretended-lender has to declare and swear that the security was acquired by them through an equity investment, and not by a bare assumption of liability. At the most foundational level, it costs $1 billion to make an equity investment of $1 billion. It costs $0, per se, to agree that you owe $1 billion.

The wagering clause in the mortgage is in anticipation and support of a falsified securities declaration that the security was given in exchange for an equity investment (by the bank), and not a bare assumption of liability. It is offensive to the criminal law not merely because it is illegal by statute. It is offensive to the criminal law because it is fraud, forgery, unjust enrichment, racketeering, and money-laundering-in-fact.

That is regardless how the private banks, and the people who own and operate them, individually and in the aggregate, systemically and systematically obtain all the wealth of the world without producing anything tangible. Whether it is done one mortgage at a time, or in a single $200 trillion chunk or tranche, it is the same naked-tribute / transfer-of-wealth as pretended-business-custom business-model.

An honest gangster and godfather says:

First, as a sign of your respect, I want you to legally sign over everything that you own to me. Then I will decide what or how much, if anything, that I will give you in return. It’s a good deal. It’s an offer you can’t refuse.

While a pretended-banker and their solicitors prefer a more polished and dignified managed-mental-illness approach that is consistent with the dignity and importance of their professions:

8.11 The Borrower agrees that neither the execution nor registration of this mortgagewill oblige the Lender to advance any…money hereunder but the advance of money from time to time will be in the sole discretion of the Lender.

[B]ut nevertheless the estate conveyed to [the bank] by any security shall take effect upon the execution and delivery of such security.

The existential problem is that the system eventually stalls when there is insufficient remaining wealth to transfer to the private-bank asset-sink(s) as they get ever closer to owning it all (and however further laundered and concealed / put-out-of-reach). 

People are habituated to use the term financial-collapse and so cognitively-obfuscate or render cognitively-dyslexic the actual phenomenon and process which is fuel-starvation of the asset-harvesting-device.

That is why it appears that a small number of financial-giga-corporations like blackrock appear to own and cross-own all the other relatively-smaller-but-still-major transglobal corporations. The machine eventually has to feed on its own (eat-its-own-young) to keep the tribute payments coming in (or to maintain the illusion of it) as all the wealth becomes ever more concentrated.

It cannot end any other way.

At the end of the line, it becomes obvious and unavoidable that humanity has been played, and the winners of the game either come-clean and reach some kind of equitable arrangement with their victims, or they will use their ill-gotten wealth and power to play one faction of society against another to substantively mass-murder their victims as a preventive-measure or inoculation against retribution. 

The private global system of de facto enslaving the masses via falsified-financial-securities is one big game of:

If you want access to your own pre-qualified-productive-potential-and-capacity, then:

Just sign and deliver the security to us – You know what it means, and don’t you dare read what it actually states.

We’ve been operating under a quantum-financial-system since at least 1913. The registered-securities are virtually all founded on the quantum-mechanical-device or effect that physicists call Schrödinger’s Cat.

They are all proper, valid, and legal – as long an no one competent ever looks at them and reads them.

But where does the actionable-deceit occur at the criminal-law level?

It starts at, or at least materially passes-through, the solicitor / lawyer’s office.

One fine afternoon at the lawyer / solicitor’s office

Globally, the USD-equivalent of some $250 trillion ($250,000,000,000,000) of broadly-defined consumer-anchor-debt that fuels the financial markets directly turns on the following conversation that obviously should happen, but which never happens. The scene is a lawyer’s office in Victoria, Canada in 1997, but it has become far worse in the meantime, and it’s the same in and throughout most of the world:

Kevin (A financial solicitor): Hi John, how’s it going?

John (A local entrepreneur and owner of ten hotel / motel properties, and who employs about 300 people): Pretty good Kevin, but I’m in a bit of a rush as usual. Do you have those mortgage papers on the property and building on Queens Street for me to sign?

Kevin: Yes I have them right here. The bank’s solicitor sent them over this morning.

John: Great – just let me have a quick look. Ok – Principal amount is $2.1 million, interest rate is 7.75% – Ouch! – and the monthly payments are $17,000. Ok where do I sign?

Oh wait! – I see here the clause on the first page states:

In consideration of the Principal Amount of lawful money of Canada, now paid by the [bank]  to the [borrower], the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, the [borrower] doth grant and mortgage unto the [bank], its successors and assigns forever, ALL AND SINGULAR the Lands subject only to the Permitted Encumbrances.

So they’ve already paid us the $2.1 million loan proceeds?

Kevin: No. No. That will still take a few days, and not until after the mortgage is registered at the Land Title Office.

John: But I thought that I have to swear this under oath and penalty of perjury?

Kevin: That’s right.

John: You want me to swear under oath and penalty of perjury, and then register a security, that states categorically that my company and I have already received $2.1 million of “lawful money of Canada” from the bank, and “now paid” and “the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged” when we both know that that isn’t true?

Isn’t that illegal? I can’t see how that could possibly not be illegal? In fact I’m pretty sure it is a criminal offence. And if we then register it, then isn’t that technically called conversion or money-laundering?

Kevin: Calm down John. It’s just routine. That’s just how it’s done. 

John: But under the bank’s terms-letter, in addition to the $46,000 that I have already paid the bank in non-refundable application-fees, and which don’t seem to be mentioned at all here in the mortgage, I have to pay a total of $16,000 in legal fees – at $8,000 for you and another $8,000 for the bank’s solicitor – for you both to advise me that it is ok to swear under oath and penalty of perjury that I have already received a payment and investment of $2.1 million from the bank when the bank hasn’t invested or paid me anything and I haven’t received anything?

Both you and the bank’s solicitor are members of the Bar Association or Law Society aren’t you?

Kevin: Yes of course.

John: And the Bar Association doesn’t have any rules about advising clients to swear false affidavits and registering falsified securities and false receipts at the Land Title Office?

Kevin: You ask too many questions John. I told you it’s routine. 

John: But the moment the security is registered the bank will be $4.2 million richer. I will have advanced $2.1 million of real-estate-secured-credit to the bank by both transferring the title and agreeing unconditionally that I owe it $2.1 million plus interest, while the security itself states exactly the opposite and that the bank has already invested and paid me and my company $2.1 million of its own lawful money of Canada. That can’t possibly be legal.

And what about this clause here that says that after I have signed-over everything to the bank and agree unconditionally that I owe it $2.1 million, the bank is not legally obligated to return anything at all – unless it wants to – and at the sole discretion of the bank?

Doesn’t that turn the whole thing into a wager or game-of-chance? And isn’t the bank then going to take the mortgage-money-receipt to the financial markets, and then use the “No obligation to advance” clause to falsely-claim and misrepresent to the markets that it made an equity investment to obtain it and that it did not incur any liability to anyone under the security? Isn’t that racketeering and money-laundering by definition?

Kevin: Ok now you’re starting to piss me off. Do you want the loan or don’t you? If you do, then raise your right hand, swear, and sign the damn papers. If you don’t, then there is the door.

Now you know where all the money comes from.

The $250 trillion of nominal consumer / anchor debt worldwide is the sum total plus interest of all those principal / equity investments that the banks never made, and the substituted false-receipts and forgeries that serve in their stead.

It’s not mostly-honest with a little bit of corruption – it is 100% in-your-face racketeering on steroids.

The most specific criminal act (by the lawyer / solicitor) that John was thinking of is called suborning perjury – the lynchpin of Western Civilization, so-called.

His lawyer / solicitor was counselling him to commit an act of perjury by swearing under oath and penalty of perjury and to bear false-witness against his corporate entity that he had witnessed that corporate entity commit an act of debt by receiving $2.1 million as a loan from the bank, and that he had witnessed the bank make such payment.

Strictly speaking, the thing registered was not a mortgage but a libel / sworn-and-registered libel against John’s corporate entity, and that stripped it of all its legal and equitable rights as the real-and-lead-creditor that was underwriting and advancing real-estate-secured-credit to the bank.

This isn’t rocket science. Imagine the following truncated conversation at the bank:

Potential customer: Hello – I would like to obtain $2.1 million of credit from the bank to renovate and upgrade a residential apartment building that I already own.

Banker: Yes I think that we can do that. But you will have to first unconditionally transfer all of the property to the bank, agree unconditionally that you owe the bank $2.1 million now, plus interest, and then another $2.1 million on the maturity date, and give the bank a sworn and notarized receipt swearing under oath that the bank has already invested and paid you $2.1 million, and that the bank does not have to return anything at all unless it wants to, and then have your lawyer register the sworn security in favour of the bank at the Land Title Office. Oh yes, and there is a non-refundable $46,000 GAAP-Fraud-concealment-fee to get into the game.

Potential customer: And if I want to make a $2.1 million deposit, then will the bank first give me a sworn and notarized and registered security stating and evidencing that I have already done so?

Banker: I’m calling the police.

The truly amazing thing is that such masses of people can become so trusting of nominal authority-figures that they can be induced into doing the most obviously and ridiculously fraudulent things without even perceiving anything unusual about it.

Note also the similarity of the two techniques. The pretended-banker uses the purported security to deceive the pretended-borrower into underwriting-and-advancing real-estate-secured-credit to the bank, while the same writing has been falsified to evidence a cash / equity investment by and from the bank.

The result is a double-whammy instantaneous $4.2 million increase in the bank’s wealth the moment the security is registered, and which it then uses to support a maximum unsecured $2.1 million deposit credit back to the pretended borrower, which it then (normally) launders through the vendor / seller by requiring them to co-sign / endorse and return the check to the bank.

Wash, rinse, repeat.

An equity-money-lender walks away $2.1 million poorer after making a $2.1 million loan, because now the borrower has it and the lender does not.

A legal-credit-reinsurer walks away $2.1 million richer after (purportedly) making a $2.1 million loan.

The difference is $4.2 million, or 200% of the nominal transaction value.

On the human-interaction flip-side of the same mirror-image device, we are all being systematically looted by the pretended-bankers because we have been habituated to believe that it can’t happen because the lawyers would not let them get away with it. So we all end up getting screwed twice-over for double the amount that the pretended-bankers would screw us out of without the lawyers helping.

And all under the societal macro-failsafe-device of an appointed judiciary comprised near 100% of former bank-lawyers and bank-solicitors and who have often made personal fortunes falsifying and trafficking in such falsified securities and forgeries before they were appointed as judges to oversee the larger process.

John was required to pay $16,000 in legal fees to pay both lawyers and which is entirely fair in the managed-mental-illness-minds of the lawyers and the bankers and of the people who own them. Why is that?

Because they were both in fact working for the bank and its owners to systematically plunder the assets of John’s corporate entity, and of John himself by also requiring that he personally re-reinsure the bank by issuing an additional wrapper called a GSA or General Security Agreement / Personal Guarantee that also just happened to dispose of all the criminal law and racketeering offences as follows:

NOTWITHSTANDING the provisions of any Statute [any lawful Act of Parliament, including the criminal law]… this contract [and security] shall remain in full force and effect.

To save the species we must first break our addiction to gullibility. It’s just garden-variety racketeering writ large. The lawyers cover for the bankers and the bankers cover for the politicians and the politicians cover for the oligarchs and the oligarchs cover for the media and the media cover for the perverts and child molesters and the rest of the circus sideshows over all of which the lawyers and judges claim jurisdiction.

Put another way, if the pretended-bankers and the people who own them had found a way to hypnotize the masses into giving away all of their property and productive capacity to the banks for free, and then to manage it on behalf of the banks for their productive lifetimes, then there would be no difference in the result.

At the end of the line it means that left to their own devices, humans tend towards zero restraint. No matter how much unearned advantage they obtain, they still can’t not-cheat to get more.

That is why the principal driving force of the controller class is plausible-deniability. Or at least what used to pass as plausible deniability. These days – not so much.

Whether the current nominal medical crisis is a false pretence or a true pretence, it remains a diversion from the ongoing financial crimes of the possessor-class as administered by its bookkeeping-class.

There is a disconnect or radically-changed-situation now because the private pretended-banks only issue unsecured liabilities, meaning that they are not legally tied to any specific asset (nor generally at all).

Picture the world’s richest man or woman and assume that they got that way because they automatically obtain the property rights in anything and everything that is securitized.

Now imagine that that man or woman also has an unlimited and wholly unsecured checking account that is perpetually kited.

In theory it can carry on indefinitely, generation after generation, because the aggregate real and financial wealth constantly flowing into the asset-sink / trust is more than sufficient to cover even the most extravagant lifestyles of the owners of the private system. As long as the permitted ratios are kept reasonably close to those which would be required under a secured system, the result is an immovable pyramid of assets that gets perpetually larger while remaining stable.

But now assume that this world’s richest man or woman were to develop an ever-escalating gambling addiction at an electronic no-limits casino. The impossible becomes not just possible but inevitable.

Notwithstanding the massive technical and actual criminality of it, our current situation is, de facto, proof of a general incompetence. No competent private-money-power would have traded a slow steady intergenerational absorption of everything for the short-term high of increased accounting profits through the general subversion and undermining of GAAP and of the criminal law.

Memo to the money-power: Your great-great-grandfathers created the accounting system and its selective rules against double-counting in order to protect you from meaningful competition, and to ensure that you would eventually own everything regardless of anyone’s relative competence. Your one and only real job was to not bleep-it-up.

But you got glory-greedy, lazy, careless, and stupid, and you bleeped-it-up royally.

And now you still want to play the “God-likes-us-better” card – the last resort of ill-gotten-intergenerational-wealth.

But even the most tertiary forensic examination reveals a reckless disregard for the foundational-building-block of your system of domination, and that is plausible deniability. The language has to be sufficiently imprecise as to remain in accord with the following Machiavellian-like advice:

If you want to advance some great evil in the world, be certain to do it in English. That way, if you get caught, then you can always claim that you meant something else.

However obfuscatory the earlier nominal securities may have been, the modern versions leave nothing to the imagination:

NOTWITHSTANDING the provisions of any Statute [any lawful Act of Parliament, including the criminal law]… this contract [and security] shall remain in full force and effect.

And more or less simultaneously, for example, in 1997 I first noticed that the Royal Bank of Canada, for example, changed its sworn declaration of significant accounting principles in its Annual Reports from:

The Bank obeys GAAP and all other accounting laws


The Bank obeys GAAP and all other accounting laws, unless the borrower has agreed otherwise.

Twenty-five years later, the entire private global financial system is a runaway-racketeering-freight-train looking for a good place to stage a train-wreck and – Wait! Is that Covid-Corner up ahead?! We better slow down.

No Way! Throw another $10 trillion into the fire and get those boilers screaming! Full speed ahead!