Bank Regulators Caused The Coming Crash

Bonuses all round, for now.

This comment was left on Polititicalbetting suggesting that bank regulation was not responsible for the credit crisis –
330c – Wasn’t there that policy report by John Redwood released in August 2007 saying that the financial institutions were being strangled in regulation and needed to be ‘freed’ of all the burden because they were responsible enough to completely self regulate.
Oh – anyone remember what happened just a month later. I guess when you are so very wrong it is good to have it proved so decisively, so quickly.
Tory central office did a rather successful job at completely airbrushing any trace of this document from the records.

     by Professor Davey January 15th, 2011 at 04:54
I replied as follows –

338. It was financial regulation which instructed banks to lend to people who didn’t meet traditional bank lending criteria = e.g ninja loans – no income, no job, no assets, and which instructed them to repackage the loans and sell the risk on to other financial institutions. The Basel 2 banking rules no less.

Basel is where the Bank Of International Settlements is located, the central bankers’ central bank, which like nearly all the central banks, is itself a private business, of which the IMF and the World Bank are ’subsidiaries’, or fronts.
It was the very few who control the world’s banking fraternity who decided to let loose the property boom, which has placed all the world’s banks in such a precarious position. John Redwood knows better than to criticise the incredibly powerful central bankers of the world, but he can see when banking regulation has gone mad. NO bank would have ever lent to such poor risks except when they were given no choice by regulators.

344.  Why did the central bankers engineer the property bubble worldwide?  They make money by manufacturing bubbles, getting people into debt which they can’t pay back, and then dictating the terms of the bail-outs.  They also make huge profits from crashes, which they engineer from time to time.  The bail-outs stop.  Prices tumble and they buy up everything for bargain basement prices.  Then when they’ve scooped up ownership of all the resources of the world, they then refinance the economies and prices recover.

1929 was a textbook operation, but nothing like the event being set up at the moment, with share prices being pumped with quantitative easing, before they are crashed when the QE is switched off, possibly in 2012. The bail-outs could suddenly stop, as, by then, new banking rules will permit senior bondholders of banks not to be paid.  Then the soup kitchens will be opening all over the world –



Great depressions are another way bankers make the really big money.  First they flood the world with loans and get everyone into debt bidding up crazy prices.  Then they get prices to crash before they clean up buying everything at bargain basement prices.  It’s as simple as A,B,C.  Just watch.

I found this video on Jim Corr’s blog.  It’s very good.  I’m not sure I agree with all its historical explanations, but as regards the relationship between banking and politics, it’s spot on.  It shows how the power of money is greater than the power of words.  Once the US had given away the right to print money into private hands, namely the Rothschilds, who were behind the Fed, the country’s politicians were no longer in control.  Every President who tried to stand up against the power of the bankers was either assassinated or was lucky to survive assassination attempts.  It’s a good way to pass twenty minutes absorbing this stuff, and it helps to explain how the American government and other governments have lost control of their economies.  And it suggests that, if you’re considering taking out a loan, it might be better to wait.

The Tap Blog is a collective of like-minded researchers and writers who’ve joined forces to distribute information and voice opinions avoided by the world’s media.

10 Responses to “Bank Regulators Caused The Coming Crash”

  1. Atlas shrugged says:

    Dear Tap

    I did not bother watching this documentary because I have seen it, and its like, many times before.

    Firstly may I say that the historical records do not in any way contradict any information contained within this documentary.

    Which should lead you, and others to ask more questions, not believe that you have found the answer, but only an important part of it.

    This documentary like so many of its kind, hind more then they reveal. The Jews do not run this world, and never have, if indeed the Rothschild’s still remain ethnically Jewish, which I have reason to very much doubt.

    For it is fairly obvious that only one family however extended, cannot possibly have become as rich or powerful as The Rothschilds are said to be, without one hell of a lot of additional assistance from an even more powerful institution other then the Rothschild dynasty itself.

    There is only one institution more powerful then one that has the control of the creation of money itself. Therefore working out with which particular institution the Rothschilds have long since been working in conspiracy with, is extremely easy to do.

    Although for some strange, or maybe not so strange reason, this all powerful, very long standing, massively rich religious institution, is hardly ever mentioned.

  2. Tapestry says:

    I liked Monteith’s presentation as he says that there is not really a single location of central power, but many, but that all are affected with a single cultural emphasis.

    As human behaviour is culturally derived, this would capable of change.

    The same influences have penetrated The Vatican as the other supranational bodies.

    Monteith calls them Luciferian or Satanic as he is a highly religious man. In my terms they are vicious and jealous emphases, the polar opposites of cooperative and content, which are the preferred cultural tendencies and overall the more successful ones adopted by human societies. We have the culture of war permanently established in the supranational networks.

    Those who tried to bring cultural change like JFK and RFK and many others were assassinated. An economic crash could signal a need for change to the masses – those like The Tea Party, who will grow in influence as the mess created by the banker-warriors becomes totally apparent.

  3. Twig says:

    Who or what is “BadBoyKillFreshOut”?

    What if any is the significance of the title song?

    Would rule by democratically elected leaders be any better than what we now have?

    In one of the YouTube clips it says that the Rothschilds have enough money to feed the starving people of the world. How would that work? would they just send them the money?

  4. Tapestry says:

    The music intro is dreadful but the documentary is excellent. The musical intro is the choice of the nutter who uploaded it onto the web.

    It is very cheap to feed human beings, surprisingly, but that is why the population in the third world grows so fast.

    The key is to work out what makes population stop growing, and rather than adopting poison as the primary method of population control, whether that be delivered through water, food, vaccine or air, a democratically elected government would have to achieve the same ends with persuasion or merely by seeing that women once educated choose to have less children.

    The OWG keeps the masses in ignorance deliberately, who then breed to the limits of the food supply, and then they decide to start poisoning everyone, to keep the population down.

    Yes I do think democracy would do better.

  5. Twig says:

    So what is the motivation of the OWG in allowing population explosions and then killing them off?

    It sounds a bit pointless.

  6. Tapestry says:

    HIPC’s are no threat to the power structure, and are made to sign over their resources to the OWG in return for being bailed out. Exploding populations are poor as a rule and therefore powerless, especially if they are ‘dumbed down’.

    There is money to be made in population growth, and there is money to be made in the delivery of death programmes such as vaccines and the distribution of toxic chemicals through food and water. I guess some people find it fun getting a swarm of ants and then killing them off.

    Power is a drug to some people. What’s the point? Not much, other than preserving power and enjoying its exercise.

  7. Twig says:


    How many population explosions and culls can these people “enjoy” in a one lifetime?

    Do they enjoy watching a population grow while it’s growing, or do they just enjoy the cull at the end?

  8. Tapestry says:

    They are Malthusian in their beliefs and so feel they are doing a good job bringing a few billion people to die early or become sterile. It’s called sustainability.

    I’m only trying to imagine what it feels like to be able to exercise so much power over other people. I suppose like anyone else they go home and sit down for a nice cup of tea and think, well, that’s another 500,000 killed today. We could have a good year if we keep this up.

  9. Twig says:

    Try as I might, I just cannot get my head around this.

  10. Tapestry says:

    You haven’t twigged it, as we used to say. It’s hard to imagine totalitarian power, and why anyone would want it – but history is full of people who sought power and then brought about the demise of millions of human beings as their choicest way to enjoy their position. I guess it’s the law of the jungle. You get power, create lebensraum by eliminating others, and then fill the word with your own progeny.

    It used to be Auschwitz and Belsen. Now it’s fluoride, dioxin, GM and vaccination, with news media driving the victims onwards to demand the means of their own demise. They saw where the Nazis went wrong, and are perfecting the techniques of mass killing.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.