The Great Banking Game of the BIS

Tony Montana: Black market lord, servant to the international oligarchy.

Greece is now in the news for the left socialist Syriza Party caving (predictable) to the IMF’s economic terrorism, resulting in bank runs and capital controls.  Echoing the previous two bail outs back to 09 and 10, the new “plan” will undoubtedly result in more collateral seizure of Greek assets for the engineered debt crisis shock doctrine that controls virtually all nations.  Nothing new here, but it is illustrative for understanding the global banking structure that emerged from World War II at the Bretton Woods Conference in 1944.  However, as we will see, the real structure extends further back into the shadows of World War I.

Originally Bretton Woods’ plan tied to the U.S. dollar-backed by gold, in 1971, the dollar became fiat (Nixon shock), resulting in a global fiat system centered around command and control large-scale economic planning and fixed exchange rates.  Under he guise of economic stability, the ruse was sold that this system would provide “security” and prevent rampant speculators from wrecking economies due to tying them to central banks.  While there is some truth to this position of regulation limiting rampant speculation, the limitations of central banks only works if central banks are independent and national, printing their own currency.  Of course, they are not, and the ability of the megabanks to own national economies through bailouts and being “too big to fail” shows however well-intentioned or effective that may have been in the past, it is no longer the case.

The Marshall Plan was an aspect of this Bretton Woods restructuring for Europe, and in regards to the incorrect myth of western conservatives concerning the ridiculous notion that the U.N. was a “Soviet Plot” (when the land was donated by the Rockefellers), Dr. Kerry Bolton cites Quigley:

The eminent American historian Carroll Quigley, Foreign Services School, Georgetown University, Harvard and Princeton, describes the post-war situation leading to the Cold War, stating that the immediate policy of the USA rested on free trade and aid via the Marshall Plan which would have included assistance for economic recovery to the Soviet bloc. However the USSR saw this as a means for the USA to establish its pre-eminence in the post war era. Quigley, a liberal globalist who saw the “hope” of the world being through a world government, wrote:

On the whole, if blame must be allotted, it may be placed at the door of Stalin’s office in the Kremlin. American willingness to co-operate continued until 1947, as is evident from the fact that the Marshall Plan offer of American aid for a co-operative Europe recovery effort was opened to the Soviet Union, but it now seems clear that Stalin had decided to close the door on co-operation and adopted a unilateral policy of limited aggression about February or March of 1946. The beginning of the Cold War may be placed at the date of this inferred decision or may be placed at the later and more obvious date of the Soviet refusal to accept Marshall Aid in July 1947.[14]

Quigley refers to the American initiative for atomic energy “internationalization” and how this arguably very dangerous scenario for world domination was again scotched by Stalin:

The most critical example of the Soviet refusal to co-operate and of its insistence on relapsing into isolation, secrecy, and terrorism is to be found in its refusal to join in American efforts to harness the dangerous powers of nuclear fission.[15]

This was the reason for the Cold War, and while the dialectic was in a sense managed, it another sense it was not.  The atomic race is connected to this, as the Baruch Plan was rejected by the USSR, as the U.S. sought to use energy dominance as a means of overt control. Aside from these matters, the Cold War was also fueled economically as a race to further hedge control on the part of the Anglo-American Atlanticists through shadow banking power.  Targeting Russia as the continual “Great Game” foe, the Atlanticists’ global economic structure allowed the West to establish the means of economic terrorism through the IMF and other entities, as I have highlighted with Yeltsin and Russia in the 90s, and the Ukraine coup more recently.

Bolton again comments on Bertrand Russell and the Fabian Atlanticists genocidal attitude towards CIA and NGO operations against Russia, even in the Stalinist regime:

Pacifist guru Bertrand Russell wrote in 1946 in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, expressing frankly the liberal internationalist attitude towards the USSR, which was anything but benign. Russell, who was to play a key role along with many other eminent liberals and leftists as Stalin-hating Cold Warriors in the CIA founded Congress for Cultural Freedom,[26] makes it plain that the atomic bomb represented the ace card to the forcible establishment of a world state:

The American and British governments… should make it clear that genuine international co-operation is what they most desire. But although peace should be their goal, they should not let it appear that they are for peace at any price. At a certain stage, when their plans for an international government are ripe, they should offer them to the world… If Russia acquiesced willingly, all would be well. If not, it would be necessary to bring pressure to bear, even to the extent of risking war.[27]

Seen in this context, the 2009-2015 Greek financial crisis can be understood as a maintenance of the Greek participation in the EU, as well as making sure Greek does not pivot towards Russia.  Syriza’s leftist socialism even appears to play into the oligarchical cabal by putting on a front of opposition to the IMF’s shock therapy, while caving within no time in surrendering a platform that was all centered around further IMF loan sharking.  This is why the banking oligarchs have perpetually funded and supported leftist, socialist and internationalist movements, as they have a common universalist impetus – the so-called humanitarian human rights initiative.  As Plato noted, democracy leads to tyranny and mob-ocracy, run by oligarchs. Why might this be?

“Democracy” is premised on the lowest common denominator as a cult of conformity. Built within it are the seeds of its own self-consuming destruction, as the bar for universalist “unity” is continually lowered and mass marketed based on the appeal to baser and baser appetite fulfillment of the utilitarian “happiness” principle. Of necessity, it must politically force the false equalitarian conformism it’s based on universally, leaving total destruction in its path.  This is why the mega-banks and their NGOs, think tanks, shell companies, intelligence agencies and social engineers constantly foist endless color revolutions, terror groups, hashtag revolutions, terror groups, etc., because the wrecking ball power these destabilizing groups have are tremendously advantageous to centralized (banking) interests seeking consolidation of national assets, economies and pensions (as well as running black markets!).

At the apex of this public structure is the Bank for International Settlements, the central bank of central banks.  Ironically, the BIS issues reports that are at times accurate, warning the policies of their dozens of member banks are rather destructive, even mentioning the toxic nature of public-private debt mixing scams. Admitting the perpetual debt-based hole is unsustainable, the banker members don’t seem to pay much attention to these “warnings” – in other words, reading a little between these lines, the policies parasitically wreck and loot the host nations.

A bankster-dominated speculative economy that is government-backed by the collateral of the people’s savings and wealth quickly devolves from a production-based economy to a financial gambler’s speculative economy.  As we read concerning the BIS’ own statement, it becomes evident the global government was in the process of consolidation at the time of even World War I through the Young Plan and the BIS as a management of reparations (a World War prior to Bretton Woods, the IMF and World Bank).  The real reason it was established was a secretive CIA-Swiss enclave for world management where the Swiss government has no jurisdiction.  Throughout the Cold War, this oligarchy was emboldened to expand into international control through the continual looting of Russia or any of its potential allies:

“Established on 17 May 1930, the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) is the world’s oldest international financial organisation. The BIS has 60 member central banks, representing countries from around the world that together make up about 95% of world GDP.

The head office is in Basel, Switzerland and there are two representative offices: in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China and in Mexico City.

The mission of the BIS is to serve central banks in their pursuit of monetary and financial stability, to foster international cooperation in those areas and to act as a bank for central banks.”