On Monday, the Bank of England announced it will hide the identities of any pension funds, insurers or hedge funds bailed out to avoid the stigma. This new policy of secrecy to protect banks’ identity will begin in 2025 when the central bank launches its Contingent NBFI Repo Facility.
Also in 2025, the final parts of Basel III will be implemented. Basel III introduces bail-ins, where account holders rather than the government bail out a failing bank.
But that’s not all. In the “second half of this decade,” i.e. any time from 2025, is “the earliest” the Bank of England would issue a central bank digital currency.
In the past, wars and oil embargoes have been used to justify implementing new global financial systems. Could we be seeing signs they are preparing for a crisis that they won’t let go to waste?
Let’s not lose touch…Your Government and Big Tech are actively trying to censor the information reported by The Exposé to serve their own needs. Subscribe to our emails now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox…
Table of Contents
1944 Bretton Woods
In 2016, Michael Rivero published an article that set out the history of the last 260 years showing the effects of efforts by private bankers to impose their system of slavery on the world. The Federal Reserve Act forced that system on the American people while the post-WWII Bretton Woods agreement forced it onto the rest of the world.
In July 1944, towards the end of World War II, when it became obvious that the allies were going to win and dictate the post-war environment, the major world economic powers met at Bretton Woods and hammered out the Bretton Woods agreement for international finance. The British Pound lost its position as the global trade and reserve currency to the US dollar (part of the price demanded by Roosevelt in exchange for the US entry into the war). Absent the economic advantages of being the world’s “go-to” currency, Britain was forced to nationalise the Bank of England in 1946.
The Bretton Woods international monetary system was established by delegates from 44 nations at the United Nations Monetary and Financial Conference in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire. It established a system of fixed currency exchange rate using gold as the universal standard.
The agreement also facilitated the creation of the International Monetary Fund (“IMF”) and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, which is known today as the World Bank.
Read more: All Wars Are Bankers’ Wars: How private bankers have imposed their system of slavery on the world
According to Investopedia, the Bretton Woods system of fixed currency exchange rates tied to gold through the US dollar collapsed in 1971. It was formally ended in 1973.
1973 Oil Crisis and the Petrodollar
At the same time as the 1973 oil crisis, also known as the Arab oil embargo, the world economy was in recession. The 1973 oil crisis was caused by an embargo by Arab oil-producing nations in response to US support for Israel during the Yom Kippur War. The Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (“OPEC”) approved the embargo on 19 October 1973.
The OPEC oil embargo quadrupled the price of oil in six months. Prices remained high even after the embargo ended. The embargo also resulted in significant attitude and policy changes. In his book, ‘Confessions of an Economic Hitman‘, John Perkins mentioned the aftereffects of the embargo:
There seemed little doubt that the 1973 oil embargo – which had initially appeared to be so negative – would end up offering many unexpected gifts to the engineering and construction business, and would help to further pave the road to a global empire.
Confessions of an Economic Hitman, John Perkins, 2004
Further reading: Economic Hit Men Are the First Line of Defence for World Shadow Government
Five months before the 1973 oil crisis, the embargo and subsequent events were discussed with surprising accuracy at the twenty-second Bilderberg Meeting held in Saltsjiibaden, Sweden. After discussing the two papers on the agenda, the meeting had a general discussion.
In the minutes of the Bilderberg conference, participants are named at the beginning but not in the body of the text of the minutes. The minutes of the general discussion quoted a “German speaker”:
As big as the monetary impact of the oil situation might become in the future, it would be “only a little addition – not much more than a tenth – to the deep mess which we are in already,” according to a German speaker. [pg. 65]
Unless confidence in the dollar returned, world monetary reform would be just “an abstract academic exercise.” America’s friends would help her, but first she had to set her strategy. Eventually we should work toward an international federal reserve system which could impose rules on foreign currency accounts. If the Euro-markets had been subject to regulation in the way that national banking systems were, things would not have gotten out of hand as they had done. It was important to recognise that the oil money question was merely a part of this much larger framework. [pg. 66]
Bilderberg Meetings, Saltsjiibaden Conference, 11-13 May 1973
Read more: Did the Bilderberg Group orchestrate the 1973 oil crisis?
Following the 1973 oil embargo, the petrodollar emerged as the primary medium of exchange for international oil transactions as a result of a series of agreements between the United States and oil-producing countries, particularly Saudi Arabia.
These agreements saw oil being priced in US dollars, making the dollar the de facto global currency for oil trade. Saudi Arabia agreed to sell its oil exclusively in US dollars, ensuring a steady demand for dollars and reinforcing the dollar’s status as a reserve currency. And oil-producing countries, including OPEC members, would recycle their petrodollar surpluses by investing in US Treasury bonds, financing US government deficits and supporting the US economy.
In the 1990s-2000s, as oil prices rose, oil-producing countries began to diversify their investments, reducing their reliance on US assets. The petrodollar’s influence began to wane.
Today, the petrodollar’s significance has diminished further, as oil-producing countries have increased their use of local currencies and alternative reserve currencies, such as the euro and Chinese yuan. The rise of alternative payment systems and digital currencies has also eroded the petrodollar’s dominance.
Further reading:
- Is the end of the petrodollar near? Atlantic Council, 20 June 2024
- 2024 Energy Highlights: Petro Dollar, Prospect Law
- The Petrodollar Is Dead, Long Live the Petrodollar, Bloomberg, 27 June 2024
2008 Global Financial Crisis
In 2016, Mark Arnold found evidence that the 2008 financial crisis, widely referred to as The Great Recession, was not caused by banks acting recklessly. Rather, it was set up by the Bank for International Settlements (“BIS”) imposing an accounting policy on US commercial banks only months before.
Mark-to-market is an accounting technique used to reflect the current market value of a company’s assets, liabilities and equity on a daily basis. The accounting method values assets and liabilities on a bank’s balance sheet at “fair value,” their current market price, which is determined by market forces, such as supply and demand. It requires daily revaluation of assets and liabilities to reflect changes in market prices. Market prices reflect the price that would be received to sell the asset or paid to transfer the liability in an orderly transaction between market participants.
It differs significantly from the transactional value method which shows assets and liabilities at cost on the balance sheet.
The mark-to-market method doesn’t come without its challenges. Mark-to-market models can be subject to errors and biases, which can impact the accuracy of valuations; in illiquid markets, it may be difficult to determine a fair value; and, can be complex and require significant resources and expertise, particularly for companies with large and diverse portfolios.
More importantly, because it is merely an accounting principle, in times when markets are volatile, this can significantly impact the appearance of liquidity of a bank while not being the case in reality.
In an introductory article to his six-part series ‘Hitler’s Bank: The Unknown Story Of The Bank For International Settlements’, Arnold explained what happened in 2008:
[The mark-to-market] principle played a devastating role in the [2008 financial] crisis because in implementing it banks were forced to mark their portfolios of mortgage-backed securities to the market for those securities, rather than to their face value or any other value; and the market at the time, as we all know, was collapsing.
In many instances, the underlying mortgages backing the securities were still sound and had not defaulted, yet the bank was still forced to “mark the value to the market.” The result was crashing balance sheets and capital reserves which made it impossible for banks to loan money, which in turn caused the credit crunch we all experienced.
Hitler’s Bank: The Unknown Story of the Bank for International Settlements – Introduction, Mark Arnold, 23 April 2016
Read more: Mark-to-market: A BIS scheme that helped to set up the 2008 Global Financial Crisis
Effectively, according to Arnold, what happened in 2008 was, along with laws that were passed or repealed by the US Congress to de-regulate investment banking, the BIS changed the accounting rules for banks which gave the appearance that they did not have sufficient assets to cover their liabilities and so caused a “credit crunch” – problem, reaction, solution.
The 2008 financial crisis led to the development and implementation of the BIS’s Basel III standards.
2025 Bank of England Tool
On Monday, Bloomberg reported that the Bank of England (“BoE”) will keep hidden the identities of pension funds, insurers, and liability-driven investment funds that use its new Contingent NBFI Repo Facility (“CNRF”) to prevent stigma attached to bail-outs. NFBI stands for “non-bank financial institution.” A repo facility, also known as a repurchase agreement facility, is a type of short-term borrowing mechanism used by central banks, governments, and financial institutions to manage liquidity and stabilise financial markets.
The CNRF is a tool designed to operate as a backstop to the gilt market (UK government bonds market), which is crucial to UK financial markets, and will be activated during times of extreme stress when gilt market dysfunction threatens financial stability. The facility will allow users to place collateral, such as gilts, with the BoE in exchange for cash, with a “haircut” on the collateral to protect the central bank against losses.
Deputy Governor Dave Ramsden stated that the decision to create the CNRF reflects changes in the structure of financial markets since the 2008 financial crisis. The development of the CNRF tool is a recognition of the changed financial risks, and the decision to keep identities secret reflects lessons from the financial crisis when stigma prevented banks from using standard BoE liquidity facilities.
The BoE has delayed the launch of the CNRF until the start of 2025, but the necessary systems changes are in place and the facility may potentially be extended to hedge funds in the future.
Bloomberg was reporting on a speech delivered by Ramsden at an Official Monetary and Financial Institutions Forum (“OMFIF”) event.
His speech highlighted the continued shift in activity to non-banks and considered how the Bank’s (BoE’s) balance sheet can be used to support the evolving financial system.
One of the pieces of evidence that there is a new tendency to volatility in financial markets and the wider financial system, Ramsden said, is that “developments in technology alongside greater market concentration and inter-connectedness mean we are more likely to see large swings in prices, particularly intraday, as markets can react faster to information and are more prone to herding behaviour.”
“Is that new volatility a sign of increasing financial instability? No, it is not,” he said. “Market volatility does not equate to financial instability, but we have to monitor and act on those developments appropriately, at the firm level, system-wide level and, importantly, in the operation of the Bank’s balance sheet.”
Today, I want to reflect on what we’ve seen in 2024, with its lack of significant dysfunction but continued volatility … I will then set out how we are utilising the Bank’s balance sheet to support financial stability.
Ensuring the Bank’s balance sheet can support financial stability
The Bank’s balance sheet operations, at their core, provide liquidity to the financial system when liquidity is required.
Until now, the Bank has provided liquidity to the financial system as a whole via the banking system, under the assumption that banks would onward lend and that liquidity would eventually find its way to the part of the financial system where it was most needed. But when core financial markets are severely dysfunctional, as in 2020 or as in the SWES exercise, we have seen that banks are not always willing or able to pass on sufficient liquidity sufficiently quickly to NBFIs to meet their demand and avoid a period of financial instability.
Accordingly, we have been working to develop tools to lend to NBFIs directly in times of severe dysfunction in core UK financial markets when financial stability is under threat. As a first step in this work the Bank announced in the summer that it is developing the Contingent NBFI Repo Facility (CNRF).
We understand from our market engagement that our approach to disclosure is a particular point of interest, and that contacts expressed concerns that revealing too much information could create stigma around the use of the CNRF. It’s incredibly important to the Bank that we avoid this.
The design and inherent nature of the CNRF should help avoid stigma … To further mitigate the risk of stigma, the Bank intends to publish the number of firms that are signed up to the CNRF, but we would not reveal any names; and in the event that we activate the CNRF, we would only disclose borrowing at an aggregate level.
Getting the balance right: ensuring the Bank’s balance sheet can support financial stability − speech by Dave Ramsden, Bank of England, 9 December 2024
Stigma? What stigma? Would that be the stigma that the public will know how much the BoE is bailing out individual non-banking institutions and so be subject to public scrutiny, however limited that might already be?
Additionally, considering the history of using crises such as wars and oil embargoes to change the global monetary system, what do you think they know but aren’t telling us?
2025 CDBCs and Bail-Ins
Coincidentally, two major shifts in the global monetary system are planned for next year: central bank digital currencies (“CBDCs”) and the final implementation of Basel III standards.
Earlier this year, Brandon Smith author at Alt-Market wrote:
I suspect the time is coming soon for the US and it may be in the form of a brand-new Bretton Woods-like system that removes the dollar as world reserve and replaces it with a new digital basket structure. Global banks are essentially admitting to the plan for a complete overhaul of the dollar-based financial world and the creation of a CBDC-centric system built on “unified ledgers.”
Unification Of CBDCs? Global Banks Are Telling Us The End Of The Dollar System Is Near, Alt-Market, 30 April 2024
On its website, the BoE says, “We haven’t made a decision on whether we will introduce a digital pound [a CBDC]. The earliest we would issue a digital pound would be the second half of this decade.”
The second half of this decade begins next year, 2025. Concurrently, Basel III is being implemented in the UK. A press release from BIS in October announced that “members unanimously reaffirmed their expectation of implementing all aspects of the Basel III framework in full, consistently and as soon as possible.”
Basel III introduces bail-ins. Bail-ins and bailouts are designed to prevent the complete collapse of a failing bank. The difference between the two lies primarily in who bears the financial burden of rescuing the bank.
In a bailout, the government injects capital into banks, enabling them to continue their operations. We saw this happen after the 2007-2008 financial crisis.
With bail-ins banks use the money from depositors and unsecured creditors to help them avoid failure. Depositors, the bank’s customers, include you, me and anyone who has money in a bank account.
Since 2018, the UK has been implementing Basel III. While some aspects of Basel III have already been implemented, the UK’s implementation is ongoing. The next milestone is 1 January 2025, when the Basel 3.1 framework will be introduced in the UK.
Basel 3.1 is the name given to the parts of the Basel III standards that remain to be implemented in the UK. This final package of Basel III standards to be implemented was referred to as “Basel 3.1 standards” in a consultation paper issued by the Prudential Regulation Authority in November 2022. Basel 3.1 mainly addresses the measurement of Risk Weighted Assets (“RWAs”).
RWAs are a bank’s assets or off-balance-sheet exposures, weighted according to their risk. They are calculated by multiplying the value of each asset by its respective risk weight. This calculation is used to determine the minimum amount of capital a financial institution must hold. The more risk a bank takes, the more capital is needed to protect depositors.
That may well be all well and good. But with the introduction of bail-ins, the banks’ customers are being anything but protected, especially if we consider that BIS accounting rules played a significant role in setting up the 2008 financial crisis, for which the public paid dearly. Could the plan be to crash the banks with accounting rules, instigate a bail-in and then offer the banks’ customers CBDCs for their lost deposits; one digital pound for each pound on deposit? It would force sufficient numbers onto a CBDC system, enough to make the remainder adopt them, whether they liked it or not.
For non-bank financial institutions, the intention to hide the names of which institutions are being bailed out, and by how much, by the BoE seems, again, to be a measure to protect financial institutions, not depositors or investors. Decisions being made behind closed doors and then the effects of those decisions being kept secret is never a good sign. What are they up to?
Further reading:
- Building an Empire – The City of London
- The Eight Families: The Federal Reserve Cartel (Part I)
- The Eight Families: The Freemason BUS & The House of Rothschild (Part II)
- The Eight Families: The Roundtable & The Illuminati (Part III)
- The Eight Families: A Financial Parasite (Part IV)
- The Eight Families: The Solution (Part V)
The Expose Urgently Needs Your Help…
Can you please help to keep the lights on with The Expose’s honest, reliable, powerful and truthful journalism?
Your Government & Big Tech organisations
try to silence & shut down The Expose.
So we need your help to ensure
we can continue to bring you the
facts the mainstream refuses to.
The government does not fund us
to publish lies and propaganda on their
behalf like the Mainstream Media.
Instead, we rely solely on your support. So
please support us in our efforts to bring
you honest, reliable, investigative journalism
today. It’s secure, quick and easy.
Please choose your preferred method below to show your support.
Categories: Breaking News
At 5 minutes and 20 seconds Ann Barnhardt explains REPOs. She tries to keep simple.
“The Economy Is Going To Implode” Pt.6 of 8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DK4RpzWjkQ
At 14 minutes it gets quite entertaining. At 23 minutes she has a dire warning about the threat to entire nations of these financial shenanigans.
gosh, and this was 8 years ago….
Yesterday soon after you posted vaboon, I replied, but it was blocked, needing approval. It hasn’t appeared. Perhaps it was too long, so I will split it in two and post the two parts below.
Eight years – that is a point worth making. Does this mean that she is wrong? Maybe she is a cranky conspiracy theorist.
We read articles and watch videos and have to wonder about them. For two or three years I have been reading about nanobots in the so-called vaccines. Now we are told that they are not nanobots. What else will turn out to not be true?
However, I think she does understand this topic and what she has to say is true. I believe that she ran her own brokerage but closed it down because she could see that the things she talks about (you need to watch all eight parts) posed a threat to her clients’ money and she didn’t want to be part of the system.
Many people have financial knowledge and experience and give warnings, but even though “The end is nigh” we never seem to get the end of the world. One example –
“Greyerz – $32 Billion Implosion Of FTX May Usher In Collapse Of The Entire Global Financial System” – that was in November 2022.
https://kingworldnews.com/greyerz-32-billion-implosion-of-ftx-may-usher-in-collapse-of-the-entire-global-financial-system/
But people like that man, Greyerz, and Ann Barnhardt are giving warnings based on sound economic principles and financial law – i.e. on how things ought to be when rules and laws are followed.
We live in a corrupt world of financial lies, cover-ups (and here is another cover up by the B-o-E) and false economic data \ official figures.
From March, 2021 – “Financial System Fake La La Land – Dr. Mark Skidmore”.
https://usawatchdog.com/financial-system-fake-la-la-land-dr-mark-skidmore/
“In Britain, Free Markets Are Dead”
“A financial crisis of humungous proportions is lurking in the wings, which in this analyst’s opinion has a fair chance of wiping out all rapacious states’ income entirely by collapsing their fiat currencies” – and he gives a good supporting argument.
https://www.goldmoney.com/research/free-markets-last-stand
That didn’t work, the first part was blocked, needing approval. I’ll try the second half, but it won’t make as much sense without the first half.
The second half –
Could the threat that Ann Barnhardt foresaw have been averted by market rigging?
So in this corrupt world, how far are they prepared to go? Some headlines –
From July, 2023 – “China’s Politburo Aims To Stabilize Property Market By Intensifying “Counter-Cyclical Adjustments”. “Adjustments” means fiddling the figures.
From September, 2023 – “Fed Engages In Shocking Seasonal Adjustments To Convert $92BN Bank Deposit Outflow Into $36BN Inflow”. “Adjustments” means fiddling the figures.
From September, 2024 – “Rachel Reeves ‘will rewrite fiscal rules in Budget so government can borrow another £30 BILLION for projects’ – despite debt pile already being at an 80-year high” Rules were meant to be broken. There are no rules, they do what ever they like.
From November, 2022 – “Fiscal black hole of £50bn is a myth because it was calculated in ‘artificial and uncertain’ manner, economists claim”.
Hmmm, fiscal black hole, where have I heard that before?
Did we come close to the things Ann Barnhardt warned about?
From October, 2022 – “BoE’s New Support Plan Fails As UK Gilt Yields Explode Higher”.
From October, 2022 – “It’s A Global Margin Call. I Hope We Survive”.
So, through market rigging and “adjustments” they keep the wheels from falling off, and could this be why they do it –
“The Fed’s Real Mandate” – October, 2022.
In it – “The real mandate of the Fed is serving its masters, the political elites, by financing government spending and debt, bailing out cronies, and supporting the political process, including the Fed’s own interests” – and – “The real mandate of the Fed is rigging the political system in favor of the political elites”.
https://mises.org/mises-wire/feds-real-mandate
Neither have appeared. I have no idea why they were blocked.
My post began with –
“Eight years – that is a point worth making. Does this mean that she is wrong? Maybe she is a cranky conspiracy theorist.”
The third paragraph was –
“However, I think she does understand this topic and what she has to say is true. I believe that she ran her own brokerage but closed it down because she could see that the things she talks about (you need to watch all eight parts) posed a threat to her clients’ money and she didn’t want to be part of the system.”
Then I gave examples of market rigging to stop the economic house of cards from collapsing.
Hi Cherry Charles, they were marked as needing approval because you used a symbol that is commonly used by spammers.
We don’t monitor the comments section 24/7 and so you have to wait until a human logs on and goes through the comments waiting for approval to check and release them.
Thanks Rhoda. If it happens again, I’ll try to be more patient.
Hi Cheery Charles, no problem. If you avoid using symbols that denote a currency it will also help to stop the spam filter flagging a comment as potential spam.
A lot to take in.
My take on the new “Contingent NBFI Repo Facility” is that it will be highly inflationary, and it is apparently mimicking the Blackrock “Going Direct” plan that was implemented with the Fed in March 2020 (after plandemic was called).
In a nutshell, BoE will be able to bailout Blackrock and their ilk, leading to more money created for the purpose.
For everyone else, their money is worth less, as more money is in accounts.
Prior to 2020, money printing was limited to bail out banks, and wasn’t necessarilarly inflationary, as banks did not lend it out unless they wanted to.
Money printing to bailout pension funds changes that.
Why might BoE bailout Blackrock? My guess is that as interest rates rise, the gilts fall in value and the pension has losses, particularly if it is marked to market. But maybe they can hide losses if they don’t need to mark to market.
One effect will be bail-ins, they take our money. We are left with nothing and we are happy.
Just idea that they could have implemented rules to allow bail-ins should have had people on the streets with pitchforks?
“What Is About To Happen Will Shock The World”
“THE GREATEST WEALTH TRANSFER SCHEME OF ALL TIME”
https://kingworldnews.com/what-is-about-to-happen-will-shock-the-world/
It’s a corporation, it can and does as it ( board of directors ) decides.
every country is broke and running on stolen laundered money
Schwab is always devising new ways & means to get the money funneled to him directly. If it isn’t injections, sextortion, begging for ukraine, banana taped to wall ‘art’ or Dorothy’s ruby slippers, it’s bailing out business fronts.
https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/DgkIislq9fM new uranium mine
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GdUOaWrHGUA&pp=ygUPYWxiZXJ0YSBwcmVtaWVy Alberta being sold out
https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/QKfMpIcj0s0
They will have to bail out the life assurers.
From the start 2022 life assurance companies started reporting big hits to their profits due to an increase in claims on life policies. OneAmerica and Lincoln National were two US companies, BKK Provita was a German one, Aegon was a Dutch one that is international and does most it is business in the US.
I seem to recall that the CEO of BKK Provita was sacked for suggesting the Covid vaccines might be to blame for the increase in deaths.
There were predictions of life policy claims wiping out the life assurance companies. Now I see how they are going deal with the problem.