David Webb is an American investor with extensive experience who is now residing in Sweden. David has discovered how international interests have historically manipulated markets and has documented his insights in the book ’The Great Taking.’
The book offers an in-depth exploration of a complex and audacious plan that revolves around the globally synchronized supercycle of debt accumulation. At its core, the book focuses on the theft of securities, encompassing all financial assets, money held in banks, stocks, bonds, and the underlying assets of public companies, including inventory, equipment, land, mineral deposits, inventions, and intellectual property. Furthermore, privately owned personal and real property, financed through all levels of debt, as well as assets in debt-financed private corporations, are also targets for seizure. The scope of this plan makes it the greatest conquest and subjugation in world history, even if it achieves only partial success.
What sets this current situation apart is the realization that we are living in a hybrid war primarily conducted through deception, aiming to achieve war objectives with minimal energy expenditure. However, this war is not directed against other nation-states; rather, it is directed against all of humanity. The consolidation of private, tightly-held control over all central banks, and consequently all money creation, has given an extremely small number of individuals the power to manipulate and control all political parties, governments, intelligence services, their countless front organizations, militaries, police forces, major corporations, and media. These forces execute their plans carefully over the course of decades, while maintaining an opaque level of control and remaining hidden from public scrutiny.
The book highlights historical precedents for such intentions, designs, and the dreadful execution of similar plans. By examining the early 20th century, marked by major wars and economic depression, one can find a blueprint for the proclaimed ’Great Reset.’ However, the current plan introduces significant innovations that will facilitate an unprecedented concentration of wealth and power through deprivation. It raises a question: How could the prediction of ’you will own nothing,’ boldly proclaimed by the World Economic Forum, come true? The answer does not lie in the convenience of renting but in a larger narrative that unfolds with the collapse of each financial bubble and subsequent crisis. The blame for these crises is collectively placed on society’s shoulders, attributing them to our insatiable desires and living beyond our means.
In the aftermath of these crises, ”authorities” and ”regulators” are portrayed as having valiantly struggled to protect society from our own ”animal spirits,” despite ultimately failing. They cannot be held accountable or prosecuted for their failures because, in the end, we all carry the blame.
The cost after the next major crash will be the surrender of all personal property or what individuals believed was theirs. The concept of Central Bank Digital Currency is introduced, which, via smartphones, provides a control mechanism under the guise of convenience.
In summary, this book serves as a comprehensive examination of the global supercycle of debt accumulation and the far-reaching consequences of a plan to take securities, consolidate power, and reshape society. It urges readers to critically assess the forces at play and consider the implications of a world where ownership and control are concentrated in the hands of a select few.
How did we lose the right to our property? In the late 1960s, a committee known as BASIC (Banking and Securities Industry Committee) was formed to address the challenges brought about by the ’paper crisis.’ The handling of physical stock certificates had become increasingly cumbersome, causing trading halts on the New York Stock Exchange. As a result, lawmakers required government intervention in the process. The BASIC committee’s report proposed a solution: transitioning from physical stock certificates to computerized transfers of ownership rights facilitated by a trust company, which would hold the underlying certificates in an immobilized state.
This is how the concept of a ’Security Entitlement’ was created, which has enabled the largest subjugation in world history. Traditionally, transferable financial instruments were recognized as personal property, commonly referred to as ’securities.’ These are no longer private property but are regarded as ’rights to securities’ (Security Entitlement). You have the right to participate in returns but do not have ownership.
To illustrate this, consider an analogy: Imagine you buy a car directly with cash, assuming you have full ownership. But due to a newly invented legal concept, the car dealer can treat your vehicle as his asset and use it as collateral to secure loans for his own purposes. Now, if the car dealer goes bankrupt, your vehicle, along with all the other cars sold by the dealer, can be seized by certain secured creditors without the need for a court hearing. This power to take your car in the event of the dealer’s bankruptcy is established as an absolute right through legal certainty.
This analogy highlights how the security law framework has enabled a transfer of power, allowing secured creditors (the largest banks like JP Morgan) to seize assets without the same level of protection traditionally afforded to personal property. It is a remarkable shift in the legal landscape, with significant implications for individual ownership and the potential for loss of securities in times of financial distress.
The majority of securities held in depository accounts, pension plans, and investment funds are now pledged as collateral for the expansive derivative complex. The size of this complex, which exceeds the entire global economy, surpasses available resources. The illusion of security is maintained through a chain of hypothecation and rehypothecation, where the same underlying customer collateral is reused multiple times by secured creditors. In fact, these creditors, well aware of this arrangement, have demanded even greater access to client assets as collateral.
In the event of a significant crash, often referred to as ’The Everything Bubble,’ securities will be swept up on a large scale. The necessary mechanisms to facilitate this process are already in place, and legal certainty has been established to ensure that securities can be seized immediately without a judicial review, with this power exclusively reserved for entities categorized as the ’protected class’ in court documents. Even sophisticated professional investors who had the impression that their securities were segregated (secured through sidetracking) will find themselves unprotected.
This orchestrated upheaval of ownership rights required careful planning and implementation over several decades. It began in the U.S. with amendments to the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) in all 50 states. Although this endeavor required significant efforts over many years, it was carried out quietly without the need for an act of Congress.
Traditional securities custody required custodians to have sufficient securities to meet all customer requirements. In many EU jurisdictions, these standards are maintained by giving investors ownership rights over the securities they hold. This ensures that investors have legal claims to their securities and can assert their ownership rights when necessary.
Through the ”harmonization” of laws, these rules have gradually entered European and Swedish legislation. Today, most jurisdictions have changed their laws so that securities are no longer considered private property.
The Hague Securities Convention, also known as the Convention, was created in 2002 as an international treaty to address legal uncertainty in cross-border securities transactions. It introduced a new conflict-of-law rule called the ”Place of the Relevant Intermediary Approach” (PRIMA) specifically for securities transactions. PRIMA was designed to prevent potential problems with national laws that could allow owners to reclaim their assets used as collateral by creditors.
To achieve the desired goal of cross-border mobility, links have been established between national central securities depositories and international central securities depositories (ICSD). This allows the transfer of legal ownership of customer securities from the national central securities depository, as well as the utilization of customer collateral. In this arrangement, customers maintain ”ownership” in the securities entitlement system of the national central securities depository while the securities are held in pooled form at the ICSD level. Pooled form means that securities are placed in a common pot. This setup enables the provision of cross-border services, similar to the American model where custodians maintain accounts with DTC, which holds securities in pooled form and functions as an ICSD.
Let us examine the developments related to Euroclear in Finland and Sweden. Previously, these countries had legal systems and national registries that protected securities owners by ensuring that their securities could not be used as collateral without their explicit consent. However, in 2006, Sweden and Finland were identified with problematic laws regarding ownership of securities.
In 2008, Euroclear Nordic Central Security Depository (NCSD), which owned the central securities depositories in Finland (Suomen Arvopaperikeskus Oy or APK) and Sweden (VPC AB), was acquired. These local securities depositories are now linked to Euroclear Bank SA/NV, which operates as a securities depository under Belgian law.
Under the CSDR, account providers are required to disclose the protection levels and associated costs of different levels of segregation of customer accounts at central securities depositories. Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB (SEB) provides such information for securities depositories in Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Euroclear Bank SA/NV, and Clearstream Banking S.A.
However, some shocking aspects are revealed here. In the unlikely event of a securities shortage, customers do not have separation rights and may be considered unsecured creditors without a priority claim to the assets in a bankruptcy estate.
Belgian law grants the National Bank of Belgium the privilege over Euroclear Bank SA/NV’s own securities to cover situations where the securities held by the bank on behalf of participants are insufficient to cover their actual holdings. As a result of this, ownership of securities in Sweden and Finland was deliberately undermined for six years. These countries transitioned from having strong securities ownership rights to having no ownership rights beyond an artificial appearance of ownership.
During 2014, significant changes were made to Swedish law, coinciding with the EU’s directive on central securities depositories. These new regulations provide the local securities depository with legal authority and broad discretion to transfer legal control of customer assets, such as securities, to the securities depository without the account holder’s knowledge or consent. Consequently, Swedish citizens cannot hold Swedish government bonds as their property in Sweden without exposure to the account provider, the local securities depository, or the securities depository’s insolvency. The securities of Swedish citizens are effectively commingled with securities used as collateral elsewhere.
In conclusion, after studying these changes in international law, it is clear that, in the event of an expected crash of the derivative market with major bank collapses, all securities and other property used as collateral can be quickly and without objections transferred into the hands of a few global banks. This applies to both the U.S. and EU countries. No nation shall have the opportunity to escape and resist.
Read the entire book at thegreattaking.com
The Great Taking
