POL.9100.0001.0616_0001

Dear Commissioner,

WHEREAS Australia has one of the strongest and most stable banking, superannuation and financial services industries in the world, which performs critical roles in pinning under the Australian economy, yielding profit for the Money Power, shareholders and their acolytes and burdening the citizens of Australia who have little choice but to use this industry.

A banking industry serving the prophesied "Banana Republic" with its demolished productive sector AND a superannuation industry from which said acolytes may siphon AND a financial services industry boasting speculation which dwarfs that of the "Pokie Nation", non-banking speculative sector.

AND Australia's banking system is systemically strong and applies this strength in concealing its speculative activities and squashing what is left of the productive sector under internationally recognised and world's best prudential regulation and oversight on behalf of the Money Power.

AND most Australians are consumers of banking, superannuation and other financial services. The superannuation system alone has created more than a $2 trillion retirement savings pool. AND this superannuation continues to grow rapidly and compels all working Australians to defer income today for their retirement, which most may never see because of siphoning mentioned earlier.

AND to fulfil the prophesied end of "the age of entitlement" all banking entities are being protected by Too-Big-To-Fail status, able to be propped up at all cost regardless of detriment to individual citizens (through 100% bail-in of 100% of financial instruments by APRA) and the collective Australian public (through bailout by the Australian Government) so that further the prophesy may be fulfilled that "the poorest people either don't have cars or actually don't drive very far in many cases".

AND all Australians have the right to be treated honestly and fairly in their dealings with banking, superannuation and financial services providers but the Australian Government acting directly and by proxy via its regulators rarely uphold these rights AND the Australian Government continues to delegate more banking functions to an industry captured by the Money Power AND does not exercise its power to take these functions back, which would restore honesty and fairness to an industry being shown to be bereft of both by this very Commission.

AND these standards should continue to be complemented by strong regulatory and supervisory frameworks that ensure that all Australian consumers, including business, have confidence and trust in the financial system, lest they realise the five point plan of the Citizens Electoral Council (CEC), with its tried and tested elements adapted for modern Australia, will lift the prosperity and amenity levels of every Australian, rich or poor, strong or weak, young or old.

I submit that the answer to your first question 'Why did it happen?' goes to the very heart of many matters plaguing humanity. The oligopoly of banks in Australia is supervised by APRA which limits new entrants to the Australian banking industry and is paid for with a bank levy and acts under the auspices of the FSB of the Money Power's Bank for International Settlements (BIS). The "Big Four'' have been given Too-Big-To-Fail status by the Australian Government, a status they exploit to the detriment of every Australian citizen fooled by the so-called deposit guarantee they have and their seemingly endless supply of credit to loan out.

Professor Wilson Sy, a Principal Researcher at APRA from 2004 to 2010, can describe to the Commission the financial status of the banks using publicly available data. More than anyone, he can assist in answering this first question, having researched this industry at APRA for this time. I ask that you call him to testify to the Commission.

The tyranny of the oligopoly of banks is echoed in the supermarkets, petrol companies and a myriad other industries that deliver much less than would be available if there were more players on the scene of each industry. The political "two-party preferred system" is the cruellest of devices POL.9100.0001.0616_0002

exploited by the Money Power via the bankrolling of election campaigns by their banking minions. Likewise, schools of economics and finance are heavily infiltrated by ideologies which serve the purposes of the Money Power because they are promoted by "think-tanks" sponsored by their minions. The media in Australia puts Goebbels to shame - it is the velvet glove that hides the Money Power's iron fist, and it does this with the cunning and stealth of an assassin.

At the top, bankrupt governments or their delegated Treasuries or other departments may create government bonds which private central banks may accept and exchange for a credit loan which the central bank may recall according to the terms of the bond. Bankrupt Greece (which has fought tyranny for centuries) sits broken by the Money Power. Bankrupt Australia, bankrupt America and bankrupt financial districts stand. As pointed out in my submission 0001 .0001.9366 of 22/7/18 10:39:44pm, quantitative tightening and bail-in is being done at the behest of the Money Power. All who ca n be broken stand to be broken if one recalls the form of the Money Power.

I believe the answer to 'Why did it happen?' lies in the fact that Australia's banks have become one-stop shops. Each added service has allowed this "industry" to create more wealth for its employees, owners and acolytes. Loaning to credit-unworthy recipients, speculating and crippling Australia's productive sector and hence ability to withstand the ravages ready to unfold all point to the complicity of APRA. Exposure of the volatility of these three things will crush Australia financially if the U.S. Fed makes good on its promise of continuing quantitative tightening. APRA has made loaning to the housing bubble easier than loaning to our productive sector. It has overseen the growth of derivatives, many of which are set to be paid out with changes in parameters of the housing bubble.

The dwarfing of assets and deposits by speculation for each of the Big Four is shown in the graph below. APRA, and ultimately its masters in the BIS (clearing house of the U.S. Fed and other central banks) stand responsible for any misery to come in the next banker-orchestrated GFC. I say banker-orchestrated because S & P Global and Moody's Investors Service, the biggest of the "Big Three" credit rating agencies responsible for not identifying sub-prime loans as sub-prime until too late in 2008, are publicly traded companies which still trade with the same stature. Bank Derivatives vs. Assets and Deposits-2017

"' Der ivatives (notional value) 12 ? :>! Assets / ---1 Customer Deposits 10 ?

7.88(2015)

4

2

ANZ Commonwealth NAB Westpac

Source: 2017 bank annual reports

Regarding the question of What can be done to avoid it happening again?' I ask that the Commission divide and conquer functions of the banks. Regulation of banks is too big a task for the Australian government, with its own ex-banker quota overflowing. Divide and conquer techniques have successfully been used throughout the ages when faced with a formidable foe. POL.9100.0001.0616_0003

Example 1 of regulatory capture. Treasury is an Australian government body which for five years denied bail-legislation was "in-train" (evidence in my previous submission PWF.0001.0001 .5272 of 26/4/18 10:33:52am) and continues to deny APRA has the power to "convert" deposits and "any other instrument" to shares in an insolvent bank (i.e. worthless shares).

I ask that you decide the implications of conversion and write-off provisions of the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018 as they appear ins. 11CAA Definitions, s. 36A Definitions ands. 230AAB Definitions which is printed as such: conversion and write-off provisions means the provisions of the prudential standards that relate to the conversion or writing off of:

(a) Additional Tier 1 and Tier 2 capital; or

(b) any other instrument.

How can Treasury attest that "any other instrument" cannot lawfully mean "any other instrument"?

Example 2 of regulatory capture. The Reserve Bank of Australia has stated since 2014 on their website that "Bailing-in unsecured derivatives obligations risks contagion given their widespread use as a risk management tool" and "Bail-in can, in principle, be applied to any unsecured debt instrument, including (uninsured) deposits, bonds, .. ." .

Example 3 of regulatory capture. ASIC have not prosecuted one bank or banker for growing derivative holdings of each bank, putting deposits and bonds at increasing risk, especially since after the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018 was assented to 5 March 2018.

Example 4 of regulatory capture. As mentioned above, APRA oversaw the starving of the productive sector, the growth of the housing bubble whose deflation will likely trigger payout of many derivatives which APRA has overseen the growth of. The following graph shows total growth of derivatives in Australia by Australia's banks under APRA's supervision.

Total Derivatives of Australian Banks June 1989-December 2017 40

35

30

..,, 25 c ·;::~ 20 ..,..::::. 15

10

5

Source: Reserve Bank of Australia POL.9100.0001.0616_0004

With the Australian Treasury, Reserve Bank of Australia, APRA and ASIC very little industry capture was necessary. These regulators are all dictated to by the Australian Council of Financial Regulators which in turn strives to implement the dictates of the Financial Stability Board of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS). If inquiring into the conflicting interests of bankers who both trade instruments in the BIS and influence the rules by which those instruments behave within the jurisdictions they exist is beyond the remit of this Royal Commission I ask that you recommend the Australian Government extricate Australia from this system. Else, how can Australians who believe we live under democratic rule abide a financial system which is clearly aristocratic?

I believe the Final report should clearly state that on 5/3/18 the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018 was entered into law. This redefines a deposit to an instrument which may be converted to a bank share which may be written-off before or when said bank closes due to unpayable derivative obligations (debts). I ask that the Commission recommends this definition be updated.

Likewise, I believe the definition provided in the letters patent for 'financial services entity' is antiquated. The functions of the ADls being inquired into fall outside the scope of this definition. These ADls can gamble away deposits and bonds using provisions born of the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018. I ask that the Commission recommends this definition be updated.

Banks needed this Royal Commission to rectify their practices. Many parliamentarians resisted a Royal Commission. The current Prime Minister is surprised at the reaction of the public to the findings of the Commission, but not the findings of the Commission. Hence, the extrication of private banking interests from bank services which serve the public (the productive sector) is long overdue, so too extrication of its influence on the Australian Parliament and the Prime Ministership.

On p23., '2.2 Necessary steps' does not include integrity of capital reserves of the licensee. Each of the Big Four have far more derivative holdings than asset and deposit holdings. Many of the counterparties to these derivatives are fellow bankers. Many derivative obligations stand to be paid out when interest rates rise as a result of private central banks exercising quantitative tightening. Many derivatives stand to be paid out as interest-only loans reset to interest plus principle in a contracting economy and bankruptcies follow mortgage defaults.

I note the Interim Report references s. 912Aofthe Corporations Act on p66.

That section obliges a financial seNices licensee to do all things necessary to ensure that the financial seNices covered by the licence are provided efficiently, fairly and honestly. And not charging the right rate or the right fee may be, in at least many cases, not to provide the relevant seNice 'efficiently, fairly and honestly'.

On the next page (p. 67) the interim report reads:

Selling without knowing that what is sold can be delivered is, at best, careless of the interests of the customers to whom the product is sold. At worst, it is deceptive.

I restate my submission to the Commission of 26/4/18 10:33:52AM and reiterate that all banks the Commission is currently inquiring into knew well in advance that bail-in legislation was "in-train" in Australia, at least since 2011. Despite this, they took deposits they suspected (or should have suspected) to be unsafe until 5 March 2018 and beyond this date have known not to be safe from their $40.6 trillion derivative obligations.

Dr Wilson Sy, with over five years as a Principal researcher at APRA, is highly qualified to explain the workings of the banks and the implications of the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018. His submission to the Senate Economics Committee is at POL.9100.0001.0616_0005

https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary Business/Committees/Senate/Economics/CrisisResolutionP owers/Submissions .

My second email to the Treasurer (and the Australian Federal Parliament) regarding this matter is attached as appendix 2. My first, third, fourth and fifth emails are also attached as appendices 1 ,3, 4 and 5 respectively. My first email was sent on the eve of the Australian Senate (all 8 Senators) convening to commit this Act of betrayal to law. My second email contains my interpretation of why this submission was glanced over by the Senate Economics Committee. A detail I failed to mention in the second email is that a minor party working with the CEC presented an amendment to the Act to the Federal government, which would have protected deposits, while the Act was still in bill form. As reported at http://cecaust.com.au/releases/2018 02 16 Govt APRA.html , while this party was waiting for a reply from the government regarding this amendment, the unamended legislation was briskly enacted. Another detail I failed to mention is that APRA can alter the terms and conditions of any instrument in the banking system to remove any impediments to their being bailed in.

I request that the Commission call Dr Wilson Sy to testify to his submission and give as truthful an analysis of each bank's financial positions as his expert vantage can provide.

The history section of the report on pp. 7 4-78 mentions much of the harmful deregulation of Australian banking since 1950. Equally as important as certain vertical integration of services that was exclusive of commercial banking prior to 1950 is the Commonwealth Bank as a government institution. Under the war-time government of John Curtin with Ben Chifley as treasurer Australia spent at least six times its peace-time spend with surplus funds and no interest rate rises. The bank crimes the Commission is inquiring into were not nearly as prevalent in the years before 1950.

From February until October 2018 the Reserve Bank has stated on its website at https://www.rba.gov.au/monetary-policy/int-rate-decisions/2018/ "At its meeting today, the Board decided to leave the cash rate unchanged at 1.50 per cenf'. As I mentioned in my submission 0001 .0001.9366 of 22/7/18 10:39:44pm the U.S. Fed has begun quantitative tightening (harvesting as it did in 1929). The RBA is between a rock and a hard place. Westpac were the first to increase interest rates to assist rolling over debt while starved of credit. Westpac are also the most desperate in their advertising campaigns, selling their sh*t like McDonald's.

If only Westpac had a name with "Commonwealth" or "National" in it, or the wholesome 3/5 of Anzac they may not have been the first to fall. Investors flock to the Australian brand. It is a pity that so far Canberra has rejected a new government credit bank. Investors would take to it like ducks to water. So would the general citizenry. Future bank victims would have recourse they currently don't have, if we had one.

On p. 82 in s.1.3 the Interim Report notes that:

Regulatory responses, however, focused on the remediation of specific instances of poor advice, rather than seeking to identify root causes within institutions and the industry.

Exposure of the industry would benefit all humanity, not to mention all Australians who suffer according to its whim. I ask that this Royal Commission look into the ownership of our Big Four banks which includes several banks with historical links to slave and opium trading and like the BIS, Nazi assistance.

The CEC have readily-available information which would assist this Royal Commission if it were to look at bank owners and their influence over their directions. If this Royal commission were to move in this direction, centuries of suffering would be eased by the provision of closure for many victims of drug-trafficking, terrorism and slavery.

Please do all you can to stamp out revisionism, especially that carried out by the banking industry and the media it sponsors. It is despicable. POL.9100.0001.0616_0006

I note on p. 91 that the Interim Report reads:

Experience (too often, hard and bitter experience) shows that conflicts cannot be 'managed' by saying, 'Be good. Do the right thing'.

The 'Banking System Reform (Separation of Banks) Bill 2018', as tabled in the Australian Parliament by Hon Bob Katter MP, seconded by Andrew Wilkie MP and supported by Rebekha Sharkie MP and Adam Bandt MP provides for jail terms for bankers who carry out commercial banking activity while under the employ of an investment bank and vice versa.

It also has the support of Senator Fraser Anning, Senator Richard Di Natale, Senator Mehreen Faruqi, Senator Peter Georgiou, Senator Stirling Griff, Senator Pauline Hanson, Senator Sarah Hanson-Young, Senator Nick McKim, Senator Barry O'Sullivan, Senator Rex Patrick, Senator Janet Rice, Senator Rachel Siewert, Senator Tim Storer, Senator Larissa Waters and Senator Peter Whish-Wilson.

Glass-Steagall (separation of banks) is a solution which came from the hard and bitter experience of the 1929 depression which involved the closure of 18,000 banks in America after liquidation by their own speculative debts. It will prevent the banker-orchestrated liquidation of commercial holdings of Australia's banks as up to $40.6 trillion of derivative obligations are realised in the next GFC.

Hard and bitter experience of the Federal Reserve stemming supply of credit during this time to ~ession (as mentioned in my submission to the Royal Commission ____.of 26/4/18 at 10:33:52am) gave rise to the 'New Deal' (government credit directed toward infrastructure construction [instead of bailouts]. leading to increased standard of living for American citizenry, not inflation [caused by storage of bailout monies by derivative counter-parties in off-shore banks for later predatory use]).

The credit crunch that the Federal Reserve and other central banks controlled by the Money Power are carrying out at present will be stopped with a new national credit bank. I urge the Royal Commission to call on the Australian Government to work with the CEC in their effort to develop and implement a new government credit bank.

As reported at https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-09/after-years-of-easing-meet­ guantitative-tightening-quicktake :

The Fed is now letting as much as $50 billion of its bond holdings mature every month without replacing them. That takes money out of the financial system, as the Treasury Department then finds new buyers for its debt. The Fed describes the winding down of its balance sheet, along with rate hikes, as part of a "normalization " of its policy stance and a response to the solid performance of the American economy and a return of more-normal inflation rates. The ECB, BOJ and Bank of England were among the central banks that deployed QE and may at some point start shrinking their own balance sheets as the Fed is now doing.

The RBA cannot move. It appears Australia's pillars of banking will continue be exposed as the husks that they are until the counter-parties to their derivative obligations come to collect, when they will wither to dust, along with all their holdings. I thank the Commission for seeking a swift and decisive end to this Roya l Commission. Hopefully there is time to save Australia. Of course, our two-party preferred apparatus could look to the present, past or future actions of the cabal that controls it and reform the banks sooner. If any are reading, ask yourself why you can't jump and have to be pushed, because you inevitably will be.

Banks have continued issuing short-term loans to unwitting recipients who are unaware of the precarious position of banks having difficulty rolling over debt. The Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018 should be inquired into, POL.9100.0001.0616_0007

especially with regard to bank know-ede of its assage to enactment and beyond as outlined in my submission to the Commission 10:33:52am. The carrying out of commercial banking acts (taking deposits, issui king loans) during this time is culpable, let alone negligent with respect to conduct involving such a great falling short of the standard of care that a reasonable person would exercise in the circumstances that the conduct merits criminal punishment for the offence. I believe Wilson Sy can attest to this.

I note that on p. 151 of the Interim Report the Big Four and AMP are noted for having "acknowledged in their initial submissions to the Commission that they or their associated entities had charged clients fees for personal financial advice that had not been provided': It is interesting to note that these are the very banks which crawled to the Rudd-Swan government for guarantees as the GFC unfolded.

Furthermore, it is interesting to note that the Big Four and AMP have the largest holdings of derivative obligations compared to deposit and asset holdings in Australia (they are our most volatile banks).

In their second reading speeches to the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018 while it was in bill form senators and legislators alike made misleading statements regarding stability and protection this Act does not bring. A Federal version of ICAC is needed to keep banking interests out of the Australian Federal Parliament. I do not believe that recommending this goes beyond the limits of this Commission.

It goes without mention that the Liberal government ministry should be the first port of call of this Federal version of ICAC. Their sins of omission and otherwise that have loosened the leash of dogs yearning for their own vomit stands proud on their lips. The damage control that the banks had to go to to get their party to instigate this Royal Commission, with its limited terms of reference and timeframe, to head off the one brewing in other quarters, was palpable at the time.

I believe that the evidence brought forward within the limited scope of the Royal Commission will be enough to warrant throwing the book at the banks. Likewise I believe the duration is adequate enough to bring swift action quick enough for our two-party preferred apparatus to disintegrate leaving sensible mutineers to reform the banks before the Global Financial Meltdown. Yes, I unfortunately believe we will need to break up the Labor party to reform the banks. I challenge the Hon Mr Shorten or any Federal Labor Party MP or senator to defy me.

P. 141 of the Interim Report mentions a report on the in-house tendencies of these five banks (Big Four and AMP):

AS/C's 2018 report showed that the approved products lists maintained by advice licensees controlled by the five largest banking and financial institutions included products manufactured by third parties and that third party products made up nearly 80% of the lists. But the report also showed that, overall, more than two-thirds (by value) of the investments made by clients were made in in-house products. (At the level of individual licensees the proportion varied from 31% to 88% invested in in-house products. By product type, the proportions invested in in-house products varied: 91% for platforms; 69% for superannuation and pensions; 65% for insurance; and 53% for investments. But taken as a whole, the report shows that advisers favour in-house products.)

These percentages are alarming. Each of these five banks cannot be working in the best interests of clients if each has clients with two-thirds of their investments in their products. Some clients would have to have been scammed (the "two-thirds" would be reduced to a portion of 100% closer to one-fifth if banks were acting in the interests of clients). Please recommend the abolition of APRA and the reinstitution of a government credit bank to regulate the banks by competing with them and staying competitive while having the private sector compete with it. This would give clients real choice and eliminate retributive fear some clients have of changing banks. POL.9100.0001.0616_0008

An end to vertical integration is needed here almost as much as is needed between the trading of high risk derivatives and deposits (as they are classically thought to be defined as [that which is deposited for safe-keeping]) in order for the confidence held in deposits, confidence which underpins the banking industry and financial stability, to be upheld.

P.142 of the Interim Report states:

As noted earlier, the basic premise for the FoFA reforms was that there are conflicts of interests between clients on the one hand and advisers and licensees on the other. The legislative solution adopted was not to eliminate the conflicts but regulate them. Has this solution been successful? Is it the right solution?

No and emphatic No. Structural reform is long overdue. The pursuit of order is much easier with obedience of the law. Government bodies and their proxies in the regulators are unable to herd these wild cats. We must cage them with legislation. The banks have resources beyond those of governments. Divide and conquer techniques mentioned earlier are necessary.

I mentioned the handiwork of Warren Buffett in my submission- of 26/4/18 10:33:52 in becoming Forbes's richest man while contradicting~ed by the RBA that derivative obligations are a risk management tool shown in their statement "Bailing-in unsecured derivatives obligations risks contagion given their widespread use as a risk management tool". To quote myself from this submission "The Federal Reserve can act on Australia's commercial economy in a similar fashion to Buffett's actions on markets in 2008". It has already begun doing so.

One need look no further than the handiwork of George Soros to see that: i) secrecy provisions in The Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018 ii) spying provisions in Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment (Assistance and Access) Bill 2018 (on pain of prison, app and software producers will be impelled to re-engineer phone programs allowing ASIO to bypass encryption protocols, unbeknownst to the majority of Australians, if enacted) iii) the Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Bill 2017-2019 (on which the bill in ii) is based) provision that allows police to close the entire "Square Mile" City of London banking centre to foot and vehicular traffic in the event of an emergency, terrorist or economic means that Caesar and the rest of the oligarchy are preparing an assault on the G20, the rest of Europe not affected by austerity and any other country with a government blind enough to implement bail-in. The counter-parties of derivatives of Deutsche Bank alone (the most volatile of the world's banks) cross nearly every country's borders. Australians (and humans in general) are not to be let to turn on each other. This Commission holds Australia's (and humanity's) fate in its hands. I ask that the Royal Commission recommend the five point program below to Parliament and further that they begin Australia's journey to a republic by firstly rescinding all legislation which has hailed from foreign intelligence agencies, especially the Five Eyes as well as the dictates of the BIS which have been adopted by the Australian Parliament, so that the oligarchy's hold on Australia is loosened.

My submission to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security (PJCIS) review of the Telecommunication and Other Legislation Amendment (Assistance and Access) Bill 2018 is attached as Appendix 6.

Likewise, the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP-11) hailing from the Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade seeks to i) hand POL.9100.0001.0616_0009

multinationals the ability to sue the Australian Government and ii) cut tariffs, the equity of which seNes common Australians and protects what is left of Australian industry.

While China seeks to build ports throughout the world by which it and any other nation may trade (open-trade) the two-party preferred apparatus of the oligarchy seeks to hand multinationals the ability to greater determine what food we eat and pharmaceuticals we take. This is dangerous. One only need look at the incidence of Syndrome X (mainly obesity, diabetes, high cholesterol and high blood pressure) that has resulted from years of letting soft drinks and fast foods protect and promote their image.

One reason I am grateful to have ceased practicing as a pharmacist is my utter disappointment in seeing 80% of drugs that entered the PBS over the past 16 years were aimed at Syndrome X. There was as little effort made by the Australian Government to get soft drink and fast food multinationals to advertise inside vascular wards as there was to get banks to advertise at the graves of Aussie battlers bankrupted when they made their last massive profit. Australians were fed , and continue to get fed soft drink, fast food and bank advertising in the Aussie backyard and the beach. I still can't see the trickle-down of big pharma investing in new therapies for areas of medicine with poor therapies e.g. chemotherapies, including antibiotics.

Practices of using levo-enantiomers (e.g. esomeprazole) and salt variations (e.g. perindopril arginine) to prolong the life of patents is rife within the pharmaceutical industry alongside many other practices aimed at exploiting the PBS (e.g. statins were more heavily promoted by drug reps while their cost to taxpayers was high than when their cost came down). Government should not promote these practices by registering such items on the PBS. With a government bank, Australia can invest in drugs for cancer and other less economically-lucrative illnesses to fill the void left by pharmaceutical companies.

The highlighted portion of the Interim Report on p. 146 reads:

These civil penalty provisions have seldom been invoked.

In order to assist ASIC in its priorities in: i) Promoting investor and financial consumer trust and confidence (from https://asic.gov.au/about­ asic/what-we-do/our-role/#priorities ) and ii) Ensuring fair, orderly and transparent markets (from https://asic.gov.au/about-asic/what-we­ do/our-role/#priorities )

I suggest that as much separation of bank functions be recommended as possible. Divide and conquer is the only tactic Australia can use to defeat this formidable enemy.

P. 190 of the Interim Report states:

There have been several inquiries into CBA's actions in connection with Bankwest business loans. Those inquiries have included:

- the Australian Securities and Investment Commission's (AS/C's) inquiries into allegations of misconduct in relation to commercial loans and engineered defaults

I merely ask that you draw the attention of the two-party preferred apparatus that sits in the Australian Parliament to the findings of this and other inquiries when considering whether to implement the Royal Commission's recommendations. Please recommend that they use their Parliamentary privilege to do what they were elected to do. POL.9100.0001.0616_0010

Many of the objectives of the recommendations of these inquiries would be served by separation of banking functions. Many of the piecemeal measures recommended by these inquiries, which add to the load of an already-inept ASIC, will be replaced by deterrents (possible criminal charges for bankers doing duties not belonging to their bank, the only bank they are allowed employment in at that time).

Regarding the matter of Bankwest I ask that the Commission consider i) share sell-offs CBA may have incurred if its books showed poorly in its statements to shareholders in 2007, ii) the fact that all of the Big Four and AMP (including CBA) were aware a GFC was coming at the time and iii) the inclination of banks to preserve share values or increase them.

In support of ii) above I refer the Royal Commission to http://www.cecaust.com.au/hbpa/ where it appears the CEC, with limited funding and resources compared with any of these five formidable institutions, successfully predicted a GFC. The severity was curbed by factors beyond the control of anybody - the U.S. Fed went on a QE spending spree, baiting a whole new generation of potential bank victims with easy credit. The lords gave. As mentioned before, the lords now take away (with interest).

If the CEC could predict global financial activity in 2007 it stands to reason that Australia's biggest lenders can. Joe Hockey was premature in his statement of 2014 that "the poorest people either don't have cars or actually don't drive very far in many cases". The closing of Australia's oil refineries by its government had not brought this scenario at this stage. Likewise he was premature in his statement "the age of entitlement is over, and the age of personal responsibility has begun", also of 2014. He was right in the sense that we now have a two-party preferred apparatus of the oligarchy holding democra cy, growth and fairness ransom in Canberra. These things belong to all Australians, rich or poor, young or old, strong or weak. I pray for their sake they give these things back peaceably.

I believe that Dr Wilson Sy can give perspective to circumstances in Australia before the Rudd­ Swan government guaranteed our banks as well as the current circumstances where banks have tripled their derivative holdings (as shown in the graph above) since 2007 to over $40.6 trillion today and where APRA stands ready to "convert" bank shares, bonds and deposits to frozen shares to use the equity derived to pay any and all derivative counter-parties.

If a bank does not have enough assets and deposits to bail-in to satisfy those counter-parties the media sponsored by our banks will cover up their BAD DEBT (yes, the debt that broke Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers) with dolled up stories about "toxic assets", a debt is not an asset like black is not white. Who knows what dolled up stories the media will spin on 100% bail-in of 100% of deposits and assets followed by bank closure and cessation of bank activities. The Cypriots took a "haircut" according to our media, when partial bail-in was applied. Perhaps "shaving"? Apt, as it is usually associated with subjugation.

Economists and financiers in the Australian Parliament and elsewhere have blinders precluding education in physical economy. Blinders produced by having studied at schools of finance and economics where physical economy is suppressed by benefactors with an interest in the status quo being maintained. Politicians throughout the world with these blinders see bail-ins and bailouts as solutions to derivative counter-party claims much like neoconservatives, Blairites, Tories and other dogs of war flippantly (and dangerously) talk of sending more westerners to more war theaters in the east.

Unless these blinders are removed, these economists and financiers will continue to apply bailout after bail-in to pay bets laid with no money down using the wealth of their citizenry until the Australian economy collapses. Physical economy tells us that government-issued credit which is directed into infrastructure and amenity development will cause an uplift in quality of life for citizens who use that infrastructure and amenity. Any inflation of money supply will be more than matched by the prosperity the infrastructure and amenity brings. A better bang for the buck than before the POL.9100.0001.0616_0011

credit-issue is inevitable as standard of living increases. The diminishing bang for the buck of government-issued credit haemorrhaging to private banker coffers via bailouts can be eliminated with bank separation.

Removal of these blinders will reveal a world where gamblers pay their own losses, Aussie battlers keep what they have fought for, investors are not made into debt-slaves of banks who apply provisions and loan terms arbitrarily to their own ends, beggars are fed and sheltered and we have a media for a free society as espoused by John F. Kennedy.

Most of this world is possible if the Australian Federal Parliament implements the CEC's five point program for Australia to survive economic crisis: 1. Glass-Steagall banking separation 2. A national bank 3. An immediate moratorium on all home and farm foreclosures 4. Nation-building infrastructure and science-driver projects to revive the productive economy 5. International cooperation on a new financial architecture and economic development

Less money would be available for sharks like George Soros or bigger to prey on Australia as they have on other economies. Less money would be available to warmongers as well. Peace and prosperity with human development can only be got with these reforms. The private sector will remain to keep the public sector competitive while the public sector keeps the private sector honest. Ensuring the maintenance of peace and prosperity for Australia requires more money in the hands of its citizenry so that they can hold the two-party preferred apparatus of the oligarchy in Canberra, which is ransoming their future, to account. Other countries may follow and similarly break chains of economical tyranny. This will drive down refugee numbers.

From p. 256 of the Interim Report:

•Should there be a national system for farm debt mediation? - If so, what model should be adopted?

In answer I say yes, the model proposed by the CEC as stated above. Further, I ask that the Commission recommend a full investigation of all farm and productive industry foreclosures during APRA's reign so far so that where initial borrowings do not outweigh the foreclosure price, potential victims of predatory banking practices can be recompensed with bank fines (and government administration fees) commensurate with the difference. Point 3 of the CEC's five point program would serve to avoid future morbidity and mortality in this vital sector of Australian life.

From p. 276 of the Interim report:

It obseNed that in 75% of the customer files reviewed, 'the adviser had not demonstrated compliance with the best interests duty in Section 961 B of the Corporation[s] Act.

To remedy this situation I suggest that the Commission recommend bank separation and government credit banking. If enacted, the 'Banking System Reform (Separation of Banks) Bill 2018' would legally prohibit bankers in a commercial bank from infusing their own interest into any product sale. As mentioned earlier, a government credit bank would regulate the banks by competing with them ensuring maximal benefit for commercial bank customers.

From this Interim Report it is apparent that the Big Four act as an oligopoly, not the pillars they have been purported to be. The five point program above will help restore public benefit and hence trust to this industry, trust it desperately needs.

An observation of the Interim Report on p.301 reads:

The governance and risk management practices of the entities did not prevent the conduct occurring. POL.9100.0001.0616_0012

This statement should not just be limited to banks. The two-party preferred apparatus has eroded its credibility by denying their obligation to deliver the public any review of the banks, delivering one with terms of reference written by the banks. Too much was too much long before this. Greater scorn was poured on the Australian public with the passage of the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018, its final act of treason.

The Australian Local Government Association denied Strathfield Council's submitted motions of 2014 and 2017 which would have seen bail-in and Glass-Steagall debated on the National General Assembly floor (no sour grapes on my part, just an illustration of how desperate banking interests are to squash debate of Glass-Steagall). More can be said on impediments to this.

The overwhelming majority of parliamentarians ignored Strathfield Council's letters of 2016 individually addressed to them urging rejection of bail-in and adoption of Glass-Steagall legislation.

The RBA's co-licitin this matter since 2014 is outlined in my submission to the Royal Commission of 26/4/18 10:33:52am. In answer to q. 2 of this same submission I ght of derivative obligation growth.

P. 296 of the Interim Report states:

So-called community benefit payments associated with enforceable undertakings appear, at least on their face, to be less than the penalty that ASIC might properly have sought in civil penalty proceedings and unrelated to the profit derived by the entity from the contravening conduct. The regulator must do whatever can be done to ensure that breach of the law is not profitable.

ASIC have not sought civil penalty proceedings against any bank throughout the time in which banks have been growing derivatives and taking deposits with the knowledge that bail-in was "in­ train". More importantly, they have failed to prosecute any bank which has continued these practices without warning depositors since the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018 was made law.

APRA is a foreign-controlled (dictated to by FSB of BIS) government body paid with a bank levy. The banks run amok on APRA's watch because they pay the piper. The cruelty of this device is only exceeded by the two-party preferred apparatus which authorises it.

This two-party preferred apparatus has ceded credit control, intelligence and a myriad of other sovereign jewels to a foreign, unaccountable, unelected oligarchy. I note the dying throes of this oligarchy in its recent attempt to double dutch the western media regarding unfounded claims that Russia was involved in poisoning the Skripals. This age old foe is so desperate for war between the west and Russia that it will show its Dutch monarchy's hand alongside its British monarchy's hand. Dying throes.

P. 330 of the Interim report states:

• How far can, and how far should, there be separation between providing financial advice and manufacture or sale of financial products?

This and many other questions leading into p. 331 can be answered with apt qualification by Wilson Sy.

Likewise, Wilson Sy can give qualified insight to answer questions at '7 .1 Conduct risk' on p. 341:

7.1 Conduct risk • What are banks doing to meet the danger of conduct risk? • What are regulators doing to meet it? POL.9100.0001.0616_0013

•What can banks do? What can regulators do? • What should either or both be doing?

I thank the Commission for its efforts so far in rectifying banking matters as wholly and expeditiously as possible. I believe that to better assist the Commission it would be prudent for the Commission to call in individuals who have previously worked in the banking sector who will help answer more of the questions posed in the report with unfettered and deep insight. For this reason I request that you call Dr Wilson Sy to testify to the Royal Commission.

Yours faithfully,

Appendix 1

Sent: Tuesday, 13 February 2018, 7:02:30 pm AEDT

Subject: Crowning moment of Australian neoliberalism: Morrison and Bowen ask Parliament to hand keys of Treasury to banksters

Dear Member/Senator

I, , request that you read the following speech (adapted for parliament) when the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and other Measures) Bill 2017 is next debated/revisited in chamber and present the petition mentioned therein (blank copy attached). Glass-Steagall legislation will protect the Australian commercial economy. National credit banking legislation is the best way for government to help build the Australian commercial economy, providing a trusted means of producing infrastructure. If infrastructure with studies predicting high economic and social returns for the regrowth of Australia are pursued, we can once again be known as the lucky country.

My submission to the Senate Economics Committee (accepted but not displayed by your Government) is attached.

A blank copy of a petition titled 'Global crash coming - Australia needs Glass Steagall and a National Bank' is attached. My signature is among at least 1300 signatures collected so far. POL.9100.0001.0616_0014

A similar petition titled 'Break up the big banks now- pass Glass-Steagall!' was presented to parliament on Monday, 4 December 2017. It was signed by 3,803 citizens.

Yours faithfully

This is it.

This moment.

This room.

This could be the last time we choose between serving the public who elected us and those who bankrolled our last campaign.

This decision.

This is all there is.

We go down in history together.

This is where we determine if there is a difference between a common thief and a thieving bankster, whether the rats in the cellar differ from the rats in the attic. And whether the home we call Australia should be protected from both.

No corporate sponsor can buy us out of the consequences of getting this vote wrong.

No excuses can be found for ignoring the warnings of over one thousand Australian citizens who wrote to the Senate Committee opposing the bill we will now vote on.

"The legislation particularly builds on the work of two publications" mentioned in s1 .15 of the report of the Senate Committee. Submissions made before the formulation of the second one of these publications expressed overwhelming opposition to bail-in (conversion to frozen bank equity). This is where we choose whether to again ignore public opposition to bail-in.

This is where we choose whether to legalise the conversion and write-off of capital instruments which are outlawed elsewhere, including in England. This is where we give unwitting Australians the big screw that English Rule did not decree.

This is where we choose whether to leave the vast majority of bank asset and deposit holders out of pocket, if all creditors of our "big four" banks fully use an activated financial claims scheme.

This is where we risk being in a poorer financial position to activate the financial claims scheme at all if local, state, and federal government accounts are bailed-in.

This is where we choose whether to reverse the burden of proof so that a defendant is presumed guilty until proven innocent.

This is where we choose whether to afford powers of secrecy to APRA with respect to this bill, powers we do not afford to ourselves or any government or subsidiary, doing away with openness and accountability.

This is where we will choose whether to abide a Senate Economics Legislation Committee report which omits mentioning that "notwithstanding [support for the bill], concern was expressed regarding various provisions of the bill and whether they were the best way to ensure the stability of Australia's financial system in the future" by the overwhelming majority of submitters (my words emphasised for volume).

This is where we will choose whether to accept a new low in consultation. There were no hearings of evidence during the formulation of the Senate Economics Committee's report. POL.9100.0001.0616_0015

This is where we choose to ignore over one thousand submissions made to this Committee which were not publicly displayed. They were considered to be form letters because they all called for Glass-Steagall.

This is where we choose whether to ignore abounding questions regarding conflict of interest surrounding the private banking pedigree of the chairperson appointed for this comm ittee.

"Current law" can be reinterpreted when "the objectives of protecting depositors and promoting financial system stability" are pitted against each other and this legislation, which overpowers and overrules all legislation, which hailed from the bank of all banks, is executed, and bail-in of deposits occurs. This is where we will choose whether to ignore bank separation (Glass-Steagall), which eliminates this dilemma.

Implementing Glass-Steagall means that choosing whether to legalise injustice and unfairness is unnecessary. None of the above choices need to be made; justice and fairness as we know it can be preserved.

We will have to face our constituents if this Bill becomes legislation, bail-in (conversion) of bank bonds and deposits occurs, and bedlam ensues. The architects of this bill may never face those constituents of ours aggrieved by bail-in (conversion).

The judgment of the public will be aimed at us, not them.

No more banker lies.

Too much is too much.

I will not be remembered for serving the deposits and superannuation of my constituents to bankers on a platter.

I will not render unto Caesar that which is not Caesar's. No more.

I understand there to be a petition, signed by over 1300 citizens so far. It is titled 'Global crash coming - Australia needs Glass-Steagall and a National Bank'. I accept that the number of signatories of the petition is not that required to oblige debate. However, given the factors mentioned above, and the following points I believe debate is warranted:

1. There were over one thousand submissions noted by the Senate Committee to so ardently call for Glass-Steagall that they were counted as form letters.

2. There was a previous petition calling for Glass-Steagall, a national bank, and a program of major infrastructure projects presented to the House of representatives on Monday, 4 December 2017, signed by 3803 citizens.

3. The recent spotlight shone by the Royal Commission on the rampant criminal activities of bankers has taken less than one day to hit the biggest media outlets.

I have with me a blank copy of a petition titled 'Global crash coming - Australia needs Glass-Steagall and a National Bank'. I urge the house accept it for debate immediately.

201712submissiontostandingcommittee+addendum.doc 35kB

20171012 Petition-Global-Crash-GlassSteagall-NationalBank.pdf 156.4kB (available at http://cecaust.com.au/glass-steagall/ )

Appendix 2 POL.9100.0001.0616_0016

Sent: Thursday, 22 February 2018, 4:49: 10 pm AEDT Subject: By hook or by crook-tell it to the judge

Dear Members/Senators,

I, , assert that policies have been broken and many o you ave een ece1ve unng t e passing of legislation which in the words of a former Principal Researcher at APRA is "designed to confiscate bank deposits to 'bail-in' insolvent banks to save the financial system" (refer to the Regulatory Priority section of Dr Wilson Sy's submission to the Senate Economics Committee, attached).

Regarding the contentious question of whether deposits will be bailed in, the Reserve Bank of Australia describes this scenario as "very unlikely". Treasury advised that "It is not the intention that a bank deposit would be an 'instrument' for these purposes [bailing in of deposits]." APRA agreed with Treasury. The statements of the Reserve Bank, Treasury, and APRA do not provide assurances that bail-in of deposits will not occur.

The Senate Economics Legislation Committee Report gives assertions that deposits will not be bailed in, stating that this is in accordance with specific statements from APRA and confirmed by Treasury. No such assurances were made by APRA. No confirmation of this was given by Treasury. Treasury's conclusion that "Therefore they cannot be 'bailed-in"' is a false conclusion to the arguments which precede it. It is not a conclusive statement refuting that bail-in will occur. Please read on and judge for yourself.

Or tell it to the judge when APRA interprets this legislation as it is written, bail-in of deposits occurs and bedlam ensues.

Question 2 of "Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Bill 2017 Written Questions on Notice-Treasury-January 2017", notified to the Senate on 25 January 2018 reads:

2. Section 11 CAA of the bill defines "conversion and write-off provisions" as: conversion and write-off provisions means the provisions of the prudential standards that relate to the conversion or writing off of:

(a) Additional Tier 1 and Tier 2 capital; or

(b) any other instrument a. What was the intent of including section (b) in the legislation? b. Can section (b) be interpreted to include bank deposits as an instrument that could be converted or written off? c. If yes, does this imply that bank deposits could be subject to, in the words of some submitters, a "bail-in"? If no, please explain how deposits are specifically excluded in the legislation.

In response to Question 2, all that Treasury states is: a. The intention of paragraph (b) of the definition of 'conversion and write-off provisions' in section 11 CAA is to appropriately 'future-proof' the legislation by referring not only to AT1 and T2 capital but to other instruments that could be the subject of such provisions under APRA's capital framework in the future. This reflects that prudential requirements can change over time and the POL.9100.0001.0616_0017

instruments that are recognised as capital under APRA's prudential standards could be referred to differently in the future. The use of the word 'instrument' in paragraph (b) is intended to be wide enough to capture any type of security or debt instrument that could be included within the capital framework in the future. It is not the intention that a bank deposit would be an 'instrument' for these purposes. b. We do not believe that paragraph (b) of the definition could be interpreted to include bank deposits as an instrument that could be converted or written off. The operative section to which this definition applies, new section 11 CAB, would only apply where an 'instrument' contains terms providing for conversion and/or write-off and those terms reflect requirements in APRA's prudential standards (which are disallowable by Parliament). As noted in the answer to a. above, this applies to instruments included within APRA's capital framework. It is not intended to apply to bank deposits. c. As discussed above, paragraph (b) of the definition cannot reasonably be interpreted to include deposits as an instrument that could be converted or written off. Therefore they cannot be 'bailed­ in'.

In answer to the same question a// that APRA states is: "APRA agrees with the responses provided by Treasury on Questions 1-3 above, on which we provided input".

In the section titled "Protection of depositors' savings and 'bail-in' a// that is stated by the Senate Committee in their report is:

2.28 As noted above, an overwhelming majority of stakeholders, particularly members of the CEC, expressed fear that the proposed legislation would allow APRA to 'bail-in' the savings of depositors in order to stabilise a failing financial institution. The term 'bail-in' refers to the conversion of capital instruments into cash that is then used to support an institution in distress.

2.29 Dr Wilson Sy, a former analyst with APRA, considered that the bill was not clear enough on the topic of depositors' savings. Dr Sy suggested that whilst the Banking Act 1959 (Banking Act) includes a section on the protection of depositors, it also says in Subdivision A, subsection 12(1 ), Division 2 of Part 11:

It is the duty of APRA to exercise its powers and functions under this Division for the protection of the depositors of the several ADls and for the promotion of financial system stability in Australia.

2.30 Dr Sy explained that this statement 'may provide some comfort to ordinary people, but it is illusory because deposit protection is to be balanced against financial system stability, without the law clearly stating which has higher priority'. Dr Sy claimed that the bill is 'designed to confiscate bank deposits to 'bail-in' insolvent banks to save the financial system'.

2.31 Dr Sy and the Australian Movement for Sustained Development (AMSD) cited Cyprus as an example of where citizens' bank deposits had been 'bailed-in'. In particular, Dr Sy explained that following the GFC in 2008, Cyprus' financial system was failing; and that to remedy the situation in 2013, bank deposits were 'confiscated' and used to support the failing financial system.

2.32 The AMSD also commented that the effects of the Cyprus 'bail-in' were devastating and recommended that the bill be amended to specifically exempt unsecured deposits from bail-in.

2.33 The CEC also commented that the bill was unclear regarding how APRA might treat deposits. It noted that in the bill, under the Section 11 CAA Definition, it states that: conversion and write-off provisions means the provisions of the prudential standards that relate to the conversion and writing off of:

(a) Additional Tier 1 and Tier 2 capital; or POL.9100.0001.0616_0018

(b) Any other instrument

2.34 In this instance, the term 'any other instrument' has been interpreted by the CEC as being open ended. However, as noted previously, any instrument that can be converted or written off must specifically indicate this in their terms at the time of sale.

2.35 Treasury stated that the above interpretation of the bill by the CEC is incorrect and clarified that:

The use of the word 'instrument' in paragraph (b) is intended to be wide enough to capture any type of security or debt instrument that could be included within the capital framework in the future. It is not the intention that a bank deposit would be an 'instrument' for these purposes.

2.36 Treasury further stated that they did not believe that paragraph (b) could be interpreted to include bank deposits as an instrument that could be converted or written-off:

The operative section to which this definition applies, new section 11 CAB, would only apply where an 'instrument' contains terms providing for conversion and/or write-off and those terms reflect requirements in APRA's prudential standards (which are disallowable by Parliament).

2.37 Treasury confirmed that because deposits are not classified as capital instruments, and do not include terms that allow for their conversion or write-off, they cannot be 'bailed­ in'.

2.38 Treasury also noted that the current law and the proposed bill both provide a high level of protection for the interests of depositors in a crisis:

In particular, APRA's statutory objectives include protecting the interests of depositors and promoting financial system stability in Australia. Both Treasury and APRA consider that, in the case of the failure of an ADI, the objectives of protecting depositors and promoting financial system stability would be very closely aligned.

2.39 The reforms in this bill ensure that contractual write-off or conversion provisions in relevant instruments operate in accordance with their terms. Further, APRA has specifically stated that the reforms do not constitute a statutory power for APRA to write-down or convert the interests of other creditors in resolution, including depositors of a failing ADI.

My emphasis has been added to the above.

There is a strongly perceived conflict of interest surrounding the banking pedigree of the gentleman who appointed the Senate Committee members of higher banking pedigree. I perceive that Malcolm Turnbull, having previously been Chairman of Goldman Sachs Australia, should not have been able to appoint Jane Hume, ex-Deutsche Bank, ex-Rothschild Australia, and Senator Peter Whish-Wilson, ex-Merrill Lynch, ex-Deutsche Bank. This is scandalous. The Senate Committee denied hearings to aid the formulation of their report. Their report fails to mention there were two thousand submissions made in opposition to the bill and over one thousand made requesting Glass-Steagall separation. The report generally waters down opposition to the bill and affirms tenuous statements made by Treasury and by Treasury on behalf of APRA. Please call me 0401 149 790 if you would like more examples of where these submissions have been misconstrued by the Senate Economics Committee and an explanation of how.

It appears that Treasury, ASIC, the Reserve Bank and APRA have been absolved of responsibility in denying that bail-in is not possible with this legislation leaving the Senate Committee to pedal the lies fathered by the architects of this bill which would convince the Australian Parliament to pass this legislation, including the lie that deposits are protected under this legislation. It appears that the revolving door of politicians will continue. The oligarchical bankers who care not who runs Australia will likely remain.

My only suggestion, after reading this bill is as follows: POL.9100.0001.0616_0019

When the proverbial hits the fan and transfer of wealth begins from the deposits and bond-holdings of the wealth, which is common to all Australians, to supranational shadow banks (hidden by privacy laws) and closure of banks and ATMs ensue, you implement Glass-Steagall and national credit banking and pay out the deposit and bond holders directly. Cut out the middleman banks which have elsewhere used bailout money to buy back their own shares, thereby propping up their value and justifying their exorbitant employee salaries.

Of course, you can avoid this scenario now if you implement Glass-Steagall and National Banking Policy immediately.

Regards,

Footnote 1

Deutsche Bank is a ticking time bomb-the amount of derivatives it held in 2015 was $45.54 trillion while its deposit holdings were $0.49 trillion and asset holdings were $1.77 trillion.

Business insider Australia reported on 13 October 2017, 2 am that "Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan are offering clients a new investment product that gives them a chance to bet on the next banking crisis.

Both Wall Street giants are now making a market for derivatives which offer investors the chance to bet on or against bank bonds known as Additional Tier 1 notes, according to a Bloomberg report."

Have any of you cast lots on the next banking crisis?

Which of you have acted to betray the people of Australia?

It is never too late to change.

Footnote 2

GFC I appears to have been a controlled implosion. Down-valuation of ratings for sub-prime loans appears to have been done at a convenient moment for many beneficiaries of the fallout from GFC I.

The Cyprus experiment appears to have been a litmus test. Partial bail-ins were used after banks were closed for several days. Many Cypriots rallied against their government, not the architects of the legislation. Did the Cypriot government know of the derivative holdings of Laiki Bank and Bank of Cyprus?

Were they to blame?

Do you know of the derivative holdings of the big 4 banks? POL.9100.0001.0616_0020

Will you be blamed if all ATMs and banks close as all bank assets and deposits are converted to bank equity, used to pay each bank's speculative debts until one is left standing? (A scenario without bailouts.)

Will you be blamed if ATMs and banks close, all bank assets and deposits are converted to bank equity, used to pay the speculative debt owed to another bank and these banks ask for bailouts? Given they have been deemed 'too-big-to-fail' by the supranational Bank for International Settlements, will you oblige, inflating the money supply, selling even more of Australia for naught?

Will you be blamed if ATMs and banks close, all bank assets and deposits are converted to bank equity, used to pay the speculative debt owed to another bank, these banks ask for bail outs and when refused increase interest rates, calling in real debts, acquiring even more of Australia for naught? (A scenario without bailouts.)

Dr Wilson Sy - Submission.pdf 135kB (available at https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary Business/Committees/Senate/Economics/CrisisResolution Powers/Submissions )

Appendix 3

Sent: Thursday, 10 May 2018, 4:13:48 pm AEST

Subject: Advance Australia, Fair go for your constituents (pleas from Andrew Soulos, former Mayor of Strathfield Council NSW)

Dear Senator/Member of Parliament,

Please find attached the confirmation of my submission to the 'Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry'. As mentioned within, the US Federal Reserve can again fail to stem the decline in the supply of money as this private bank did during the Great Depression while the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018 converts one or" any other instrument" that every derivatives-ridden bank holds into shares which are not readily redeemable. Two tourniquets turned to strangle our commercial economy.

At https://reports.jpmorganchase.com/investor-relations/201 7/ar-ceo-letters.htm?1 Jamie Dimon writes "It is also a reasonable explanation (and one that many economists believe) that today's rates of the 10-year bond trading below 3% are due to the large purchases of U S. debt by the Federal Reserve (and others). This situation is completely reversing. Sometime in the next year or so, many of the major buyers of U.S. debt, including the Federal Reserve, will either stop their buying or reverse their purchases (think foreign exchange managers or central banks in Japan or China and Europe). So far, only one central bank, the Federal Reserve, has started to reverse QE-and even that in a minor way. However, by the end of this year, the Fed has indicated it might reduce its holding of Treasuries by up to $150 billion a quarter. And finally, the U.S government will need to sell more than $250 billion a quarter to fund its deficit• Enough from this mouthpiece of the architects of the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers POL.9100.0001.0616_0021

and Other Measures) Act 2018. The US can write off its debt to the Federal Reserve (cf. Iceland) if its government had a fraction of the bravery of the last president that risked taking dogs away from their vomit. It does not "need to sell" anything. America needs a national credit bank to rebuild a money power-ravaged nation, as does Australia.

Australia needs Glass-Steagall to ensure private purses are not picked with bail-in and the public purse is not picked with bailouts. It will ensure APRA's tourniquet cannot be turned. A national credit bank is needed to guarantee the flow of money into the Australian commercial economy, releasing the Federal Reserve's tourniquet so that it does not affect Australia. Please show the way for other G20 countries which have succumbed to this bail-in/bailout scam by breaking up the banks and re-establishing a national credit bank.

The architects of this scam stand ready to gain the earth. So much stands to be lost.

Whistleblowers over the years have, through many means, exposed how close our regulators are to the banking sector. The sins of the banks that they have overseen will continue to be exposed by the 'Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry'. The trust that some insist holds our financial system together will likely further diminish.

Many rightly trust that APRA will use these powers to uphold the "too-big-to-fa il" status of our Big Four banks. Speculators will walk away with the wealth that is common to your constituents.

Heads, the speculators betting bank A's deposits and assets win (and deposit and bond-holders of bank B lose). Tails, the speculators betting bank A's deposits and assets don't lose (and the deposit and bond­ holders of bank A lose). Parliament's passage of the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018 has enabled this heads I win/tails I don't lose scenario for speculators.

Attached to th is email for your reference is a flyer from the Citizens Electoral Council titled 'Banks are structured to exploit customers-the Royal Commission must investigate APRA and banking structure'. encourage you to read 'Top reasons the Banking Royal Commission must investigate APRA' and note that its circulation is increasing. After reading it I asked myself why would APRA's resolution of bank failure not involve it creating a crisis using the Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures you have given it?

How can you trust APRA not to bail in deposits and bonds of your constituents? "APRA is funded largely by the industries that it supervises" (from http://www.apra.gov.au/Pages/default.aspx). The banks have paid the piper. Why would they not call the tune? To do so wou ld contradict expectations based on their past and present behaviour.

A high banking authority once stated "ADls are also intensively supervised by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority". The current Financial Services Royal Commission has already proven that the corruptive supervision of ADls by APRA which the 'Banking System Reform (Separation of Banks) Bill 2018' (attached with explanatory memorandum) seeks to end is long overdue. Please expand the terms of reference of the Royal Commission to include APRA, the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018 and its authors. The output of any industry is intensively influenced by its regulator and policy developers. APRA and the authors of the Act need to be brought to account.

On its website at https://www.rba.gov. au/publications/submissions/financial-sector/financial-system-inquiry- 2014-03/regulatory-response-to-the-g lobal-financial-crisis. html the RBA states that "Bail-in can, in principle, be applied to any unsecured debt instrument, including (uninsured) deposits, bonds, commercial paper, derivative obligations and trade credits. However, in practice, longer-term senior unsecured debt is generally considered by policymakers to be the most bail-inable. Short-term liabilities are also considered to be less bail-inable as they are more likely to be subject to runs. Bailing-in unsecured derivatives obligations risks contagion given their widespread use as a risk management tool, and bailing-in trade credits, operational liabilities and uninsured deposits is considered to be less likely due to the social or political implications of exposing individuals or small firms to loss". (Emphasis added.)

I ask that you stand up for the interests of your constituents over those of the banks, preferably before Australian bank bonds, deposits, shares and "any other instrument" are converted to bank shares which are very likely to be frozen until they are written off. As seen in the RBA quote above, bail-in of deposits and bonds is prioritised before derivative obligations. There is a great potential that somewhere under $37 trillion dollars (notional value) of derivative obligations will become toxic assets wh ich will require (some) and "any other instrument(s)" to be bailed in/written off to balance the books of our Big Four banks. POL.9100.0001.0616_0022

Our Big Four banks' derivative obligations outweigh their asset and deposit holdings more than five times over. This will mean that these banks will likely bail in all assets and deposits and have no capital to lend or release for these shares to be paid out, and every ability to call in debts. They will likely continue to be poorly regulated, have a reputation for freezing deposits and bonds, have other insolvency problems prohibiting release of funds and require bailouts until you let them fail and close, leading to writing-off of shares. In short, the banks will receive all the money you are willing to let them take from your constituents. The social cost may be immeasurable.

I ask that you help Australia turn the tide on providing bail for our criminals, be they of blue or white collar. Bailouts and bail-ins for our criminal banks are wrong. Glass-Steagall is right. Ethically, historically, in all possible ways. Give every Australian a fair go. Support Glass-Steagall. Show every other G20 country the way as you advance Australia fair.

I have previously sent two emails regarding this Act of Parliament. In summary, the first outlines what I thought the Parliament should know about the repercussions of passing a bill which enables bail-in of bank deposits to prevent bank failures. The second outlines how a judge would likely interpret the ignorant or wilful lies reported by the Senate Economics Committee in their assurances to you that deposits cannot be bailed­ in using the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018.

Unless the actual wording of the Act states that deposits are off limits to APRA's new tool chest for bank resolution, business accounts, personal deposits, pensions and superannuation accounts could be bailed-in, if APRA so wills. I am sure you would not intentionally sacrifice the well-being of your constituents through the redistribution/transfer of their wealth to other person(s ).

If you recognise the unnecessary hurt this Act can cause, and want to best serve the interests of your constituents and protect them from bail-in, I strongly urge you to look at the principles of Glass-Steagall bank separation under which commercial banking would be protected and completely separated away from any bank's speculative activity. I hope that a review of the popularity of Glass-Steagall proponents like Jeremy Corbyn, its past success in America and present success in China will entice you to move, second or vote for Glass-Steagall bank separation for the betterment of Australia and the prosperity of all your constituents.

There were an estimated two thousand members of the public who made submissions to the Senate Economics Committee with concerns regarding bail-in of deposits. The Senate Economics Committee saw their concerns as "incorrect". Over one thousand of these submissions called for Glass-Steagall banking separation.

The petition I emailed you on 13 February 2018 which at that time had over 1,300 signatures, now has over 3, 100 signatures. This petition calls for the disbandment of APRA and the implementation of Glass-Steagall legislation and national credit banking legislation.

More people are questioning the rot in the government executive which, but for the few references to bail-in within Treasury documents over the last five years, kept this 300-plus page Act of betrayal under wraps until late last year. More people are disputing the claims of the Senate Economics Committee, whose banking interests I questioned in my last email. More people are aware of the banking pedigree of this Committee which lied to the Parliament to lower their guard and more people are aware of the hijacking of Parliament which saw six of one house and a baker's half dozen of the other house do the bidding of the bankers. More people are aware that our media is also, at best, asleep at the wheel, reporting on who is screwing who instead of Parliament giving the public the real big screw.

My method of ensuring people are reasonably-informed about Glass-Steagall and national credit banking involves informing them, one way or another, that:

1. Derivative obligations of banks are bets that when realised pay returns or become liabilities affectionately called 'toxic assets'. These toxic assets need to be paid with available capital when they arise. They are usually paid to other banksters (holders of CDOs). Bear Stearns failed and many other American banks needed bailouts to stop them failing because they did not have enough working capital to pay them off.

2. Bail-in was applied in Cyprus in 2013 when deposit-holders in the Bank of Cyprus and Laiki Bank took what was affectionately called 'haircuts' using all but 100,000 euros in every deposit to pay off the debts of these banks, limiting loss absorption and the need for bailouts. POL.9100.0001.0616_0023

3. Attached is a graph displaying the deposit, asset and derivative holdings of our Big Four banks. ANZ stopped disclosing its full derivative holdings in 2017; the National Australia Bank stopped in 2016; the Commonwealth Bank stopped in 2012 when it was ahead of the pack.

4. Attached is a graph which shows the exponential growth of derivative obligations held by Australia's banks from -$14 trillion at the time of the GFC to over $37 trillion now under the intensive supervision of the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority.

5. Many of these derivatives are bets on Australia's sub-prime loan market-interest-only loans made in January 2013 which have been resetting since the beginning of th is year. When these derivatives are realised, all the Big Four banks will have toxic assets that they will need to remove from their books- they may become unstable.

6. All Australian banking instruments are able to be confiscated by APRA when a bank is in trouble in order to square the books of the banks. Holders of deposits, bonds and shares will likely be left with shares in a bank which are not readily-redeemable. Banks may then also call on the government for bailouts.

7. With Glass-Steagall, deposits and loans are handled by one arm of the bank which is government­ protected. All investments are not protected by the government. Derivatives, hedging, swaps, coos and all gambling instruments are handled by a separate, isolated institution or institutions much like a casino. When the derivative is realised one party wins, the other party loses. No bailouts from the government. No drawing on other parties to cover losses.

8. If an investment bank fa ils and closes it does not affect the commercial economy. People keep their houses, shops stay open, banks and ATMs stay open, the amount of people above the current poverty line remains as it is-we keep the status quo-business as usual.

9. National credit banking involves the government creating money, either by selling bonds or from no backing (except that of the people of the nation), and directing it into infrastructure with enduring economic and social returns. The Snowy Mountains Scheme generates billions of dollars of returns every year in hydroelectricity and agriculture and stands as a testament to Australia's fi rst national credit bank. Bigger and better infrastructure and development can stand as a testament to a new national credit bank.

10. Free-market thinking has led successive governments to sell good infrastructure to build not-so-good infrastructure, lend money from others on interest to build infrastructure or enter into PPPs where government takes more than its share of risk and the private partner(s) take(s) more than its share of profit. Many politicians will ride this free-market titanic to the bottom.

Importantly, the proportion of people that proceed to sign the petition after becoming reasonably­ informed about it is well over fifty percent. The vast majority of the rem ainder agree with the need for Glass-Steagall and an overwhelming majority agree with the need for a national credit bank.

More exponential growth of support for Glass-Steagall has been seen in the number of people tuning in to The CEC Report on YouTube since the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018 was passed. The CEC's followers on Facebook are also experiencing increasing growth.

The Commonwealth Bank, with most confusion surrounding its name, stopped disclosing its full derivative holdings first. National Australia Bank was next. Then the Australia and New Zealand Banking Group. Speculators appear to be placing their trust in the Australian nation as a credit-worthy counterparty, why don't you see this credit-worthiness and create a national credit bank?

The Productivity Commission, in its Draft Report: Competition in the Australian Financial System, focuses on lack of competition in Australia's banking system. In one section titled "Blunt application of some prudential measures is costing the community", it focuses on APRA's role in perpetuating this oligopoly. The ACCC's submission to this commission states that 'Arguably the effect of the "four pillars" policy in addition to the implicit guarantee and prudential measures entrenches the large banks' strong position in relevant markets and reinforces their "too-big-to-fail" status'.

As mentioned above, "APRA is funded largely by the industries that it supervises" (from http://www.apra.gov.aulPages/default.aspx). Given the amount of collusion between the "four pillars", it would appear that these pillars support one house, that of APRA's patrons. POL.9100.0001.0616_0024

There is at least $1.2 quadrillion worth of derivatives in cross-owned TOO-BIG-TO-FAIL banks throughout the world. They will likely be very SYSTEMICALLY IMPORTANT FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS for the role they will play in sucking much of the commercial economies of the majority of the G20 countries into realms protected by secrecy provisions within the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018 and other similarly-enacted legislation.

A network of supranational organisations, including APRA, under the auspices of the financial oligarchy, will likely work to plunder deposits, shares and bonds of banks with minimal TOT AL LOSS-ABSORBING CAPACITY brought about by the passage of this and other similar Acts.

Transfer of private wealth to the coffers of banksters using bail-in may be followed by transfer of public purse monies (via bailout[s]) until you finally decide that no bank is TOO-BIG-TO-FAIL.

When the 'Banking System Reform (Separation of Banks) Bill 2018' (Glass-Steagall) reaches the floor of Parliament I ask that you do not look at the faces of conflicted banker-come-politicians who advise on money matters. Their plastic smiles and polished rhetoric have meant nothing to constituents who have suffered the realisation of Mont Pelerin ideology in Australia. It will mean nothing to those constituents of yours who suffer the bail-ins of southern Europe and the bailouts of America when our housing bubble deflates or the next banking crisis orchestrated by the money power occurs. Think of their faces after the money power direct APRA and the Federal Reserve of America to turn off the money tap they are accustomed to.

If Glass-Steagall is not legislated and bail-in of bonds and deposits occurs, how many of your constituents will wrongly accept frozen bank accounts/closed banks and ATMs as inevitable and uncontrollable? How many will see you as an active participant in this plunder? Or a dupe? How many will wrongly blame the East for their misery?

How many will see this as a deliberate ploy by the financial oligarchy to plunder the remaining wealth of the western free world, whilst remaining perched, insidious and impartial atop the whole world? I note that Goldman Sachs, who I previously noted as having employed Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and who have been taking bets on the next financial crisis since October last, have been expanding their offices in India, China and other BRICS countries. Is it that the biggest parasite of the West senses the death of its current hosts and is headed east for fresh hosts? Is it that it, or another lackey of the financial oligarchy already has its hooks in the BRICS? I'll leave that question for another time and instead ask myself if the Australia that abides (out of ignorance or will) Macquarie bank, which is almost as parasitical does not care. Surely not?

How can a government which has been boasting the health of the Australian economy for umpteen years suddenly award crisis measures to our criminal regulator and then talk of implementing austerity measures?

As more bail-in of deposits occur worldwide, how many will seek to take back from the money changers (the ones who are changing derivatives obligations [worth nothing but the paper they are or aren't written on] into gold using legislation like the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018 and other people's bank deposits and bonds) what is not theirs and return it to its rightful owners? How many more will reject the distinction between blue collar criminality and white collar criminality? How many more will seek to replace the government which passed the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018 which will catalyse this redistribution in Australia?

How many more will realise that our Federal Parliament is happier for its constituents to eat what falls from the bankers' plates (after they have starved our productive sector and inflated our non-productive housing bubble) rather than to provide a national credit bank to pursue endeavours with ever-increasing economic and social returns?

How many will see the hypocrisy of our media focusing on the nationality of our Federal parliamentarians rather than that of our legal, economic and social systems? I am no longer a happy little vegemite. How many more will recognise media and instruments which act to legalise theft, murder or any other thing which is cursed?

How many more will query the influences behind conflicted and interested participants actively engaged in the deception and skulduggery which occurred during the passage of the diabolical Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018? POL.9100.0001.0616_0025

How many more will recognise media lies and omissions as well as false flag attacks which nurture the myths that Wall St, and consequently the City of London square mile, are sacred?

How many aspiring Goldman Sachs employees will realise they will have to compete with Eastern wages?

And they'll tell you black is really white The moon is just the sun at night And when you walk in golden halls You get to keep the gold that falls It's heaven and hell, oh no

(from the song 'Heaven and Hell', Ronnie James Dia, 1980)

There is still time for you to stop shifting deck chairs on the free market Titanic. Increasing privatisation, deregulation, austerity and other suicidal measures to stay afloat will only hasten the race to the bottom. The good ship Glass-Steagall/national banking awaits. As mentioned in my submission to the Royal Commission, a homeowners and bank protection bill is increasingly necessary to keep Australians in their homes given the extent of 'liar loans' in our housing system which are resetting to interest plus principle.

Glass-Steagall will protect the Australian commercial economy as it protected America's and currently protects China's. The 'Homeowners and Bank Protection Bill 2008' will act to keep all Australians in a home and all productive Australian businesses in operation. National credit banking will serve to grow the Australian commercial economy as it did in our past and does in China presently. The sooner we let good public policy serve and protect us and jump ship, the easier the recovery will likely be.

Please support Glass-Steagall to protect the wealth of your constituents and that of your government. Please support homeowners and bank protection to keep your constituents in a home and able to produce goods and offer services. Please support national credit banking, taking back for Australia the power to fund your government.

Every sitting of the Royal Commission will expose the sins of the banks and show the need for bank regulation by the Australian government. The Royal omission of APRA and bail-in will prove what has been known all along-regulation of banks by bodies paid by the banks serves the interests of the owners of the banks. In Australia's case, APRA is paid using a levy on the Big Four banks and carries out objectives of the Bank for International Settlements-the clearing house for the biggest private banks of the world.

The Royal Commission will also sadly show that without the press that JFK promoted for a free society, the court of public opinion is unlikely to pass proper judgment on the architects of this scam. The influence of wars and proxy wars on bolstering trust in the western financial and parliamentary systems, thereby stabilising the financial system, is too deep a topic to cover here. Needless to say, the drive for war is yet another economic tool of the market forces.

There's so many of us There's so many [Repeat: x2]

Let's have a war So you can go and die! Let's have a war! We could all use the money! ...

. . . There's so many of us There's so many [Repeat: x2]

Let's have a war! Jack up the Dow Jones! ...

. . . There's so many of us There's so many [Repeat: x2]

Let's have a war! Sell the rights to the networks! Let's have a war! Let our wallets get fat like last time!

(from the song 'Let's have a war', J Cramer Philo I Lee Ving, 1982) POL.9100.0001.0616_0026

It is time that you decide which is the golden rule- "He who has the gold makes the rules" or "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you".

Please move/second/vote for the 'Banking System Reform (Separation of Banks) Bill 2018', the 'Homeowners and Bank Protection Bill 2008' and the 'Commonwealth National Credit Bank Bill' mentioned earlier. Remove the blinders. Wipe the scales from your eyes. Embrace these policies. Pay no mind to the labels awarded to the party that wrote them. Exit your paradigm. Tear the walls of the money powers. See policy without political distinction. These measures do not take away from any human endeavour, be it selfless or selfish. These bills merely provide much of the bedrock upon which we can build our country to obey every article of the Declaration of Human Rights, providing every Australian greater opportunity to seek any endeavour.

Australian Human Rights Commission at https://www.humanrights.gov.au/publications/what-universal­ declaration-human-rights states that "The Universal Declaration was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 10 December 1948. Motivated by the experiences of the preceding world wars, the Universal Declaration was the first time that countries agreed on a comprehensive statement of inalienable human rights. Australia played an important role in the development of the Universal Declaration".

We can learn the lessons of our past, abandon revisionism, rise against the same old order, be kings, not pawns. Believe. Article 25 ( 1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states "Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his fam il y, includ ing food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control. " You are in control of circumstances beyond the control of your constituents.

Consider us the long lonely road Defenders of the brittlest of bones The dressers of the prettiest of clothes Our time is gonna come but we'll have nowhere to go

(from the song 'Consider Us', Ron Aniello and Kevin Martin, 2008)

As for measures which fall short of protection by bank separation (e.g. ring-fencing) I ask, would you eat a meal without peanuts from a restaurant which handles peanuts if there was an equivalent restaurant down the road which had no trace of peanuts? Please don't waste your time considering inferior measures. Rats get through fences. The house needs to be quarantined. Commercial banks need to be separated away from all speculation.

For the protection of the Australian commercial economy from financial instabil ity I ask that you support bank separation. To stop Australians being left homeless and hungry I ask that you support homeowners and bank protection. To unleash your potential as a government to once again grow Australia and provide a lender of last resort during the deflation of the housing bubble I ask that you support national credit banking.

The longer these stay enacted, the more we will advance Australia fair.

Yours faithfully,

P.S. Bail-in of most of the economies of the Western world has the potential to plunge humanity into a new dark age. The architects of the economic disorder it will create have almost finished sewing the wind. Please stop them before they reap the whirlwind.

PWF.0001. 0001 .5272.pdf 84.8kB (previously submitted to this Royal Commission)

20180321 Royal Commission Flyer A4.pdf 1.1MB (available at http:l/cecaust.com.au/pubs/pdfs/flyer/20180321 Royal Commission Flyer A4%20colour.pdf ) POL.9100.0001.0616_0027

Banking System Reform (Separation of Banks) Bill 2018 - Apri l 2018.pdf 1.3MB (available at https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary Business/Bills Legislation/Bills Search Results/Result?bld=r6136 ) big4deriv.png 159.4kB (appears on p.2 of this submission to Interim Report)

Copy of Total Derivatives Australian Banks.xlsx 21 .6kB (appears on p.3 of this submission to Royal Commission)

u

Sent: Monday, 23 July 2018, 5:3809 pm AEST

Subject: Second submission from Andrew Soulos, former Mayor of Strathfield Council NSW to the Banking Royal Commission, with request for meeting, letter for forwarding and questions

Dear Senator/Member of Parliament,

Second submission from •••••••••••••••••••••to the Banking Royal Commission, with request for meeting, letter for forwarding and questions

Mammon by George Frederic Watts (1884)

Watts, in common with such social commentators as William Morris, Ruskin and Carlyle, began to question the benefits and purpose of modern industry and commerce and their dehumanising effects. In 1880 he wrote, 'Material prosperity has become our real god, but we are surprised to find that the worship of this visible deity does not make us happy.' (G.F. Watts, 'The Present Conditions of Art). Four years tater he decided to personify this so-called deity- the evil 'Mammon' - in paint.

The picture is nearly life-size and the seated figure against a curtained backdrop calls to mind the portraits of Titian. However, instead of an established figure or celebrated beauty, Watts depicts an object of revulsion, seated on a throne decorated with skulls. Just behind the curtained background we are offered a glimpse, not of a peaceful landscape, but of fire and destruction. The picture is painted in a rich, almost hellish palette of red, gold and black. Watts visualises Mammon as a brutish despot, an ugly, lumpen figure seated on his throne, nursing his moneybags on his lap. The ogre brushes aside a beautiful girl with one hand, and crushes a young man under foot. Both are symbols of youth, innocence and beauty; yet, naked and vulnerable, they are a/so lifeless and inert. Mammon sits in glory with his 'gorgeous but ill-fitting golden draperies, which fall awkwardly about his coarse limbs' (M.H. Spielmann, 'The Works of Mr George F. Watts, R.A., with a Complete Catalogue of his Pictures,' Pall Mall Gazette, 1886, p.21). In the oil study (Watts Gallery, Compton), Watts a/so gives Mammon a bandaged, gouty foot, a symptom of his indulgent and excessive lifestyle.

Mammon's crown, with its upended gold coins and ass's ears, symbolises Mammon's ignorance and stupidity, but also links him with Ovid's King Midas, whose touch turned everything to gold and to whom Apollo gave ass's ears because he did not respond to the music of the tyre. The best-known literary reference to Mammon occurs in Spencer's Faerie Queene, book II, canto 7. Spencer describes Mammon as POL.9100.0001.0616_0028

tanned by soot from the blacksmith's forge, a detail that perhaps accounts tor the smoke on the right hand side of the painting.

The subtitle of the picture - Dedicated to his Worshippers - is like an inscription on a monument. Watts apparently had plans to commission a sculpture of Mammon which would be set up in Hyde Park and 'where he hoped his worshippers would be at least honest enough to bow the knee publicly to him' (MS. Watts, George Frederic Watts: Annals of an Artist's Ute, 1912, vol. II, p.149).

Source: http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/watts-mammon-n01630 (emphases as per source)

Given you and/or several of your colleagues have already liquefied assets in preparation for the coming financial crash without notifying constituents, I ask that you please propose to Parliament a larger than life sculpture of Mammon as pictured be placed in Sydney's Hyde Park or another suitable prominent location where I hope "his worshippers would be at least honest enough to bow the knee publicly to him".

His worshippers are about to transfer the private wealth of your innocent constituents into the coffers of fellow worshippers using the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018. Italian banks asked for bailouts after bail-ins. Our banks will likely follow suit, diluting Australia's money supply and taxing your innocent constituents further. Of course, as mentioned in my last email, you will likely be unable to borrow from many of the world's central banks at this point. Nor will you likely be able to borrow from Too-Big-To-Fail banks outside Australia which are too busy redistributing the wealth of other economies to stay afloat. You will likely be left to let APRA close any failing Australian banks, writing off one and "any other instrument'', primarily shares which have been converted from deposits, bonds and shares of your constituents under authority of the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018. Your government will also likely need to begin selling more public assets to pay back its share of debt to central banks if you continue running Australia into the ground.

Do you see his worshippers looking to make have-mores out of certain haves and have-nots out of certain other haves?

Do you see those who go to sleep as credit-stretched " investors" and who wake up as debt-slaves as seeking to take back their freedom, accepting their slavery or despairing (as many did in the 'Great Depression')?

Did you fool "asset rich, cash poor" " investors" into trading their home (a bird in the hand) for a home and an investment property (two in the bush) leaving them to see both fly away (transferred to the lending bank)?

The weak in courage is strong in cunning.

(from The Marriage of Heaven and Hell, William Blake, circa 1790)

If our banking regulation does not change and an economic crisis hits, rats from the attic will stream into the kitchen of the home we call Australia and lick the cupboards so clean that the roaches won't find food . Charity may soon fade as it often does. Some rats likely intend to remain in the attic, allowing other "lower order" rats to do their bidding, watching the culling of these "lower order" rats like their forebears watched the culling of loyal subjects by the angry masses from ivory towers in the past. Do you think the corporations will protect you from the masses your legislation will see reduced from optimistic investors to hungry and homeless debt-slaves? After all, the charity of corporations is usually an oxymoron. Is there honour among white collar thieves that does not exist among blue collar thieves?

What crimes await the cellar rats which will emerge? Which attic rats do the oligarchy intend to throw to the masses? Which rats do they wish to promote to the Australian Parliament? How blind can these "lower order" rats be to more adequately do the bidding of the oligarchy and continue to do so? Yes, Henry Kissinger is not the only baron who can prove "the evil that men do lives on" and on . Which of you will kill the rat within, bite the hand that starves and provide for your fellow man (and woman) according to the wishes of most of your constituents?

Do you see those who seek to take back their freedom as doing this via a peaceful renaissance or a violent revolution?

They say that life's a carousel Spinning fast, you've got to ride it well POL.9100.0001.0616_0029

The world is full of kings and queens Who blind your eyes and steal your dreams It's heaven and hell, oh well

(from the song 'Heaven and Hell', Ronnie James Dia, 1980)

Did you see the sleight of hand by which you/your colleagues have contributed to the potential death toll of the coming depression or do you have a blood lust you feel you need to satiate, like many of the oligarchy served by this Act of public starvation?

YOUR GOVERNMENT HAS LEGALISED THEFT (BAIL-IN, a form of WHITE COLLAR THEFT by standards of a reasonable person). Legalisation of MURDER (ABORTION AND EUTHANASIA, forms of murder by standards of a reasonable person) has taken place in various states over the years. ATTACKS ON THE FAMILY UNIT AND MORAL ORDER EMBEDDED IN AUSTRALIA'S IDENTITY abound in Canberra. Yes, Dick Smith is not the only Australian "philanthropist" actively investing in perverting public opinion. Wake up and smell the rot in your government.

The fallout from application of the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018 may see crimes against peace and crimes against humanity on a scale surpassing that of World War 11. Genocide can be sponsored as it has been in the past, this time by the proceeds of bail-in fueling chaos and death. Who will be lord of the flies?

"In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, to contribute something to solving overpopulation"

Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, 1988

If the thought of the fate of adored leaders of the past who had popular economic policy scares you then you are weak. But courage can be found. Where do you see yourself standing? Our current economic order has 19 of 20 G20 countries lined up like ducks to suffer bailout after bail-in until their money has run dry. Economic austerity is likely to follow. Do you see our current economic order as being popular with the people of Australia? I use the word 'popular' according to its' dictionary definition today - not according to what spin doctors try to dictate. There is no "appeal to people's baser instincts" here. Appeal for Glass­ Steagall is born of charity, desire to do good, motivation to protect the innocent and many other higher instincts.

In my lifetime politicians that have leaned too far to the people have found themselves removed from government (directly and indirectly) by other governments and their intelligence agencies with their reputations tarnished by the GOVERNMENTS AND INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES WHO ACTIVELY PARTICIPATED IN THEIR REMOVAL. Things get fuzzy with the introduction of terms like "intelligence agencies" and "other governments". All apologies for this. Please read on for an explanation. The point is that Rupert Murdoch is not the only person who murders with lies, half-truths, misinformation, omissions and more lies. Before I was born, politicians who emulated the oligarchy committed suicide, were violently removed from office and murdered, and had other unwholesome endings. How much emulation needs to be done before we see "a little bit of history repeating"? Or a lot?

Are you able to access all information held by "intelligence agencies" of "other governments" of the five eyes?

Do you think information is power? Who has this "power"? Do they sit at the same table as the Money Power? Belief among inner circles of the oligarchy is that assassinations and other traumatic world events have conditioned humanity to accept that "all good things must come to an end". This saying is a nonsense. I do not know how much I have lost believing it. Human beings all have choice - conditioning is for dogs and other pets. Your life is your own. Power is given and withheld. It cannot be taken. You are in government, you have the power, you direct or don't direct it where you wish. I ask that you assist the Citizens Electoral Council to change this world for the better.

Or join George Soros in serving the oligarchy's death agenda.

Notions which include "the world owes me", "survival is key", "God doesn't exist" and" I can dominate, insult and injure my own kind because he/she is less than me" are convenient lies allowing each one of us to "get by". These convenient lies are not to be confused with inconvenient truths about a vital part of air. We expire carbon dioxide as a byproduct of using oxygen. If we don't excrete enough carbon dioxide we suffer morbidity. We may expire (i.e. die). Plants use carbon dioxide to grow, and produce oxygen as a byproduct. POL.9100.0001.0616_0030

Plants thrive in well lit environments enriched with carbon dioxide. Inspiration (of all good things visible and invisible) is needed for human development. Do you believe we should live in a world where inspiration is stifled because we are afraid of byproduct(s) of it? Do you see the egotism in the notion that the human race can dangerously change the balance between oxygen and carbon dioxide in our atmosphere? This balance has existed since before the dawn of homo sapiens. Do you not see the shackles of having a tax on the air we breathe?

"Article 12.2 of the Kyoto Protocol to the UNFCCC states that the aim of COM (Clean Development Mechanism] is to assist non-Annex I countries (developing countries) to attain sustainable development through low-carbon technology transfer, while assisting Annex I countries (developed countries) in achieving their reduction commitments" ... "To date, more than 252 million CER (Certified Emission Reduction] units have been issued globally, and to the end of 2012, a further 1.5 billion credits are expected to be issued from registered COM projects. These figures are continually increasing as additional COM projects are registered and commence operation". (https//www.aph.gov.au/About ParliamenUParliamentary Departments/Parliamentary Li brary/Br owse by Topic/ClimateChangeold/governance/international/cdm )".

The excerpts in the last paragraph were "Last reviewed 15 July, 2010 by the Parliamentary Library Web Manager". Do you think it acceptable that in 2018 I can search for "clean development mechanism" on your government's website and be taken to a webpage with what from the second quote appears to be information which is over eight years old? How many certified emission reductions has the Australia Government purchased since 2008 and what is their value in Australian dollars?

Do you believe that the human race can cause "climate change" more than the sun (which has been worshipped by humans in the past, largely because of its part in changing the seasons)? Do you believe that the earths' ability to buffer "climate change" can't protect the human race from temperature extremes? Monocultures planted in order to create CERs have "many negative social, cultural, economic and environmental impacts" ( http//www.unrisd.org/80256B3C005BE6B5/(httpNews)/531DAFFB8B319F69C125792E00499ED1 ). Do you think they are less damaging to earth, and for that matter human beings, than carbon dioxide? Do you think it reasonable that several of the world's Too-Big -To-Fail banks have taken 15 % commissions to trade the commodities that are certified emission reductions? Do you not believe that the three bank reforms I urged you to support in my last email will better allow exploration of inner and outer space, giving more of your constituents what they want and need including protection from solar flares and any other ravages of the elements? Do you not think that national credit, and the progress it will bring, will better allow natural popu lation trends while limiting social, cultural and environmental impacts?

Is the 'Financial Services Industry' supposed to serve your constituents or be served by them? The Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry has revealed what this 'industry' did while at a certain arm's length from your control, under the "prudential regulation" of APRA.

Amendments to various Acts resulting from enactment of the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018 have put this 'industry' at greater arm's length from your control, under greater "prudential regulation" of APRA.

In case the sarcasm is not apparent, I will be clear. APRA is not Australian - it is paid for by supranational interests bent on profit, making it supranational. APRA does not provide 'prudential regulation' - it is likely that the ADls it regulates do not at present carry sufficient capital of their own to handle the realisation of their share of up to $40trillion in derivative obligations and are collectively at risk of paying out equity converted from all assets and deposits in their possession (every bit of the commercial economy that is not tied down).

Again, APRA is not Australian. APRA follows directions of supranational powers. The "banking industry" it regulates creates wealth for these supranational powers like the car manufacturing industry Australia no longer has used to create wealth for Australia. APRA's authority and its very existence is determined by your Parliament. APRA's ability to facilitate a wholesale acquisition of Australia's wealth by these powers will be taken away with the passage of the 'Banking System Reform (Separation of Banks) Bill 2018'. Bankers who hold derivatives (who don't appreciate either of the golden rules I questioned you about in my previous email [the oligarchy will continue to produce more and more exotic financial instruments and change how they behave using APRA and sim ilarly-controlled organisations to their own ends] ... ) wil l lose their chance of cashing in their chips (realised derivative obligations paid out with the money of your constituents). Why do POL.9100.0001.0616_0031

you think bankers who represent banks which have been running amok since the inception of APRA are lobbying you to reject this bill?

Will you separate the banks now, before bail-in of deposits, bonds and shares occurs or let the bankers legally take all you can stomach them taking from your constituency? Perhaps you will witness the plight you inflict; perhaps the mob will see that you don't. I hope compassion drives you to do the right thing, not fear.

Do you think policy on the run will keep up with the shutting down of money supply to a country addicted to credit? Even if it did, it may be too late for some of your constituents. The media is mostly corporate and mostly corrupt. The agenda of devaluing life and the family unit is well-progressed. The post­ war dream is likely dead enough to have trigger happy politicians invite another generation of youth to participate in theaters of another world war. Many other elements are in place to ensure maximal morbidity and mortality, leaving a world more brutal and barbaric than the present.

Will you take your ever-diminishing cut? If you stay one step ahead of the next sucker in line you will eventually get suckered.

Will you risk making your fortune off your broken brothers and sisters? Fortune favours the brave, but so does destitution - you risk more than your life.

Austerity of Southern Europe and poverty of America await Australia. Aussie battlers stand to lose what they have earned. Gold diggers stand to share the gold of the Aussie battlers with no work and no money down. Beggars stand to fall further through the cracks. Borrowers stand to be made into debt-slaves. Thieves have already been given the green light to transfer the property of your constituents to other thieves using conversion provisions born of the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018.

Is APRA to be differentiated from "Neddy" Smith, who claimed Roger Rogerson gave him the "green light" to commit crimes in NSW? Are you different to the gentleman who technically should no longer have the nickname "the Dodger" after he was caught on CCTV and sentenced to life in prison in 2016?

APRA acts on behalf of "Caesar". It will be its "tax collector" when it uses its new powers. You are the authority over what taxes are rendered unto Caesar through your authority over APRA. I think it best you do not try to deny this. I think it best you do not try to shirk your responsibility to stay abreast of the Acts of Parliament endorsed by Her Majesty's representative under your watch. I think it best you do not let the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018 be the final straw for your constituent's tolerance of your government, the straw that broke the camel's back.

I am tempted to cease emailing you and to begin wearing a sandwich board wherever I please that on one side reads "If and when that which is Caesars is rendered unto Caesar, do not blame Caesar" in large on the front with "For Caesars know not what Caesars do" in small underneath. I can stop wearing this side when all kings, queens, heirs and usurpers disappear. On the back I am tempted to wear "Do not blame our Federal Parliament for any economic downturn" in large with "For many in Parliament know not what they do" in small underneath. I can stop wearing this side when your government wakes up and stops sleeping with the banks (the ambiguity of this sentence, and only this sentence, is intended - please interpret it as you wish).

Throughout most of the G20 nations bankers and/or their regulators, under instruction, will likely" haircut" all they can to pay the winnings of other bankers. I respect gamblers. They place their own money on the table to bet. Win or lose, gamblers do not expect others to cover their bets. Bankers bet money they do not have and will walk away with no debt when they lose and the money of your constituents when they win. Banks make gambling dens look like nurseries. If bankers can transfer the wealth of your constituents to other bankers in this way, why can't a common thief likewise give your constituents' wealth to another thief? And some of you talk of equality. Are you happy for this double standard to exist? Maybe you can act as quickly to see this rectified as you acted on the last "equality issue".

In my email of 10 May 2018 I wrote "For the protection of the Australian commercial economy from financial instability I ask that you support bank separation. To stop Australians being left homeless and hungry I ask that you support homeowners and bank protection. To unleash your potential as a government to once again grow Australia and provide a lender of last resort during the deflation of the housing bubble I ask that you support national credit banking". POL.9100.0001.0616_0032

The first of these requests concerns the 'Banking System Reform (Separation of Banks) Bill 2018'. It is the first, and most critical step in preserving private and public wealth in Australia throughout any bank instability or economic crisis. The only thing to be gained from bailing in and bailing out real wealth of your constituents to pay for speculative losses of others seems to be the realisation of how much is lost. I am not just referring to physical loss. I ask you, what else is to be gained from bail-ins and bailouts?

Do you have a vested interest in authorising the rip-off of your constituents? Will your life be for less than naught like Judas?

Isn't the potential gain from enacting these three bills which will serve and protect Australia limited to human understanding at present and not much else? Do you want Australia to keep regressing?

Enactment of the first of these three bills will see $4otrillion of derivative obligations owned by Australia's banks banished from our commercial economy. The cancer that is derivatives will be prevented because it is excised while it isn't invasive (stage 0, in situ). Ask any oncologist or haematologist when is the best stage to treat cancer.

Why are there so many among you who are content with the enactment of the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018 and not keen to see the 'Banking System Reform (Separation of Banks) Bill 2018' enacted?

Separating the banks will ensure that speculators who have bet with nothing down do not collect the equity of Aussie battlers realised from the conversion of their wealth using the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018. It will avoid bailout monies being given to speculators which will likely further tax the collective Australian public and grow the real money of the Money Power. What is to stop the Money Power attempting to bankrupt the western world using the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018 (and similar Acts [and their like] throughout the G20) while giving directions to all subservient Too-Big-To-Fail banks to call in all loans (directly or indirectly [e.g. via APRA])?

Given that worldwide derivative obligations dwarf worldwide GDP at least fifteen times, what do you see happening to G20 countries which are subservient to the Bank for International Settlements if their economies are sucked into the coffers of the oligarchy and their minions using the vacuum of APRA and other similarly-empowered institutions? The sand that most of you are burying your heads in will likely be swept away by the vacuum caused by the swift conversion of full wallets to empty wallets in your constituency. If you haven't yet done so, at what point will you realise you can't hide from public scrutiny on bail-in? If you haven't yet done so, at what point will you realise you can't maintain your position on economic reform?

What is to stop the Money Power from tightening the purse strings of governments? What is to stop the Money Power using provisions in the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018 and similar Acts (and their like) throughout the G20, from hiding the money that is vacuumed from these economies with their existing money until such time when they buy much of the G20 countries for pennies on the pound, surpassing all the financial harvests of their forebears over the centuries put together? What is to stop the Money Power and company continuing the world order of death with greater hold on a larger empire?

No mercy for what we are doing No thought to even what we have done We don't need to feel the sorrow No remorse for the helpless one

War without end No remorse, no repent We don't care what it meant Another day, another death Another sorrow, another breath No remorse, no repent We don't care what it meant Another day, another death Another sorrow, another breath

(from the song 'No Remorse', James Hetfield!Lars Ulrich, 1983) POL.9100.0001.0616_0033

Banker-orchestrated economic downturns have perhaps been the most effective way for the Money Power to obtain greater wealth and carry out their death agenda (based on the false belief that in order for one to survive another must perish as well as all extrapolations of this stupidity). Money is the main tool by which the oligarchy and their minions exert control over each other and us. Influence over our world by the oligarchy throughout the ages in various domains of life has mainly been fueled by this instrument.

Just like the Pied Piper Led rats through the streets We dance like marionettes Swaying to the symphony Swaying to the symphony Of destruction

(from the song 'Symphony of destruction', Mustaine, 1992)

Money is not a commodity like the map is not the road. Money is merely an instrument in the hands of its holder.

I play the game of a rich boy, I buy everything I can. My bankroll is a foot thick, I'm a wealthy man. A million dollar reserve note is right there in my hand And I can't stand to think it's all that I've got. Take away all my silver Take away all my gold And hand me a stack of paper Paper money don't hold. Paper money don't hold. Well, you act as though you don't remember The way it all used to be. Now one man, he locks up the money Another man holds the key.

(from the song 'Paper Money', Ronnie Montrose/Sammy Hagar, 1974)

Do you think it is fair that a diner in a casino should foot the bill for a gambler on the pokies? Do you think that the money poured into a casino poker machine drives our economy more than that which buys meals and drinks? Does big business pay more tax per dollar earned than small business? Does big business provide more job hours than small business fo r every dollar of tax exempted? McDonalds or Hungry Jacks or Burger King may be choice for you but it isn't for me. Family-friendly pubs are better for birthdays. Burgers are better and bigger at most local pubs. There is real choice. A dollar spent on a poker machine at a pub is likely to subsidise a better value burger than a dollar spent on a poker machine at a casino. Food and drink from the local pub is likely to have less impact on society in general (rubbish, heart disease ... e.t.c.) than the franchises ...

The economist at https://www.economist.comlcontent/big-mac-index describes three countries with "overvalued" big mac prices and thirty eight countries with "undervalued" pri ces. Does this index predict market corrections that your government denies?

Fat cat puts a lot of meat in the soup. Working man trying hard, jumping through the hoop. Senators, Legislators living on the hog, Man on the street living like a dog.

(from the song 'Oh No You Don't ', Ronnie Montrose, 2000)

I understand you are not able to improve businesses which sell burgers like you are able to improve the Big Four bank businesses (that all commercial businesses rely on) so I will cease my questions regarding this industry but ask another non-banking question: Do you need to be an engineer to understand that many pillars made from a certain amount of bricks and mortar will support a temple roof better than 4 pillars made from the same amount of bricks and mortar? The Banking Industry has recently been enlarged by up to POL.9100.0001.0616_0034

$4otrillion of potential debt. The roof will eventually fall, given the sparsity of pillars. More pillars will serve to limit vertical integration which threatens to bring down the temple. Glass-Steagall will provide the pillars which support the backbone of the roof, commercial banking, which serves everybody in Australia. Any economic instability will see the pillars which support this backbone stand, along with the temple. The worthless (weightless) derivatives (dust) will be written off (blown away) with any financial crises (storms). The husks that are the pillars that support them will eventually be gone. The beauty of the temple will eventually be restored.

N.B. "The temple" is merely symbolic. I in no way advocate the worship of money. Please accept the question about the statue of Mammon (and only this question) earlier as rhetorical. I do not encourage the worship of idols. 1°For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.

Timothy 6: 10 King James Version

The passage of the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018 put private interests before public interests, followed recommendations of an inquiry conducted by someone with a clear and apparent interest in its outcome, ignored much good advice, silenced much opposition, had erroneous supporting documentation, squashed much debate, held up much secrecy, involved deception and skulduggery and the list goes on. It has too many hallmarks of bad legislation. Do you not agree?

Glass-Steagall is promoted by current and former regulators, professors, former political party financial advisers, current and former bankers as well as economists. Some high-profile supporters have changed their mind after having previously opposed it. The 'Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry' has already disproven claims that "the Australian financial system already exhibits a high degree of structural separation". Will you now pledge support for Glass­ Steagall? It has plenty of hallmarks of good legislation. Please give me a single reason to not support Glass-Steagall that can be seen as ethical by a reasonable person?

To reassure the Australian public that the free-market titanic our commercial economy rides upon is stable the corporate media accuse those who point to the iceberg ahead of destabilising the economy. Without our commercial economy jumping ship to the strength of Glass-Steagall, engine of national credit banking and rudder of homeowners and bank protection there is no avoiding the $4otrillion mass of derivatives that lie beneath the surface, at the base of this iceberg.

To sure up support for 'the system', the oligarchy fuel the fires for war which hot-headed politicians and the corporate media fan with promises of "democracy" (not anarchy which usually ensues), "regime change" (not invasion [by any name] which usually ensues), and any myriad of other things which test the validity meter. Adequate logic volume reveals American democracy to be a world more cruel than that described in Charles Dickens's England of the 1800's.

Do you remember Tiny Tim, the child with a sickness his father did not have the means to pay treatment for?

Do you remember Oliver Twist, the child born in a workhouse and sold into apprenticeship with an undertaker?

Do you remember Little (Amy) Dorrit, born and raised in the Marshalsea prison for debtors in London?

It was tempting to cut and paste Pablo Picasso's Guernica here but having witnessed the original in its grandeur, like the painting at the start of this correspondence, justice would not be served. In short, war brings tragedy and suffering, particularly for innocent civilians. Despite this, some of you may follow the narrative now being played out between "East and West" without a care for the morbidity and mortality that lies in store for humanity. Nobody knows where this narrative will end.

The "East vs West" narrative is exemplified in James Bond (Ml6 agent), who continues to battle for Ml6 to this day. James Bond can be seen to be countered by the alternative narrative in The Prisoner, "a controversial 1967 UK television series about a man who, after resigning from a government agency, is kidnapped from his London home and awakes in a strange village, where he is known only by the name POL.9100.0001.0616_0035

Number Six" ( https//en.wikiquote.org/wiki/The Prisoner ). Number Six was played by Patrick McGoohan, who turned down the role of James Bond before it was offered to Sean Connery.

The Prisoner can be seen as a continuation of Danger Man (also played by McGoohan). an earlier series about a "globetrotting British (NATO) spy, who cleverly extricates himself from li fe -threatening situations, and introduces himself as 'Drake ... John Drake" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danger Man ) (development assisted by Ian Fleming of James Bond fame).

Number Two runs 'The Village' on behalf of that which is referred to as Number One throughout the series. He is replaced in each episode. Number Six pursues Number One doggedly and rejects any attempts by Number Two to thwart his efforts. e.g.

Number Six: Has it ever occurred to you that you are just as much a prisoner as I am?

Number Two Oh my dear chap, of course--1know too much. We're both lifers ... I am definitely an optimist. That's why it doesn't matter "who" Number One is. It doesn't matter which "side" runs the Village.

Number Six: It's run by one side or the other.

Number Two Oh certainly, but both sides are becoming identical. What in fact has been created is an international community--perfect blueprint for world order. When the sides facing each other suddenly realize that they're looking into a mirror, they will see that "this" is the pattern for the future.

Number Six: The whole Earth as the Village?

Number Two That is my hope. What's yours?

Number Six: I'd like to be the first man on the moon.

(from The Prisoner (Patrick McGoohan],The Chimes of Big Ben, episode 2 of 17, 1967) ( https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/The Prisoner )

In the final episode of The Prisoner Number Six meets Number One.

Number One was depicted as an evil, governing force in this Village. So, who is this Number One? We just see the Number Two's, the sidekicks. Now this overriding, evil force is at its most powerful within ourselves and we have constantly to fight it, I think, and that is why I made Number One an image of Number Six. His other half, his alter ego.

(Patrick McGoohan in 1977)

Who is more free? 007 or Number Six? Which would you choose to be? Do you know who gives orders to Ml6 and the Bank for International Settlements? One that relishes the fact that many more people have seen a James Bond film than an episode of The Prisoner?

The cold war has reappeared like a three-hour movie you've already seen - have you grown tired of the narrative? Will you question the narrator of the next fiction to reach your ears? If you don't, cool heads don't prevail, the first megadeath occurs and you and I are still alive I may ask you what you have learned. An opportunity exists to extricate the parasite on our banking system. direct national credit into economic development and growth, not pay for the next genocide. Take it. The darkest hour is just before the dawn for the enemy. This is the greatest chance in history to make your mark. Unleash humanity's power. Do it now.

14 Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

Matthew 15:14 King James Version

Please reform Australia's banking system with the three bills I mentioned earlier and keep a cool head as the oligarchy and their minions in the corporate media and elsewhere up the ante in the high stakes play of peace and prosperity through bank reform versus war and poverty through economic austerity.

Could be your father And it could be your mother Could be your sister Could be your brother POL.9100.0001.0616_0036

Could be a foreigner Could be a Turk Could be someone out looking for work

Could be a king Could be the Aga khan Could be a Vietnam vet with no arms and no legs Could be a saint Could be a sinner Could be a loser Or it could be a winner

Could be a banker Could be a baker Could be a Laker Could be Kareem Abdul Jabar

Could be a male voice choir Could be a lover Could be a fighter

Could be a super heavyweight (ooh) Or it could be something lighter Could be a cripple Could be a freak Could be a wop, gook, geek Could be a cop Could be a thief

Could be a family of ten living in one room on relief Could be our leaders in their concrete tombs With their tinned food and their silver spoons Could be the pilot with God on his side

Could be the kid in the middle of the bomb sight Could be a fanatic Could be a terrorist Could be a dentist Could be a psychiatrist

Could be humble Could be proud Could be a face in the crowd

Could be the soldier in the white cravat Who turns the key in spite of the fact That this is the end of the cat and mouse Who dwelt in the house Where the laughter rang and the tears were spilt The house that Jack built Where the laughter rang and the tears were spilt The house that Jack built

Bang, bang, shoot, shoot White gloved thumb Lord thy will be done He was always a good boy, his mother said He'll do his duty when he's grown Yeah, everybody's got someone they call home

(from the song 'Home', Roger Waters, 1987) POL.9100.0001.0616_0037

The three pieces of legislation I mentioned on 10/5/18 can be implemented when derivative bets are realised, the Royal Commission concludes or sooner if adequate hindsight, sight or foresight is used. Do you acknowledge that more social order will be better maintained the sooner they are implemented? Do you see that the only losers from implementing Glass-Steagall, national credit banking and homeowners and bank protection are, by any reasonable description, criminals who will only be prevented from receiving ill-gotten equity?

If you don't appreciate that there is an impending payout of speculative losses of Australia's Big Four banks then please read my previous email. If you don't believe a parasite is dependent on its' host for survival then please call a doctor. If you don't believe the enemy is dependent on humanity to destroy creation then please call a priest. If you don't know what to do please call the Citizens Electoral Council on 1800 636 432. If you don't act then much will be lost.

Although I find it strange to ask: May I (or any person who is enrolled to vote in Australia for that matter) be afforded equal opportunity as various bankers (representing persons who are not enrolled to vote in Australia) and make an appointment to see you in Canberra at your earliest convenience to discuss (at any level) your role in allowing APRA to confiscate the wealth of your constituents (your authorising the robbing of Peter to pay Paul)?

I await answers to the questions in bold above within 28 days. Kindly advise if an extension is required. Alternatively, please forward the letter below to anyone (else) you know who has obtained either Total return swaps, Collateralised loan obligations or has otherwise bet on the next economic crisis.

I will likely ring your office to check availability for an appointment and if you are able to comply with either answering the questions above or forwarding the letter below.

Yours sincerely,

P.S. Many people, including myself, have attempted to demystify derivatives. The best definition of these instruments I can offer you is 'wishes'. Wishes are of no substance, like derivatives. Both wishes and derivatives are derived from human beings. Wishes are able to not come true, like derivatives can remain unrealised. Wishes can also come true, like derivatives can be realised. Holders of derivatives should be careful what they wish for.

Dear Sir/Madam,

Re: Will you follow the blind leaders? Or will you follow the Messiah, Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, Son of God?

Whether you are a member of an international body (e.g. Financial Stability Board), bank regulator (e.g. APRA), bank employee, a punter or another, none of you is conflicted or legally restrained from betting in any segment of the banking system. This letter is for everybody who stands ready to reap the whirlwind. If you do not understand it, I believe it better for you.

The credit-fattened lamb that is Australia is ready for you to slaughter. It has been dutifully fed by Australia's banks and carefully laid out before you by the Australian Federal Parliament, your loyal servants. The walls you have built between conscience and action in your fellow man and your own are mighty indeed. However, none are mightier than the wall between life and death - and this wall has been destroyed. Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ died and then rose from the dead on the third day, fulfilling Old Testament prophecy. POL.9100.0001.0616_0038

The suffering you will unleash on humanity if you cash in Total return swaps, Collateralised loan obligations or like instruments bet on a financial crisis affecting any and/or every G20 country which has adopted the Financial Stability Board's 'Key Attributes of Effective Resolution Regimes for Financial Institutions' is unfathomable to most people.

This suffering will be made worse if some of you call in the debts the world owes your central banks, compounded with interest for generations. Life experience of those close to you may not prepare them to your satisfaction for facing the extent of the morbidity and mortality you will make them party to. They are not immune from feeling the pain of your/their debtors. However, my object here is not to persuade anyone by fear.

Humanity risks descension to a new Dark Age or nuclear holocaust. That which is driving you to cash in on economic demise, call in this debt, and reap the costs and spoils of war was not born of you. Perhaps the devil does not want the secret of his existence to be known to you. Perhaps he doesn't want you to know the world he promises you and your progeny will come to an end one day. Perhaps another deception.

The new yoke you wish to apply to humanity may prove to be your undoing. You imitate a dog returning to its vomit with every action you do to bring your fellow man to heel.

You and I are more than dogs. We are humans being, made in God's image to imitate and worship Him and surrounded by the rest of His creation. There is as much limit to human goodwill and human endeavour as there is to God's omnipotence. There is as much limit to human wisdom and understanding as there are limits to God's omniscience.

As one not-so-famous (yet highly influential) band once sang before being promptly dropped by one of their record labels (as best as I could interpret from youtube audio mp3 with 634 hits [I was unable to find written lyrics]):

"Today, there'll be wonder

Today, there'll be laughs

Today, today, today

From Calvary to Victory

Isaiah to Kennedy

The all-pervading mystery

Today, today, today"

Five years earlier, before evolving to this point, this band produced a song which according to Metallica has been played 7 46 times by them and has appeared on 16 of their releases. Its chorus is merely:

Am I evil? Yes I am

Am I evil? I am man, yes I am

I find this transition marvellous, as I find many transitions. I find the obscurity of this transition fascinating as I find all such transitions which are obscure.

Every person recognises walls or any other things which drive poles apart, or appear to. Some can discern the difference between walls which are man-made and those which are natural. If you create walls in others and blind their eyes to the manifestations of God then you are blind leaders. The finite world you exert control over belongs to you as much as it belongs to the liar(s) who promised it to you, be he/they the father of lies or any of his servants. However, despite your blindness you are never lost.

All will be revealed my friend. What goes around comes around. Every effort made by you to return mankind to chaos will be repaid. Every effort made by you to preserve mankind likewise will be rewarded. Perfect judgment awaits us in the next life.

16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? POL.9100.0001.0616_0039

17 And he said unto him, Why cal/est thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,

19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

20 The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet?

21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.

22 But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.

23 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.

24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

Matthew 1916-24 King James Version

Look upon your brothers (or sisters) as you would yourself. I believe that they, you and I are made in the image of God. I believe that insult given to another human being is insult given to God and ultimately to oneself. I believe that help given to another human being is pleasing to God and that God rewards those who please Him. Lift another out of poverty. Lower yourself. Follow our Lord, the Word and Son of God. All are invited to the Kingdom of God.

6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

John 14 6 King James Version

Jesus show me the way.

Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.

Matthew 7 7 King James Version

Seeing is believing. The New Testament are the accounts of people who bore witness to God incarnate - his way, his truth and his life. I pray you forgive others their debts as they forgive you yours. I pray God forgives me my many debts as I forgive my debtors.

Yours faithfully,

P.S. St Matthew was a tax collector. His Gospel (good news of the Kingdom of God) sits among many books and letters testifying the incarnation of the Word of God, Jesus Christ. I find it marvellous that his is the only Gospel to account the bribe given by the chief priests to spread the lie that Jesus's disciples came by night and stole him away after his death. Although focus between Gospels varies, I used to wonder if it was the exchange of money involved in this instance that drew the writers' attention or the ghost of a flea. I now know it doesn't matter, the good news of the resurrection of Jesus Christ is what matters. I take comfort in knowing that the Lord who loves us all will ultimately square all ledgers.

reviousl submitted to this Ro al Commission

Appendix 5

From: POL.9100.0001.0616_0040

To:

Sent: Tuesday, 18 September 2018, 8:34:42 pm AEST

Subject: Fifth email to Australian Federal

Dear Hon Josh Frydenberg MP

I note your lack of response to questions in my email of 23/7/18 and write to you individually in the hope that I be afforded a considered reply. I also note certain happenings like the appointment of another Prime Minister to continue hiding the rot in your government executive (and its guiding forces) as well as responsible media allowing Kevin Rudd to wipe the scales from the eyes of many by unveiling more of Rupert Murdoch's and the oligarchy's doings. Do you also notice the tipping of the scales of justice regarding matters of banking in general? Before I continue, the picture of Mammon left off my last email is below. The blood-red, death-black and money-gold were even more brilliant when I viewed the original in the Tate gallery. POL.9100.0001.0616_0041

The owners of the world's central banks established many of those banks by covet [sic] means, and continue to do so (e.g. in Syria). They subvert the power of credit banking, power now being shown in the Belt and Road Initiative by many eastern nations. This method of human progress and development is only to be surpassed in power by the physical output of true life in Christ, where no medium of exchange is necessary.

The physical and non-physical pursuits of a life in Christ can involve study of the literal (while accounting for historical and other contexts), metaphorical and theological answers contained in the New and Old Testaments. Studying beyond the literal will help discern questions of metaphorical meaning within the world e.g. Did the bringing down of the twin towers of Wall Street bring about sympathy for "the love of money" because of metaphorical association with twin pillars of a temple (e.g. pillars that Samson, the last of the Judges, pushed apart to bring down the temple) and did the construction of" Freedom Tower" give license for Wall St to run amok with US$20 trillion of public money because of it's metaphorical association with a sentinel of old? Are you both respectful to and fearful of Wall St and City of London because of these happenings? Answers to these questions can be got with ease once humans embark on a life in POL.9100.0001.0616_0042

Christ. Along the journey, the need for such answers eventually falls away and higher theological answers come.

In my emails of 10 May 2018 and 23 July 2018 I wrote "For the protection of the Australian commercial economy from financial instability I ask that you support bank separation. To stop Australians being left homeless and hungry I ask that you support homeowners and bank protection. To unleash your potential as a government to once again grow Australia and provide a lender of last resort during the deflation of the housing bubble I ask that you support national credit banking". I again repeat my requests. My reasons for requesting these reforms are in my previous emails which are attached.

Central banks have sown easy credit in the G20 and beyond, tempting a whole generation of westerners to leverage dangerously. Unwinding or tightening quantitative easing on citizens of G20 countries will allow wholesale wealth accumulation by the owners of the world's central banks on a scale unseen in human history, as loans to banks are called in and the banks in turn call in debts of citizens, seizing assets according to terms of agreement. It has already begun with Westpac passing on an interest rate increase from central banks e.g. http://www. abc.net. au/nevvs/2018-06-27/b ig-four-banks-mounting-pressure-out-of­ cycle-mortgage-rate-hike/9914990 . Are you going to sit back and watch what your government has left of the Australian dream go down the toilet?

Bail-in will add to the woes of citizens, as ATMs and banks close until such time as debts born of derivative obligations are settled by APRA APRA stands ready to exact every dollar possessed by Australia's banks on behalf of speculators, all $40 trillion of this part of the economy that exists. 'But deposits, bonds and shares make up only a fraction of $40 trillion?' do I hear you ask? Yes, the banks may remain closed, the economy may stop (along with the physical lifeblood it provides to the masses), and your police may act as bailiffs for banksters cashing in on predatory lending. Australians may wake up homeless and hungry in the country their forebears fought for, like many citizens of countries which have suffered at the hands of oligarchs of old and new.

Owners of the world's central banks can wash their hands of the repercussions of quantitative tightening coupled with bail-in in all the antiquated doctrine they wish. This will not clean them. They can be saved by following Jesus Christ.

Who gives you the right to authorise APRA to take from them and give to speculators who have bet with nothing down? Which constituents? Who? I await response to these questions and a reply to my letter of 23 July 2018 within four weeks. Alternatively, please forward the letter below to anyone (else) you know who has obtained either Total return swaps, Collateralised loan obligations or has otherwise bet on the next economic crisis. Please also confirm if you have forwarded any or both of the chain letters in this email and my email of 23 July 2018.

I will ring your office after four weeks if I do not receive a reply. Kindly advise via email of your actions regarding the vital matter of economic reform.

Yours faithfully

Dear Sir/ Madam

In case there was anything missing from my last correspondence I will attempt to fi ll in the gaps. POL.9100.0001.0616_0043

1. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 The same was in the beginning with God.

3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

John 1:1-5 King James Version

The Second Temple (Hebrew: l!i1i?1ili'.l - n'~ ')l!/i'.l , Seit HaMikdash HaSheni) was the Jewish holy temple Which stood on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem during the Second Temple period, between 516 BCE and 70 CE. Jerusalem was the centre of the Jewish religious life and the site of the Three Pilgrimage Festivals of Passover, Shavuot and Sukkot, and all adult men who were able were required to visit and offer sacrifices (korbanot) at the Temple. https://en.w ikipedia. orglwikilPilgrimage#Judaism and Second Tern pie

14And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

John 1: 14 King James Version

15 And they come to Jerusalem: and Jesus went into the temple, and began to cast out them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves;

16 And would not suffer that any man should carry any vessel through the temple.

17 And he taught, saying unto them, Is it not written, My house shall be called of all nations the house of prayer? but ye have made it a den of thieves.

18 And the scribes and chief priests heard it, and sought how they might destroy him: for they feared him, because all the people was astonished at his doctrine.

Mark 11 :15-18 King James Version

The other three gospels also give account of the obedience of the Pharisees and Sadducees to that part of Isaiah 56:7 Which reads "My house shall be called of all nations", and disobedience of the vital part which reads "the house of prayer'', allowing My Lord's house to be exploited for monetary gain. This is not the first case of disobedience of Israelites to God (some examples in the Book of Judges) and it wasn't the last.

Matthew accounts the rejection of My Lord, a jew, who answered the loaded questions of the scribes and priests with responses that proved His authority and the authority of what He said and did, including His action of ridding God's house of moneychangers.

1 When the morning was come, all the chief priests and elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put him to death:

2 And when they had bound him, they led him away, and delivered him to Pontius Pilate the governor.

3 Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders,

4 Saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. And they said, What is that to us? see thou to that.

5 And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself.

Matthew 27:1-5 King James Version

What is it to you? Why did Judas Iscariot hang himself if there was nothing to it? Why is his name still synonymous with betrayal today if there was nothing to it?

History does not repeat. Evolution happens. POL.9100.0001.0616_0044

The crux of the matters of bail-in and quantitative tightening, like the crux of all things, lies in acceptance of Jesus Christ as the Messiah.

23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father a/so.

1John2:23

28 And one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well, asked him, Which is the first commandment of all?

29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, 0 Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:

30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.

31 And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself There is none other commandment greater than these.

Mark 12:28-31

The first commandment mentioned by Christ is accepted by Jews and Christians who accept the Old Testament. The second of these commandments is rejected by some who reject Jesus Christ as Messiah.

Rejection of the second part of the last and greatest commandment of God, allows some to treat neighbours as foreigners and exact debt. Acceptance of Jesus Christ as Messiah sees Deuteronomy 15:3 (which applied to Israel when she was at the mercy of a cruel world) superseded by the highest commandment.

Now, Zion commands great influence and has great wealth. Many Zionists will soon inherit much more earthly wealth.

How many times did Our Lord cut down the proud and raise the humble in The Old Testament? How many times did those of lowly birth rise to greatness in The Old Testament.

22 The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner.

23 This is the Lord's doing; it is marvellous in our eyes.

24 This is the day which the Lord hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it.

25 Save now, I beseech thee, 0 Lord: 0 Lord, I beseech thee, send now prosperity.

26 Blessed be he that cometh in the name of the Lord: we have blessed you out of the house of the Lord.

Psalms 118:22-26 King James Version

9 And they that went before, and they that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna; Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord:

10 Blessed be the kingdom of our father David, that cometh in the name of the Lord: Hosanna in the highest.

Mark 11:9-10 King James Version

My friend, do you comprehend who were "the builders" two and a half thousand years ago and who are "the builders" in the year of our Lord 2018?

Who will be "the builders" after bail-in and quantitative tightening have exacted their measure?

Who will God cut down?

What is that to Christians? Everything. Jesus Christ came for prodigal sons and daughters of the world, like myself. He also came for prodigal sons and daughters of moralism, like myself.

There is no reckoning of the material wealth of a debtor and his creditor that satisfies both parties completely. Our purpose as humans being is as our eternal purpose - to approach God. We are drawn to God. God wants all of us to partake of Heaven. We want what he gives. Some of us, like Satan, want what He has. We fall. We crawl. I crawl. Some walk with God already. POL.9100.0001.0616_0045

Jesus is the stone rejected by the builders.

Jesus show me the way.

All can turn to God at any time. We always have recourse.

20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

Matthew 18:20 King James Version

Jerusalem is no longer in the once-advantaged Fertile Crescent. You can see Jerusalem in the arid, downtrodden, degraded, ravaged and pillaged lands of the Africas. It is in the minds and hearts of every (wo)man. You cannot stop its construction, nor its manifestations in every part of the Belt and Road Initiative.

I wish for a world free of the love of money. (Wo )men must be weaned off money carefully to keep crimes born of overnight poverty from happening, much like a heroin addict must be weaned off opioids to avoid withdrawals. If all is rendered unto Caesar at once (as looks likely to happen in 19 of 20 G20 countries), untold havoc will ensue. Please act. You have an opportunity to save lives, including those of hapless parliamentarians who have chosen paths of avarice and apathy. Take it. Urge the Australian Federal Parliament to reform the banks with the three legislative changes I and many other Australians have recommended to them. Save the debtors and yourselves alike. God will square the rest, as He always has, does and will.

P.S. The parable my Lord spoke to the scribes and priests in Mark 121-12, Matthew 21 :33-46 and Luke 20:9-19 is a complete history of the world from beginning to end. Accept the Word spoken through the prophets of God. Accept the Son of God. Salvation is through Jesus Christ. It is not in the lifeblood of any human being, nor anywhere else but through Jesus Christ.

2018051 OtoJoshFrydenbergMP.pdf

194.8kB

20180723toJoshFrydenbergMP.pdf

288.6kB

Appendix 6

Dear Parliamentary Joint Committee,

It appears that the Department of Home Affairs has changed its mind as to whether to publish my response to this Inquiry (below) on its website. Or worse still, it is not giving it and the 15,000 other submissions, due consideration.

Please read below the dates of my submission (10/9/18), the email from the Department of Home Affairs of 14/9/18 with deadline for my request for public display of my submission by 19/9/18 and my reply of 17/9/18.

I trust you will properly consider the concerns and suggestions of the 15,000 of you constituents who made submissions. Many speak on behalf of the weak and down-trodden in Australia who stand to be further disempowered with the passage of the Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment (Assistance and Access) Bill 2018.

Yours Faithfully POL.9100.0001.0616_0046

--- Forwarded messa From: l ' . y, . p . .; , . .. p ' T+10 Subject: Comments on Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment (Assistance and Access) Bill 2018 from Andrew Soulos, Former Mayor of Strathfield Council

Dear Sir/Madam

I object to passage of The Assistance and Access Bill 2018'. I am becoming increasingly convinced that Australia is submitting to a totalitarian dystopia beyond anyone's Orwellian nightmare. Big brother of 1984 left long ago to make way for Nanny State, which left in the early 1990s when the Government became our mother. Now you want me to accept the wicked stepmother that controls the Five Eyes as guardian. Who is watching the watcher?

I note the Department of Home Affairs, which will administer this bill if enacted, is under the purview of Peter Dutton, a man who refutes media allegations of arbitrarily granting visas to questionable recipients. Peter Dutton abides gag orders on Australians who want to talk of Nauru - a common shame all Australians should know about. Why can't we see what the watcher is doing? Who is the watcher accountable to if not Australian voters?

Can you let all Australians decide for themselves if they want to wash their hands of the issue of boat people in the legal system your government washes them in? I note that your government has treated its own with contempt as well. The same legal system allowed your government to wash its hands of the ill-treatment of Adelaide's David Hicks and Sydney's Mamdouh Habib who, among other things, languished in Guantanamo Bay as "suspected terrorists".

The introduction to the Bill at https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/about/consultations/assistance-and­ access-bill-2018 explains that security measures "are also being employed by terrorists, child sex offenders and criminal organisations to mask illegal conduct" and to "address these threats, the Government has developed the Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment (Assistance and Access) Bill 2018 (1.13MB PDF) (the Assistance and Access Bill) to secure critical assistance from the communications industry and enable law enforcement to effectively investigate serious crimes in the digital era".

Enactment of this bill, like the enactment of past bills, will see your government cede more rights of its citizens to ASIO and the Five Eyes. The threats of terrorists, child sex offenders and criminal organisations will likely only get worse, as they have with most interventions to combat these threats so far. I urge you, please stop before more people get hurt.

Regarding the tackling of terrorism, your government spies on my neighbours on behalf of America, close allies of Saudi Arabia, whose Prince Bandar was the only official to be implicated in POL.9100.0001.0616_0047

the official 9/ 11 report. At https://edition.cnn.com/2013/07127/us/september-11 th-hijackers-fast­ facts/index.html CNN revealed 15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. Why did we follow America into Iraq chasing non-existent WMDs? What did Libya achieve that it wasn't supposed to stop? Where is the credible evidence for following the Five Eyes into Syria?

If General Wesley Clark at https://www.globalresearch.ca/we-re-going-to-take-out-7-countries-in-5- years-iraq-syria-lebanon-libya-somalia-sudan-iran/5166 is correct, America's view is "if the on ly tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail". If you want to stop terrorism then ask our Five Eyes partner to investigate the sponsorship of the Wahhabi schools in "Londonistan" by, among others, Prince Bandar's close friend Prince Charles. Please note that in 2001 all seven of the countries mentioned by General Wesley Clark had national credit banking.

After essential services are re-nationalised and job-creating, economy-generating and revenue­ raising infrastructure (e.g. at https://www.snowyhydro.com.au/our-energy/hydro/the-scheme/ it states "water from the Scheme underwrites the production of around $3 billion worth of agricultural products every year'') is built using national credit banking, government will have more tax revenue spare to spend prosecuting predatory banks which fund terrorism (e .g. 'Commonwealth Bank to pay $700m fine for anti-money laundering, terror financing law breaches' at http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-04/commonwealth-bank-pay-$700-million-fine-money­ lau ndering-breach/9831064 ) .

Regarding the tackling of child sex offenders, removal of safe schools and any other reform which attacks childhood would be a more sensible step. Suffer children, encourage innocence generally. Bigger locks on doors and smarter security does not keep burglars out. Kids should be taught to be wise as serpents and gentle as doves. This way they can beware of treasurers-come-prime ministers who suffer bankers who fraud customers and who also take advice from mentors who suffer paedophiles. Who elected the watcher, and the PM for that matter?

Regarding criminal organisations, I will only mention how to reform the organisation whose practices are older than harlotry, more brutal than the bikies, more insidious than the freemasons and more organised than the mafia. The banks, be they banks owned or co-owned by other banks or not, include our Big Four and their foreign owners.

Under the "prudential regulation" of APRA, Australia's banks have gambled more than $40 trillion in derivative trading. This is up from $14 trillion at the time of the GFC when "NAB, Westpac tapped Fed" for a $US53 billion bailout (ref. https://www.smh.com.au/business/nab-westpac-tapped-fed- 20101202-18i58.html ). In 2008, total derivative obligations were $700 trillion, up from $100 trillion in 2001 when the remedy outlined in step 1 below (Glass-Steagall) was removed in the U.S. and the criminal organisation was given access to more cover for their bets. Conservative estimates of total derivative obligations today are $1.2 quadrillion. Some economists estimate it at $4 quadrillion, well beyond world GDP. This stuff is dangerous enough when confined to the criminal organisation's financial quarters. But. ..

In the face of another, larger precipitating GFC, with the Fed calling in $150 billion a quarter (reversal of quantitative easing they have been baiting us with since 2008, most of which has gone into inflating the housing bubble) members of this criminal organisation within your government have prepared Australia for economic austerity (or economic Armageddon as several economists predict) by passing the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018. POL.9100.0001.0616_0048

The Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Act 2018 allows APRA, under the direction of the Financial Stability Board of the Bank for International Settlements (the clearing house of the Fed and other central banks), to "convert" (bail-in, "haircut") deposits and "any other instrument" to worthless bank shares so that our gambling banks can use the equity derived to remove "toxic assets" (born of their derivative obligations) from their books and pay fellow banksters of this criminal organisation. Working capital for the Big Four banks is minute compared with their potential losses. Our financial sector is in line with Cyprus, Portugal, Italy, Spain and Greece. Does your government disagree?

Step one of tackling this criminal organisation and the upcoming implosion of City of London, Wall St and affiliated financial districts is firstly to separate commercial (deposit, bond, share, loan) banking from all speculative banking (derivative, hedging, swap, option, future and any other volatile instrument) with the government only protecting commercial banks. This way, when the financial quarters of this criminal organisation implode with the realisation of up to $1.2 quadrillion of derivative obligations, no bleeding of the public purse (bailouts) occurs and no confiscation (bail­ in) of deposits, bonds and shares occurs.

Step two of tackling this criminal organisation and preventing the stemming of credit that allowed the Fed to worsen the Great Depression involves the creation of a national credit bank much like our Commonwealth Bank when it was publicly-owned. This bank successfully spent over $600 million per year for nearly four years during WWII with no debt, no inflation and no interest-rate rises. This bank can act a lender of last resort if what is left of the banking system refuses food and shelter to any Australian. Also, as mentioned earlier, it can be put to peace-time use producing huge job-creating, economy-generating and profit-producing infrastructure.

Currently we endure depletion of the public purse. Much of this is by the design of this criminal organisation, whose banks usually broker and often end up owning vital infrastructure. We wake up each day with less and less per capita by i) paying interest repayments on money borrowed from private banks to build infrastructure, ii) publicly insuring public-private-partnerships (PPPs) where government takes on more than its share of risk and receives less than its share of profit and iii) sale/privatisation of ports, airports, electricity, telecommunications and other profitable utilities to pay the government's share of PPPs which are usually motorways the private partner(s) collect(s) tolls for. The result of each and all of these methods is a net decrease in government revenue, crippling said government's ability to provide for its citizenry. Step two will end this and prevent further funding of this criminal organisation.

Step three of tackling this criminal organisation involves homeowner and bank protection which will act to keep all Australians in a home and all productive Australian businesses in operation by freezing loans so that banks cannot foreclose until such time when house prices normalise.

Step one will help avoid economic austerity. Step two will ensure credit flow to the manufacturing and farming sectors, further help in the avoidance of economic austerity, grow infrastructure per capita and help keep Australians in their homes. Step three will help ensure there are roofs over the heads and food on the plates of all Australians. We may even show the way for other countries falling prey to or being preyed on by this criminal organisation.

I am conscious that I have dedicated most of this submission to criminal organisations, dedicating less of it to the other more important manifestations of evil the Bill is supposedly trying to curb. I ask the reader to understand that the sooner the instrument by which criminal organisations flourish is responsibly contained the sooner we can contain the evil it brings, including terrorism and child sex offences. POL.9100.0001.0616_0049

I ask that you combat the threats of terrorists, child sex offenders and criminal organisations with the reforms above. The Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment (Assistance and Access) Bill 2018 (1 .13MB PDF will only serve to worsen these threats as the oligarchy ultimately control the Five Eyes and the criminal organisation I mentioned and perpetrate .... I am confident that a root cause analysis of terrorists, child sex offenders and criminal organisations will show that the reforms I recommend will curb the threat of these abominations. One does not empower an abomination to tackle itself.

Empowering ASIO with enactment of this Bill is akin to empowering APRA, the regulator of all bank crimes being revealed in your Royal Commission, with the ability to confiscate deposits, bonds and shares to "promote financial system stability in Australia". I do not want to find out what AS IO 's minders have in mind for Australia, and likewise I do not want to find out what "Too-Big-To-Fail" really means.

Thank you for taking my submission into consideration.

Yours faithfully

----- Forwarded message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, 17 September 2018, 8:03:49 pm GMT +1 O Subject: Re: Submissions to the Assistance and Access Bill Public Consultation: Request for Publication [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Good evening,

Thank you for acknowledging receipt of my submission to the Assistance and Access Bill 2018 public consultation process. I am willing to have my submission/feedback/response posted online. Please advise me when you have posted my submission online.

Regards POL.9100.0001.0616_0050

On Friday, 14 September2018, 4:06:51 pmAEST, Assistance Bill Consultation >wrote:

UNCLASSIFIED

Good afternoon,

Thank you for your submission to the Assistance and Access Bill 2018 public consultation process. The Department is considering your feedback as we prepare the Bill for introduction to Parliament.

The Department would like to publish your response on our website. Please indicate if you are willing to have your response posted on line in a reply to this email. If a response is not received by 19 September 2018 your submission will not be published.

The Department of Home Affairs

UNCLASSIFIED

Important Notice: The content of this email is intended only for use by the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you have received this email by mistake, please advise the sender and delete the message and attachments immediately. This email, including attachments, may contain confidential, sensitive, legally privileged and/or copyright information.

Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. The Department of Home Affairs and ABF respect your privacy and have obligations under the Privacy Act 1988.

Unsolicited commercial emails MUST NOT be sent to the originator of this email.