Further evidence of the coming banking collapse

Following on from my earlier post on the inevitability of a second banking crisis this weekend is seeing a very unusual situation at the three banks that make up the Natwest banking group. It appears that a computer glitch has caused widespread disruption to peoples accounts with deposits and withdrawals not being registered correctly and people unable to make withdrawals from cashpoints. Bank branches are being opened over the weekend to help, but the timing suggests that something more is going on. If we start from an understanding that there are still major problems in the banking system, something that is generally accepted with bank ratings being downgraded and the Euro still in crisis then the possibility exists that there may be a rather more serious story behind this issue. The first thing to note is that whilst any computer system is vulnerable to technical difficulties, the computer systems used in banking are very highly regulated and are subject to continuous monitoring and checking. This is a legal requirement, and is actioned by the financial services authority (FSA) and the Bank of England (BoE) in the UK. Consequently it is unlikely that this is a simple error, or that it would cause this level of disruption if there wasn't something more behind it.

What could that be? Well, what if a decision was taken that large scale bank failures were an inevitability? What if the governments of the US and Europe had established that the only way out of the crisis was to let banks fail? What if they genuinely believed that there was no way to save the banks this time? Wouldn't they consider the implications of this to the public? Wouldn't they plan for public unrest and the possibility of full scale revolt? Would they perhaps try to shift the blame away from themselves as legislators and on to the banks which are going to fail anyway? If they were thinking in this way, how could that be achieved? How do you create a situation in which banks which the public have used for their entire lives, that they rely on for holding money, paying bills, providing mortgages and so on were no longer trustworthy or viable? One way would be to set up a series of events that over time reduced peoples opinions of the stability and security of banks. You could certainly imagine that if people kept having problems with banking services, with getting access to their money, there might be a move by those people to find alternative means of looking after their money themselves, you might see a steady withdrawal of money and closing of accounts rather than a panic run on the bank, until such point that the bank ran out of money.

Wouldn't this also create an opportunity for a movement that created a “new” form of banking? Something globally based perhaps? Of course, if the banking sector collapses, there is every likelihood that currencies would follow suit leaving the way clear for some kind of replacement, again perhaps on a global scale. No-one ever said that the New World Order would be established by force of arms. How much better for the elite if we, the public were placed in an engineered position that they actively chose this solution? It would certainly save a lot of effort, and leave a subservient population ready to do the bidding of their masters. It sounds like turkeys voting for Christmas to me.