-----Original Message-----
From: OPC International <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Opsecrets <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Monday, 30 August 1999 3:38 PM
Subject: "Offshore & Privacy Secrets, August 30, 1999"


>================================================================
>      >> "Offshore & Privacy Secrets, August 30, 1999" <<
>              Published by OPC International
>                 http://offshoreprofit.com
>================================================================
>
>CONTENTS
>
>[1] Welcome!
>[2] Feedback
>[3] The New Millennium - Gloom & Doom or Boom?
>[4] Top 10 Offshore Funds
>[5] NewsBriefs
>
>================================================================
>[1] Welcome!
>================================================================
>
>Welcome to the last edition for August - now only four months to
>the new millennium! And certainly, such an event holds both
>promise and foreboding (depending upon your point of view). For
>more on this - see article in this newsletter.
>
>For those of you who like a little bit of "conspiracy", I received
>an interesting email subscription request during the week. As you
>can see by the domain, I took the precaution of NOT adding it to
>the list!
>
>The email address was: (name removed)@fincen.treas.gov
>
>The domain is that of FinCEN - the Financial Crimes Enforcement
>Network - in their own words, "The Financial Crimes Enforcement
>Network (FinCEN) is one of the U.S. Department of Treasury's lead
>agencies in the fight against money laundering."
>
>See: http://www.ustreas.gov/fincen/
>
>So, in the light of comments last week about money laundering, it
>appears that Big Brother is keeping a fatherly eye on us! As you
>know, we are not promoting drug running, or any "crime". However,
>we are promoting the idea that you should be able to keep your
>own money - and retain your financial privacy. And that explains
>BB's "interest".
>
>But don't feel paranoid - enjoy this weeks edition!!
>
>Kind regards
>
>Robert Smith
>OPC International
>http://offshoreprofit.com
>
>================================================================
>[2] Feedback
>================================================================
>
>On the matter of the tax burden, a reader had this question:
>
>"I have often wondered if anyone has sat down and figured out just
>how much tax we really pay to all the different governing bodies.
>We all know what is obvious, Income Tax, SSI, Unemployment Ins.,
>Sales Tax, Excise Tax, Property Taxes, etc.  But what we don't
>see or it doesn't register on us is all the value added taxes on
>products, plus other unknown fees and taxes. It seems to me that
>the real taxation figure must be upwards of ninety percent.
>
>If you could please enlighten us as to our real burden that the
>government places on us."
>
>A point well-made. All value-added taxes (like GST in Canada,
>New Zealand and now Australia, and VAT in the UK) add tax at every
>stage of commerce. Everyone pays GST/VAT on everything purchased.
>And if you are in business, you charge your own clients the same
>tax on goods and services you provide. For example, the GST in
>New Zealand is 12.5%. So you add this percentage on to the accounts
>you send out. At the end of each tax period, you total the GST/VAT
>you have collected from your clients - and subtract the tax you
>have paid. You then pay the difference to the tax man. The result
>is you pay tax on the value "added" by yourself. If you buy
>wholesale and sell retail - you end up paying the tax on your
>mark-up.
>
>However, there is yet another important hidden tax. All businesses
>pay three taxes in these countries - provisional tax (or tax on
>profits) payroll tax (tax on employees) and GST/VAT. What's often
>ignored is the effect of the company's tax liability on profits.
>
>Every good and service provided on the market carries a price
>that is made up of all sorts of costs - one of them being the
>"cost" of tax. A company can only make money by charging enough
>to cover all costs - including the tax it will have to pay. So
>the price of everything on sale is loaded with tax costs - even
>before any GST/VAT is added!
>
>Add to that the other hidden tax of inflation (even if it is only
>2%) and the total tax take is staggering. I don't have any figures
>for what it would be, taking all this into account - but I'd bet
>it was in the region of 75% or more.
>
>The end result is tax charged on tax upon tax - a sort of tax
>pyramid. And that's what you call being a "75% tax slave"!
>
>Another reader made this thoughtful comment:
>
>"In your introduction (last week), you talk of 'trouble brewing'.
>Yes, indeed. But it may not be trouble for us!  If you look at
>the actions of government in general, you will realise that
>Government is shooting in all directions, with no real target in
>sight.  They try to encompass all our liberties with general
>rulings that leave plenty of loopholes.
>
>These hasty law changes, to me, are the symptoms of a very ill
>Ruling Power.  They are the tremors of their own failure. We are
>coming to the end of the well known 500 year cycle, where society
>has to undergo a fundamental change.  I see these illogical
>decisions as the first cracks in a dying dynasty.
>
>The Government, as we know it, has to go.
>
>As the Net rises, so does individual knowledge and individual self-
>awareness! By means of your e-news and the Net, millions of
>individuals acquire that awareness, hidden from us within our
>Government based education system.  'They' even gave us the means!
>'Their' laziness in understanding the way the World is going leads
>'them' to give computers to primary schools, THUS, allowing their
>prey to probe into the reality of the World that surrounds us,
>and discover what web of lies we have been entangled in by our
>own Rulers..."
>
>I couldn't say it better myself! I have commented before that
>in matters of advanced strategies and technology - the power is
>shifting to individuals. Bureaucrats do not have the same incentive
>to get off their butts and do something as those within the private
>sector (driven by the profit, rather than power motive).
>
>The 500 year cycle mentioned is also elaborated on in the book
>"The Sovereign Individual" by James Dale Davidson and William
>Rees-Mogg". Well worth reading, if you haven't already.
>
>Another reader had this helpful, practical advice:
>
>"Thought the readers might enjoy this site. Check it out:
>http://www.lpwa.com It's a free, private proxy and anonymity web
>surfing service!! I really like it. It makes your browser
>automatically invisible to sites you surf and gives a fictitious
>ID to suspecting snoopers."
>
>Thanks for that! We always welcome any tips from readers that we
>can share with everyone on the list.
>
>================================================================
>[3] The New Millennium - Gloom & Doom or Boom?
>================================================================
>
>Y2K - View #1
>
>CONFIDENCE = Suspicion Asleep
>by Jack Weber
>
>http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_99/weber073099.html
>Permission granted to reproduce this article.
>
>Webster defines the word confidence as: "full trust, belief in
>the trustworthiness of a person or thing."
>
>About 30 years ago, as a result of being a gold mining stock
>specialist, I was invited to a seminar at a gold mine in Southern
>California. The keynote speaker was John Exter.
>
>Mr. Exter had recently retired as VP of City Corp., the large
>banking conglomerate. Previously he had been in charge of the
>transfers of gold in Fort Knox, was the person who founded the
>Central Bank of the Philippines, also the founder and first
>Governor of the Central Bank of Ceylon. In addition to these
>prestigious positions, he was a member of the Council on Foreign
>Relations. Mr. Exter was obviously well connected in banking,
>gold and international relations.
>
>One of the most important comments he made in his address was
>that the key to stability in the banking system was embodied in
>one word - confidence. He went on to say that when, not if,
>confidence in the banking system evaporated, the banking scheme
>would be over, because "confidence is suspicion asleep." He had
>no doubt that we would live to see the day when suspicion would
>awaken.
>
>Mr Exter is now in his nineties, and I predict that if he lives
>another six months, circumstances will prove him to have been a
>prophet, because the "belief (of the citizens of the world) in
>the trustworthiness of" the banking game is about to vaporize.
>
>To support my prediction, the following items are submitted.
>
>On 1/13/99, CNN published the results of their poll, which showed
>that 53% of Americans plan to withdraw extra cash by year-end.
>On 2/4/99, ZD Net ran a survey that showed 48% of those polled,
>plan to pull 40% or more of their money out of the banks by year
>end. On 2/17/99, Koskinen said, "We can print more money than
>Americans can withdraw." On 2/24/99 Greenspan said not to worry
>- "Don't withdraw currency." If Koskinen is right, why did Greenspan
>need to tell you not withdraw your money? If Koskinen is right,
>why did the bankers go ballistic when GTE recommended its customers
>pull cash out of banks (on 2/6/99)?
>
>If, in fact, the banks will have $200 billion in currency on hand
>for those who are suspicious about their bank savings, and will
>"print more money than Americans can withdraw," why are bankers
>sponsoring such a high-powered propaganda campaign to "educate"
>the public as to how safe the banking system is? Could it possibly
>be that they suspect that CONFIDENCE in their banking game is
>shrinking and suspicion is awakening?
>
>In an effort to stifle such, the Federal Reserve Bank (FRB)
>notified the US citizens in 1998, that they would print up another
>$50 billion (in addition to the $150 billion allegedly on hand)
>to meet any unusual demand for cash in late 1999. Also in 1998,
>the Central Banks of England (33% increase in currency), New
>Zealand and Canada made similar announcements.
>
>So far this year the following countries' Central Banks have made
>these announcements -
>
>2/16 -- South Africa's Central Bank will stockpile currency
>
>4/8 -- the Bank of Japan will stockpile $331 Billion worth of Yen
>
>6/26 -- New Zealand's Central Bank will DOUBLE their currency
>
>7/17 - Malaysia prepares for bank runs by printing more money and
>will close their banks from Dec. 31 through Jan. 3
>
>7/23 - Hong Kong Central Bank announces they will increase their
>currency by 100% to 160% by year end
>
>Prediction -- other such announcements will be forthcoming.
>
>Meanwhile, the president of the Canadian Bankers Association has
>announced that "Customer's money will be safe in their Canadian
>bank accounts." Isn't that the definition of a bank in the first
>place - a safe place for our money? Don't you wonder why they feel
>the necessity to make such an announcement?
>
>Incidentally, most people assume that they have the right to demand
>currency when they make a withdrawal from their bank accounts. No,
>no, tain't necessarily so, according to Don Childears, President
>of the Colorado Bankers Association. As quoted in the Denver
>Business Journal, he stated; "banks have a legal right to offer
>other forms of payment (such as) cashier's checks or wire transfers."
>He also stated, "What the public needs from the banking sector on
>Y2K is courage. Courage to tackle the problem, first of all,
>whatever the cost, and courage to stand by that effort. It must
>communicate the unequivocal message that it is ready and offer
>the proof. CONFIDENCE will follow." Sure. When the banks cannot
>offer proof that they are ready, what little confidence is left
>will turn to suspicion and then evaporate. When that occurs,
>watch the lines start to form - around the world. [snipped]
>
>Because of space constraints - you can read the rest of this
>article at: http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_99/weber073099.html
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Y2K View #2
>
>I'm going to be a bit of a "contrarian" on this subject and provide
>an alternative view for you, the reader, to consider.
>
>First of all, the Y2K "bug" is an issue which the layman cannot
>properly fathom. It is a technical issue - one which must be
>addressed by experts. I am a layman in this regard (as I imagine
>are most of you). I have to form my own opinion based on what I
>read. And I have read both sides of the story.
>
>Initially, I was very concerned. I read Gary North's opinions -
>http://www.garynorth.com - and found my heart sinking when I
>realised that if what he is saying is true, then Armageddon is
>just around the corner. This concern lead me to probe further
>and try to look a little deeper.
>
>I agree with the first article - the banking system does depend
>upon confidence - but it's a confidence which has been maintained
>against all odds for a very long time now. Most people are "sheep"
>when it comes to having an opinion - following whatever the masses
>think. However, the masses have a vested interest in this matter
>of "confidence". Why? Because all their money is at stake. Deep
>inside, they may feel that if THEY panic, then so will everyone
>else, hence proving the reality of the self-fulfilling prophecy.
>
>When one looks on the "other side of the fence" regarding opinions
>on this Y2K issue - one finds that there are those who openly
>declare the whole thing to be a big CON - a clever ploy to create
>employment for hundreds of thousands of computer companies and
>consultants!
>
>Then you have the "middle ground" opinion, which says that there
>will be disruptions of varying degrees - but nothing to indicate
>the "end of the world as we know it".
>
>After weighing up all such opinions, I have come to the following
>opinion. (Notice I say "opinion" - as I have no proof that what I
>think is the absolute truth of the matter.)
>
>There is a greater danger in the public's reaction than there is
>in the actual Y2K threat as a technical issue. I believe that the
>possibility of people acting as if the world IS going to end poses
>a greater danger than any real outcome of Y2K.
>
>For example: If people really believe that the banking system will
>fail on January 1, 2000, then they WILL take out all their cash.
>This act will trigger bank closures and public panic. The money
>will not be there - and the panic will spread worldwide, including
>into the stock market and every nook and cranny of the financial
>system.
>
>All this could happen - even though Y2K turns out to be a non-
>event! It is because the banking system is based on confidence
>that loss of confidence is all that is needed to collapse it.
>This loss of confidence can happen without any real technical
>threat to the banking system. It can happen because people may
>BELIEVE it will happen.
>
>I have heard, from various sources, of the building of "processing
>centers" in the USA (also being called detention camps) and I have
>received some purportedly "inside" information that indicates such
>places are for holding those arrested of firearms violations - in
>the wake of a major police/army swoop of US cities. And what are
>these swoops? It is being said that such swoops are planned as a
>response to public panic - as a result of Y2K. It is also being
>said that even if such panic doesn't happen - it will be engineered!
>
>Now, this is really "conspiracy" stuff I know. But I also know
>there is a fair amount of opinion that believes the mass shootings
>that have been happening in the USA, in recent times, have been
>"arranged" to soften up the population to the need for such an
>armaments swoop.
>
>I should also say, from the perspective of someone living outside
>the USA, that the most vocal Y2K "gloom" views originate from
>within that same country. In other parts of the world - including
>New Zealand and Australia - there is nowhere near the overall
>public "concern".
>
>So what's the bottom line? Personally, I think the whole technical
>issue is overblown. The "doom" scenarios make me think of the
>"end of the world" prophetic utterances of various "end-timers" -
>those with a vested interest in seeing the modern "evil" world
>come to an untimely end.
>
>The real issue is whether people believe the "end time" views -
>and panic as a consequence. And in this regard I have to say that
>the USA must be the most religious country on earth, and therefore
>very prone to believing such things. Whereas, those of us living
>in the UK, Australia and New Zealand (and much of Europe), are
>not even half as religious - and much more skeptical.
>
>Keep in mind that any public panic will play right into the hands
>of the politicians - who will just love to put in place new laws
>to control the situation. Governments love emergencies - like
>wars etc, and always use such opportunities to increase their
>stranglehold on the people. So be warned.
>
>Come December 31 this year - I will not be living in a bunker, or
>stashing all my cash under the mattress. Instead I will be hoping
>that people don't panic - and I will not want to encourage it by
>panicking myself.
>
>We've had warnings of the "end of the world as we know it" for
>decades now - and you know what? The world keeps going.
>
>================================================================
>[4] Top 10 Offshore Funds
>================================================================
>
>For the year ending July, 1999, the following funds posted these
>percentage changes - gross income reinvested. (source Micropal)
>
>  1. RSAIFS/Lippo Indonesian Growth - 505.1%
>  2. Lippo Indonesian Growth - 449.2%
>  3. Korea Open Fund - 309.8%
>  4. Malacca Fund (Cayman) Ltd - 276.8%
>  5. Nicholas-Applegate US Growth Equity - 273.8%
>  6. BBL (L) Invest Indonesia C - 262.4%
>  7. BBL (L) Invest Indonesia D - 262.2%
>  8. Fidelity Funds Indonesia - 252.7%
>  9. The Yellow Sea Inv Co - 249.1%
>10. Paribas EM Indonesia Ptfl - 248.9%
>
>================================================================
>[5] NewsBriefs
>================================================================
>
>http://www.lp.org/
>
>Libertarians say "bravo!" to brave anti-Drug War Republican
>governor
>
>WASHINGTON, DC -- The Republican governor of New Mexico deserves
>praise for committing a "brave act of political heresy" -- urging
>the federal government to end its ill-fated War on Drugs, the
>Libertarian Party said today.
>
>"Governor Gary Johnson is like the little boy who says the
>emperor has no clothes," said the party's national director, Steve
>Dasbach. "While most Republicans and Democrats pretend we're
>winning the War on Drugs, Johnson has the courage to say we can't
>jail our way to a drug-free America, and we ought to stop trying."
>
>COMMENT
>The "war on drugs" is insane. And it's insane the way the US is
>trying to "export" its fanaticism to other countries. The whole
>issue is about control. Making drugs illegal is as stupid as
>the original prohibition on alcohol - and for the same reasons.
>Making drugs illegal simply drives them into the black market -
>where criminals take over supply. (Criminals by definition - as
>trading in drugs is an illegal act.)
>
>One bad action (drug prohibition) leads to all sorts of bad
>consequences - including the mass incarceration of millions of
>Americans and the "new" crime of money-laundering (trying to keep
>the money you make from selling drugs - drugs wanted by people
>in the first place).
>
>All I can say is WHEN is the US going to wake up and end this
>evil prohibition?
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>http://cgi.zdnet.com/slink?/adeska/adt0823ba/3770:845066
>
>Forget the conspiracy movies. It's happening in real life now.
>The Clinton Administration wants the right to break into your
>home and install a "listening device" on your computer. Of course,
>they promise not to abuse the privilege. (Right. Sure. Uh-huh.)
>Forget the Melissa virus. Forget Y2K. This may be the scariest
>computer threat of the year...
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>By Hans H. Chen - APBNEWS.COM
>
>Law enforcement officials are calling for every suspect placed
>under arrest to have a DNA sample taken.
>
>NEW YORK, Aug. 18  A plan by New York City police commissioner
>Howard Safir to take DNA samples from everyone arrested has
>received the backing of an influential police organization.
>
>Meeting at the New York Police Department headquarters, the
>executive committee of the International Association of Chiefs of
>Police (IACP) on Saturday voted unanimously to approve Safir's
>resolution calling for states and the federal government to fund
>the DNA sampling of criminal suspects upon their arrest.
>
>COMMENT
>What is it with governments and criminals. I guess, having created
>them (mostly) in the first place - they think they have to do
>something about it! And I guess the other reason is that crims
>and governments have something in common - they're both trying
>to fleece us. The government hates competition!
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Who Pays The Most In Taxes?
>
>According to the Treasury Department 85% of all federal taxes
>are paid by the top 40% of taxpayers, which is anyone who earns
>more than $49,800. That means that the remaining 60% of taxpayers
>contribute just 15% to the total of income taxes collected.
>(source  - Harris Publishing)
>
>COMMENT
>This is what is known as "income redistribution" - perhaps the
>most insidious idea/action ever perpetrated on productive people.
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Australian Crime Increases After Guns Are Confiscated
>Orange County Register - Letters to the Editor Section 8/4/99
>
>It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were
>forced to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed, a
>program costing the government more than $500 million dollars.
>
>And now the results are in: Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2
>percent; Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent; Australia-
>wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent). In the
>state of Victoria, homicides with firearms are up 300 percent.
>Figures over the previous 25 years show a steady decrease in
>armed robbery with firearms (changed drastically in the past 12
>months). There has been a dramatic increase in break-ins and
>assaults of the elderly.
>
>COMMENT
>No surprises here! When you disarm people you turn them into
>potential victims. I know that if I was intent on committing some
>crime - I would feel a lot more comfortable knowing there weren't
>going to be any guns waiting for me!
>
>It's not just that. The state has one legitimate function - to
>protect our individual right to our lives and property. But we
>all know they cannot protect us. If someone turns up in your home
>intent on robbing and assaulting you, then the police will only
>turn up AFTER the event. In other words, the state's current
>function is limited to bringing felons to justice - not preventing
>crimes from being committed. And in this environment it is criminal
>to prevent people from protecting themselves.
>
>Just to give you some idea of how silly it gets. In New Zealand
>the police have consistently opposed the importation of "pepper"
>spray - particularly useful for carrying in one's handbag - on
>the grounds that the criminals will also use it!
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>One in 34 Americans in jail, on parole or probation
>
>WASHINGTON -- The number of American adults behind bars or under
>police supervision last year reached a record 5.9 million offenders,
>almost 3 per cent of the adult population, the United States
>Justice Department has reported.
>
>It means that one out of every 34 adults was in jail or on
>probation or parole for criminal acts last year. (source: AFP)
>
>COMMENT
>What did I say last week, about making citizens into criminals?
>Enough said.
>
>================================================================
>
>"Life, faculties, production - in other words, individuality,
>liberty, property - this is man. And in spite of the cunning of
>artful political leaders, these three gifts from God precede all
>human legislation, and are superior to it. Life, liberty, and
>property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary,
>it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed
>beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place."
>
>Frederic Bastiat
>
>================================================================
>See you next week! Please spread the message and forward this
>newsletter in its entirety to related mailing lists, friends,
>associates, and Webmasters.       !! THANK YOU !!
>================================================================
>  To subscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>       with the following subject: subscribe opsecrets
>                           - - - - -
>  To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>      with the following subject: unsubscribe opsecrets
>================================================================
>     True Freedom CAN be yours at http://offshoreprofit.com
>           Copyright 1999, OPC International, Inc.
>================================================================ 
>

Reply via email to