This book and documentary details the legal taking of ALL STOCKS, BONDS, SECURITIES WORLDWIDE.
IF YOU BOUGHT A BOND, STOCK, OR ANY SECURITY, YOU DON'T OWN IT!
The Great Taking is highly researched and cites laws in the USA and European Union that have been designed to subvert our financial system and take everything you own without a day in court in the event of a global financial meltdown (which has been planned!)
The Great Taking - Documentary
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dk3AVceraTI
A 1hr 10min summary of the book "The Great Taking" by the author himself. I recommend everyone watch or listen to. When David starts talking about very technical details, I'd recommend playing at 0.75 speed.
Here's where you can buy the book for The Great Taking. There's a free downloadable PDF available as well.
Archived Zip File of all references from "The Great Taking" minus [48], [27] (Video has been scrubbed) and [10] (Don't have an electronic copy of the '87 book)
165 MB
https://files.catbox.moe/6pxbwr.zip
Full [48] is too big to be included in a catbox.moe link, It hasn't been scrubbed off YouTube yet. (October-19-2020) Cross-Border Payment -- A Vision for the Future | IMF
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVmKN4DSu3g
Source [4] from the book is a reply from the New York Federal Reserve to the European Commission that cites the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) Article 8 and 9 as the legal right to take all of your security investments.
A link to the source is here
https://archive.org/details/ec-clearing-questionnaire/page/19/mode/2up
Page 3
(0) In respect of what legal system are the following answers given?
This response confines itself to U.S. commercial law, primarily Article 8, specifically Part 5 of Article 8, and parts of Article 9, of the Uniform Commercial Code (“UCC”);
Page 9
(10) Where securities are held in pooled form (e.g. a collective securities position, rather than segregated individual positions per person), does the investor have rights attaching to particular securities in the pool?
No. The security entitlement holder does not have rights attaching to particular securities in the pool, he has a pro rata share of the interests in the financial asset held by its securities intermediary to the amount needed to satisfy the aggregate claims of the entitlement holders in that issue. This is true even if investor positions are “segregated.”
The Questionaire before being answered is here:
https://files.catbox.moe/70jgri.pdf
U.c.c. - Article 8 - Investment Securities (1994) can be found herehttps://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/8
U.c.c. - Article 9 - Secured Transactions (2010) can be found herehttps://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/9
Extra research on the person David Rogers Webb - Author of "The Great Taking"
EXTRA-on-David-Rogers-Webb.zip 73.2 MB
https://files.catbox.moe/24nvf2.zip
NEW! Sources from The Great Taking Documentary that was created by David Rogers Webb himself! These sources in addition to the ones in the book. TIME-STAMPED IN THE FILE NAME FOR THE EXACT TIME SHOWN IN THE DOCUMENTARY. PINPOINTS EXACT LAWS AND DOCS TO READ! DOWNLOAD THE ZIP FILE FOR OFFLINE VIEWING. PLEASE TAKE A LOOK ANONS
Format: HH-MM-SS
The Great Taking Documentary Sources.zip 160 MB
§ 9-328. PRIORITY OF SECURITY INTERESTS IN INVESTMENT PROPERTY.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/9/9-328
The following rules govern priority among conflicting security interests in the same investment property:
(1) A security interest held by a secured party having control of investment property under Section 9-106 has priority over a security interest held by a secured party that does not have control of the investment property.
(2) Except as otherwise provided in paragraphs (3) and (4), conflicting security interests held by secured parties each of which has control under Section 9-106 rank according to priority in time of:
(A) if the collateral is a security, obtaining control;
(B) if the collateral is a security entitlement carried in a securities account and:
(i) if the secured party obtained control under Section 8-106(d)(1), the secured party's becoming the person for which the securities account is maintained;
(ii) if the secured party obtained control under Section 8-106(d)(2), the securities intermediary's agreement to comply with the secured party's entitlement orders with respect to security entitlements carried or to be carried in the securities account; or
(iii) if the secured party obtained control through another person under Section 8-106(d)(3), the time on which priority would be based under this paragraph if the other person were the secured party; or
(C) if the collateral is a commodity contract carried with a commodity intermediary, the satisfaction of the requirement for control specified in Section 9-106(b)(2) with respect to commodity contracts carried or to be carried with the commodity intermediary.
(3) A security interest held by a securities intermediary in a security entitlement or a securities account maintained with the securities intermediary has priority over a conflicting security interest held by another secured party.
(4) A security interest held by a commodity intermediary in a commodity contract or a commodity account maintained with the commodity intermediary has priority over a conflicting security interest held by another secured party.
(5) A security interest in a certificated security in registered form which is perfected by taking delivery under Section 9-313(a) and not by control under Section 9-314 has priority over a conflicting security interest perfected by a method other than control.
(6) Conflicting security interests created by a broker, securities intermediary, or commodity intermediary which are perfected without control under Section 9-106 rank equally.
(7) In all other cases, priority among conflicting security interests in investment property is governed by Sections 9-322 and 9-323.
Code of the District of Columbia - §28 8–511. Priority among security interests and entitlement holders. D.C. Law Library
https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/sections/28~8-511.html
(a) Except as otherwise provided in subsections (b) and (c) of this section, if a securities intermediary does not have sufficient interests in a particular financial asset to satisfy both its obligations to entitlement holders who have security entitlements to that financial asset and its obligation to a creditor of the securities intermediary who has a security interest in that financial asset, the claims of entitlement holders, other than the creditor, have priority over the claim of the creditor.
(b) A claim of a creditor of a securities intermediary who has a security interest in a financial asset held by a securities intermediary has priority over claims of the securities intermediary’s entitlement holders who have security entitlements with respect to that financial asset if the creditor has control over the financial asset.
(c) If a clearing corporation does not have sufficient financial assets to satisfy both its obligations to entitlement holders who have security entitlements with respect to a financial asset and its obligation to a creditor of the clearing corporation who has a security interest in that financial asset, the claim of the creditor has priority over the claims of entitlement holders.