All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 1, 2013 - Project Camelot
01:56:11
PROJECT CAMELOT: INTERVIEW WITH KAREN HUDES - WORLD BANK WHISTLEBLOWER
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi everyone.
Okay, we're just getting started here.
Thank you for your patience.
This is Kerry Cassidy.
Thank you so much, Karen, for coming on with us.
And we've got an audience already standing by.
And this is a live broadcast.
So what happens with a live broadcast of this type is that we will be having people...
Who are going to be able to ask you questions.
So in addition to my questions, the public will be able to ask you questions along the way.
So that should be a lot of fun.
Yes, wonderful.
Okay, and what I'm going to do here, we're going to have about two hours to get into everything rather deeply, and so this is going to be a great opportunity for you to really explain what has happened to you, where your sort of perceptions were maybe originally when you went to work for the World Bank,
and then how they've changed over time and why, and then we'll get into drilling down a little deeper in various areas And I guess I think the best thing to do is to have you give your own bio.
I do have a bio printed on the front page of Camelot on my blog for you.
It's a brief bio for the people that are listening, and they will also have the link to your website, etc.
But at this time, why don't you go ahead and give your background the way you would like to do it.
Okay, this is a wonderful opportunity.
I can't thank you all enough.
So, I went to the World Bank, not right out of law school.
That would have been what I really wanted to do because I went to Yale Law School.
But before I did that, I studied Development Economics at the University of Amsterdam.
And if you're interested in development, The World Bank is the premier place to go and so that's what I tried to do and I'm a very persistent soul so I ended up interviewing at the World Bank five times before I ultimately got hired.
It took me about 10 years to get in there because each time I went there they said we want to have somebody who's seasoned, who knows, who's a professional Who knows what it is to be a lawyer for an institution that lends money.
And so the first place I went was, you know, the usual.
Actually, that wasn't the first place I went.
I ended up working on a law firm.
Which did a lot of securities laws, so people who issue stock on the capital markets.
I would be working as a corporate lawyer to help them do that.
But before I did that, I thought what I really wanted to do was to work for Ralph Nader.
This was before he spoiled the election as a third-party candidate, and I thought it was really important to help Consumers.
And he was somebody who was doing that.
So what happened was I hadn't had that much experience in the interviewing technique.
I thought that the thing to do when you're asked a question is to give an honest answer.
And so the question that I flubbed was, you've told us why you think it would be a good thing for you to come work here with Ralph Nader.
Tell us why you're having any doubts.
And so I said, well, it seems to me that what you end up doing is you do all the work and Ralph Nader gets all the credit.
So I didn't get the job offer.
And I ended up scrambling and going to work in a large firm.
And it turned out that that was exactly where I needed to go.
Because what I learned about what the rules are for issuing stock on the capital markets, that stood me in very good stead.
Fast forward when the World Bank was breaking all of those rules and the auditors for the World Bank were not following the audit standards and this is because they were shielding large-scale corruption although at the time I didn't know why this was going on but I knew what the rules were and so I also knew what my job was which was to make the World Bank follow those rules and so I just sort of hung in there
and that's where we are right now.
And I think we're just poised at the moment when the group that's been breaking the rules at the World Bank, that's been the power behind the scene and that has been responsible for having the World Bank become an organization that everybody loves to hate because The stated purpose of the World Bank is to alleviate poverty,
and yet if you read what John Perkins has written about the World Bank, it's actually doing the opposite.
It's creating debt for the countries that is siphoning off the money that these economies need to alleviate poverty.
And the reason that this is happening is because there is a very powerful economic group That has seized control of the World Bank and is very busy behind the scenes with its own agenda.
I'll be happy to tell people how I discovered that group and what I think that group's agenda is.
So the reason I wanted to go to the World Bank was because I believed what its stated purpose was.
Okay, fair enough.
Thank you for that.
Well, that's a good background.
And if I can ask you to possibly tilt your screen because the bottom of your face is a little bit cut off.
That's better.
That's good.
That's great.
Yeah, that's better.
Thank you.
And what I'd like to know is at what point did you start to realize that your job at the World Bank might be not everything you dreamed of?
Let's put it that way.
There was a very crystal clear moment that I started to have very serious misgivings.
I was there for 20 years.
I went there in 86 and I ended up being a fired whistleblower in retaliation for reporting corruption in 2007.
So the moment that I really felt that there was a serious problem was in 1998 and that was because I was representing the staff association on something called the Drysdale Committee.
There was a strategic compact where the board was telling the people who wanted more money from the board that it was important for the World Bank to clean up its act in human resources and so I was part of that task force and one of the recommendations I made was you know it's not really hard to clean up human resources you just have to track what people
are doing and reward the ones that are doing what you think is important and you know help the ones that aren't delivering give them training if that doesn't help then just move them out of management and we brought in Somebody from IBM, but the part where I started having serious misgivings was when at the end of the exercise I said, okay, when you do reform, you always monitor to see whether the form is taking hold.
And so what is our plan for monitoring?
And also in a large entity like the World Bank, you're also supposed to have some kind of a group that's going to be the owners of the reform.
So you're not only measuring whether the reform is happening, but you have not only a Sherpa, which is a guide, but you have the honchos that are going to retrofit whatever it is you're doing to make sure that you achieve what it was that you wanted to achieve.
And that recommendation was not adopted.
So I thought, this is a serious problem.
But actually, before I went into the World Bank, I was on notice That the legal department had a very special role to play.
The man who had been the longest serving general counsel was a Dutch lawyer named Aaron Brockes.
He had been there in 1944, which is when 44 countries went to the ski resort named Bretton Woods in New Hampshire to negotiate the treaty establishing the World Bank.
I got to know him after he had retired.
He played the piano, I played the cello, and we used to play Beethoven.
And I wanted to, you know, get a good introduction to the World Bank.
And he told me that he had been there when Robert McNamara became the president of the World Bank.
That was in 1968.
And he said when somebody from the Pentagon comes in to be the president of the World Bank, It's very, very hard to maintain the rule of law inside the organization.
And Brockes was also the one who told me that it's the legal department that's the most important position inside the World Bank.
It's not the presidency, because what you have is a resident board.
There's 25 of them now.
There were only 12 in the beginning.
But this board is supposed to be there as a counterweight to the presidency and it's the legal department that acts as the honest broker between the board and the presidency.
He said after Robert McNamara the board really lost its way but there was something that happened actually from the very get-go and that is after the first six months they adopted a convention which said that the board would not initiate actions.
The board would wait for the presidency to propose anything and they would simply vote what the president had proposed up or down.
So the board gave up its functionality and I found that rather curious and as I saw actual corruption occurring I went to the board and I told the board that they were not to be passive anymore.
They had to get to the bottom of this corruption that the World Bank was out of compliance on the capital markets.
That basically means that the financial statements were not trustworthy because anybody who saw money going in the wrong direction, which is what I saw and what a number of World Bank whistleblowers were reporting, that meant that the board had to become proactive.
And the board wasn't doing this.
And I found that very curious.
You know, why would that happen?
And it's only later on that I found out what the problem was.
Because, you know, I kept doing the...
taking the measures that you're supposed to take to solve a problem.
So, for example, when I saw corruption in the Philippines, which is...
What happened at the also a year after that Drysdale committee that I was Continue if we possibly can.
So let's see.
You're back live.
Okay.
So we got interrupted right when you're talking about Joseph Estrada and the Philippines.
And you kind of made a quick turn there, but I think you were in 19...
What year were we talking when you got involved?
Okay, this is 1998, 1999.
Okay, so you're back then.
Right, just at the end of the East Asia financial crisis.
And so, Joseph Estrada ended up getting impeached and he, in 2007, the Santabagayan, that's the Philippine word for the anti-graft court, made Estrada cough up the plunder that he had stolen from the Philippine people.
He had to pay back about 30 million dollars.
Now, I saw that this was going on.
What Estrada did was he gave, he sold At a sweetheart deal, the employee's stock in Philippine National Bank to a man who owned Philippine Airlines, which was a borrower of Philippine National Bank, a borrower in default.
So I went to the man who was resident in Manila, who was the country director for the Philippines at the World Bank, and I wrote a letter that said, Dear government of the Philippines, You are never going to be able to get the rest of this loan because you cannot comply with the conditions.
If Lucio Tan, who's a borrower in default, owns all these shares, you're not going to be able to sell the remaining government shares to a minority shareholder.
No shareholder in their right mind is going to come into a bank in that kind of a situation.
And of course the depositors got very, very nervous.
And they withdrew their deposit.
And there was a run on the bank.
And the Philippine Deposit Insurance Corporation had to bail out Philippine National Bank for $500 million.
So we canceled our loan for $200 million.
Philippine Deposit Insurance Corporation had to bail out the bank for $500 million.
And the Japanese had matching co-financing for $200 million.
So there was $400 million worth of canceled projects.
And $500 million worth of bailout.
$900 million worth of problem loan.
And at the end of the project, the World Bank is supposed to evaluate the project to say, you know, whether it had succeeded.
And obviously, the project had not succeeded.
But they said there was no way for the World Bank to have anticipated this turn of events.
And so they rated the performance of the bank as satisfactory.
So I went to, you know, the evaluation department and I wrote down what had happened.
I was reassigned.
I went to the man who was the head of the legal department and I said, you cannot be reassigning lawyers when they're trying to do their job.
This was before the run on the bank.
And then I went with the man who represented the Dutch government to see Jim Wolfenson, who was then the president of the World Bank.
And we said there's corruption going on in the Philippines and Karen's getting reassigned and this is a real problem.
The general counsel is not doing his job.
The governance is a problem and the board is being lied to.
So what did Jim Wolfenson do with all of this information?
He called up my boss and said that I was up there complaining about my boss.
So my boss obviously put me on probation.
And that was in 2002 and 2003.
And what I did was I went to the Treasury Department and I went to the Treasury Department with a lot of information.
There were other whistleblowers inside the World Bank.
We were all working together and we are still working together.
And there are more of us every year.
But anyway, so I went to the Treasury Department and I told the Treasury Department that there was Serious corruption and I've told them another very important piece of information and that is the World Bank is a knowledge bank.
A political scientist named Yasek Kugler came to the World Bank and he came there with a very very accurate what you call a stakeholder analysis.
The computer uses game theory to simulate a problem and so I asked Yasser Kugler if he would give me a reading on rule of law at the World Bank and what this analysis showed was that the United States would lose something called the Gentleman's Agreement which was a convention that the US would always appoint the president of the World Bank and the Europeans would always appoint the managing director of the International
Monetary Fund.
There are two organizations that work together That are called the Bretton Woods Institutions.
One is the World Bank, and the World Bank is supposed to help the different members of the World Bank in projects that will help get the country more productive, improve whatever issues that country may have.
And the International Monetary Fund is supposed to keep the currency and the monetary system functional.
I said to the Treasury Department, this is a very accurate stakeholder analysis.
I'm reporting corruption, and this corruption, not only do you have a problem in the Philippines, damaging the Philippines economy, but you're losing your credibility with the other 187 countries, and they're not going to allow you to continue to have a leadership position in the World Bank.
This was in 2006 and 2007, and that actually happened in 2010.
And I went to the U.S. Congress and, you know, I went to Yale Law School, so I know how to document things pretty well.
And when I went to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, that was when it was chaired by Joe Biden, and Hillary Clinton was a senator from New York there, and Barack Obama was a senator there from Illinois.
And, you know, I met with all of their staff.
I met with some of the senators as well.
And I gave Senator Lugar, who had been having hearings on the World Bank and the problems there.
The Joint Economic Committee had written a letter in 2005 to the World Bank saying that there were real problems with the accounting.
Some of the borrowers had been overcharged on interest And the accountant that reported that was fired, and so there was something called the Luger-Lahey Amendment, which said that staff who are reporting accounting problems, and of course the lawyers as well,
who are trying to get all of the information that's given to the public who are buying the bonds of the World Bank, to make sure that all of that information is accurate, They said that those people, if they're reporting a problem, should not be stuck with something called the administrative tribunal.
The World Bank is an international organization, is immune from the court system.
And so if an employee has a grievance and is trying to prevent corruption, then they're stuck with the internal administrative tribunal and the judges on that tribunal.
are given very lucrative arbitrations.
The World Bank has different windows.
The main window is the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and that makes actual loans with market interest rates.
But then there's something called the International Development Association and there's something called the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes.
That's like an arbitration forum and so the judges Who were supposed to be impartial were getting lucrative arbitration contracts.
They would serve as arbitrators and get paid a lot of money by the World Bank.
Right.
So you can imagine that they're not going to give impartial decisions.
Sure.
So the whole thing, you know, was just rife with corruption and conflict.
Okay, but this is back again in, are we in 2002 at this point?
Um, no.
We were then in 2006.
Okay, but I just want to stop you for one minute, just so that we can, in terms of chronology, figure out sort of where your head was at this time, because you were already at this time, it seems to me even back as early as 2002, starting in 98, you were becoming a whistleblower even back then, right?
Well, one of the things that they did in the World Bank was they gave you something called a 360-degree review, which you ask people who you worked with what your strengths were, what your weaknesses were.
And I had one of those done around the same time that I started seeing what was going on in the Philippines.
And I got a near-perfect score on the question, tell senior management what needs to be improved.
So, I was kind of a built-in whistleblower, and it's hard to explain what I was thinking at the time.
I mean, I knew that I wasn't going to be necessarily making myself that popular, but on the other hand, I also knew, because I had been taught by Aaron Brockes, that the legal department, if it did not fulfill its function of empowering the board, That the whole organization would go to hell in a handbasket.
And I also had this very accurate stakeholder analysis which was telling me that the United States was going to lose its leadership position inside the World Bank if it didn't play by the rules.
So I felt that if I didn't do what I had to do as a lawyer, which I had learned as a professional on Wall Street, if I didn't fulfill my function, that the whole organization would suffer.
And this stakeholder analysis is extremely accurate.
There's a track record.
It was developed in the defense industry and there was a track record.
And that track record is whenever there was a disagreement between the game theory modeling and the analysts, the model would win.
Of course, it's garbage in, garbage out.
What you had to do was you had to estimate who the stakeholders were.
In other words, who would influence a problem, how powerful those stakeholders were, where they stood on the problem, and also if that was very important to them or not.
So, for example, in the question of rule of law, it was very important to the staff.
So that was something that You would call salience.
In other words, would you focus on this?
Or if you were like the President of the United States, is this an issue that's on your desk competing for your attention?
And so I had to estimate what those values were.
And if you go on my website, you'll see in the upper left hand corner, I have modeled, I have shown everybody what that model is.
And on the very first button, which says Board of Governors, if you click on that, Go to page 16 and you'll see what the result was of that stakeholder analysis.
What I found out later was that Yasek Kugler had done this exact model, but not for the internal World Bank, which is a microcosm of the world.
He had done it for the entire world, and what it was showing was that with the Iraq War, The United States had a very clear choice.
And that was, if it was going to be focusing on the regional issue in the Middle East, it was going to alienate its allies.
And it was going to lose NATO. It was going to lose Europe.
And right now, fast forward, look at what's happened with Germany and where the Germans have repatriated their gold from the Federal Reserve and the Federal Reserve has refused.
This is an act of war.
We are in the process of losing Germany as an ally, which is predicted by the model.
I understand.
So to get back to where you were, though, sort of psychologically, if you will, in 2006, at this point you were becoming, in essence, a whistleblower, would you say?
I mean, you'd already sort of been moved from one department to another.
Isn't that true?
No, I stayed in the legal department.
What happened was, at the very end, because of an agreement that I made, I had developed another position and I wanted to move out of the legal department because I was clearly not getting along with my boss.
I had got my boss fired, actually.
And I had been interviewed for the job of general counsel.
And during that interview, the executive search firm asked me, why is there such a high turnover in general counsels?
And I said, that's an easy thing to answer.
It's because the World Bank is not in compliance on the capital markets.
And an executive search firm is required, when they're interviewing a general counsel position, they're required to bring that organization into compliance.
And so when I went up the corporate ladder, I stayed internally at the At the level of the Audit Committee for about three or four years.
Then I went to the Treasury Department for about three years.
And then at that point, that's when I went to the U.S. Congress.
And what happened was Senator Lugar, you know, I said I was interviewed for the job of general counsel.
The World Bank is out of compliance.
It's lying to the board.
There's no way that you have any clue about where the money is actually going because An accountant or a lawyer who tries to correct misinformation to the board gets fired.
They call that internal controls.
There were absolutely no internal controls.
And this is real money.
You can't have a situation like that.
That means that you have absolutely zero confidence in the financial statements.
And when I went to Senator Lugar, don't forget the World Bank, it's a real bank, it's real money, but The shareholders are countries.
So I gave him information.
I had been speaking to the man who was the leader of the board of executive directors, that's called the dean, the person who's been there the longest.
And don't forget, you know, I had been there for 20 years.
I had been active on this strategic compact business, and I had also made it my business to know some of the executive directors.
I went to Senator Lugar with a very accurate stakeholder analysis, which I gave to him, and told him that the United States was going to lose its alliance with Europe.
It was going to lose the gentleman's agreement.
This was very credible information.
And I also gave him a quote from the dean of the board, from Eckhard Deutcher, the German executive director.
I said, he said that the board is treated Like a mushroom, kept in the dark and covered with fertilizer.
Okay.
But at that point, what exactly happened?
Because I thought that you got fairly good treatment by Congress.
There were some motions taken to sort of alleviate some of your concerns at that point.
Is that correct?
Well, they tried.
They pulled out all the stops.
They wrote three letters telling the World Bank not to fire me.
But the World Bank went ahead and fired me.
I was absolutely flabbergasted.
I hadn't expected that.
Now I understand what was going on.
But at the time, it seemed totally inexplicable to me.
I knew that that meant that there was corruption, but I thought it was corruption at the level of the World Bank.
I didn't realize that we were dealing with world corruption.
But I did know that...
Not only were we going to lose the gentleman's agreement, but a couple of years after that I went and I read the macro study which said that the world was going to end up in the currency war.
So this was an issue where I knew from the inside what the problems were and that they had to be addressed.
I just didn't know the scale of the problem, but I knew that it was A problem that I couldn't walk away from.
I felt obligated to stick with it.
And so what I did was after I was fired, I went out and I bought a World Bank bond.
So that meant that the World Bank was not immune.
And I ended up suing the World Bank and the World Bank's auditors in federal court.
And fast forward, and because the board knew me and All the years that I was working the problem, I was writing the countries.
I had written all 188 countries, about six letters.
Some of the countries, I've written many more.
I've really been working very hard with Canada.
And some of the other countries, you know, I don't want to give away too much.
Okay, but when you say you've been working with those countries, to alert them to the corruption within the World Bank or within the entire world and the currency system, etc.
I have been showing them this model.
I have been telling them where we're headed.
Okay.
And they have been working with me.
So I, you know, I testified in the UK Parliament.
I met with a serious fraud office.
And the serious fraud office called the SEC. That was in 2010.
And I got two statements up on the UK Parliament website.
When I say I, I was working with the other World Bank whistleblowers, and one of them is Elaine Colville, and she's in Scotland.
She's the one who told me where the opportunities were to liaise with, you know, it was the two of us making joint statements.
She had uncovered Inaccurate financial statements.
So hold on one moment while we make sure this is working.
Okay, so I think we're back on.
And yes, they're saying we're back now.
So with that in mind, Karen, you had just been finishing the last sentence.
Can you repeat your last sentence?
Yes.
I had testified...
to the UK Parliament about how the serious fraud office was stonewalled when they called up the SEC and I had testified in the European Parliament and I had given the European Parliament a very detailed chronology and what the European Parliament did was they wrote me back a letter saying we have asked the World Bank what they plan to do about this detailed chronology So you see,
this is something where all of the different stakeholders were absolutely working together in a coalition.
And that was the point.
And the reason why I stuck with the problem was that I knew that if I worked hard enough, once the UK Parliament published my statement on the website, you know, I went back to The inventor of this stakeholder analysis, Yacek Kugler.
And I said, can you tell me, is this something which I should stick with because it's achievable?
He said, yes.
Once you got the UK Parliament website to talk about this accounting problem, you just hang in there and you're going to win.
And when I say you, I'm in...
Collaborating with the other whistleblowers who are also, you know, it would be really great.
One day I would just answer the phone and somebody would say, hey, Karen, did you know there was a hearing in Congress?
No, I didn't.
I'd jump in the car, drive down, and get there for the hearing.
And so, for example, one hearing, that was when Secretary Geithner was testifying.
And I went up to his driver and I said, Secretary Geithner ought to know That in the House of Lords, they are saying that they need to get to the bottom of this corruption before they commit more funding.
And I left that with him.
You know, we were a tag team.
Okay, okay.
But what was his reaction, or did you just deliver the message?
I delivered the message, but I have had so many emails with the Treasury Department.
I didn't give up on them.
And at a certain point, what I did was I went to something called the National Advisory Council, which is chaired by the Secretary of the Treasury.
It has the chairman of the Fed in there, Ben Bernanke.
It has the chairman of the SEC there.
This is the group that's supposed to make sure that the World Bank is in compliance on the capital markets.
And so I wrote to them You know, I must have written to them about five times.
At a certain point, I started writing to the Fed itself.
And they, you know, that was the office of the inspector general and their ombudsman.
And they had the nerve to write me back and say they didn't think that the Fed had anything to do with it.
I said, I beg your pardon.
You've got the chairman of the Fed who's on that committee, the National Advisory Council, for a good reason.
And he's not doing his job.
Don't, you know, I'm not letting you off the hook.
So, I mean, when that happened, you know, I would be escalating things each time, and I would always be disappointed because each time I would think, okay, we've got a handle on this.
So after the SEC stonewalled the serious fraud office, I was dealing not only with World Bank whistleblowers, but I'm a lawyer who is a member of different There's something called the International Law Association, which is headquartered in London.
And I knew the man who had been the executive secretary of the ILA. The ILA has chapters in 44 countries.
I said, I can't believe it.
The SEC stonewalled the serious fraud office.
He said, well, Karen, you have to go to the credit rating agencies now.
So I did.
And, you know, when the U.S. credit rating was lowered, that was because they had a front row seat.
This corruption that I'm reporting that wasn't getting resolved.
People can say, well, the credit rating agencies don't do their jobs.
But, you know, it was very serious stuff that they were getting a front row view on.
And so when Standard& Poor lowered the US credit rating, and this is a humongous, I mean, if your listeners are trying to figure out how does this affect me, if you have to pay higher interest on the US debt, This affects you and your children and your children's children.
This is major, major, major.
It doesn't get any bigger than that.
And so Eric Holder's response was to sue Standard& Poor.
And the lawyer who's representing Standard& Poor said, when Standard& Poor lowered the U.S. credit rating, that's when Eric Holder really stepped up his litigation against Standard& Poor.
So, yeah, that is what is going on.
Okay, right.
And now, has Eric Holder had any luck with his litigation against Standard& Poor?
Just curious.
Well, you know, Eric Holder started suing me.
Yes, I guess I did hear that.
That was his response.
Right.
Okay.
Now, when all of this was not resolving...
I started going to the states.
I went to the state attorneys general.
I went to the governors.
I went to the chief justices of the state Supreme Court.
And just recently, I started going to the counties and gotten them involved.
But you're not getting them involved, per se, in the corruption within the World Bank, are you?
You're more getting them involved in the state of the dollar and the precarious situation that we're in as a result of all this.
Or am I wrong?
No.
They are very intimately involved with the World Bank because they have people living in their states who own World Bank bonds.
And are not getting accurate financial information.
The securities laws in the states are called blue sky security laws, and they are not off the hook.
They have got to protect the bondholders in their states.
Okay, fair enough.
Now, but to get back to when you were at the British Parliament, I'm just curious, are there any particular members of Parliament Particular lords, for example, I'm thinking of Lord Blackheath or Michael Meacher or other members of Parliament who might have given you some support or traction, or did you get pushback from various sectors?
You know, there's a whole series of correspondence.
It wasn't just me, it was also Elaine Colville, and then there's been a cover-up.
Right.
Because this is a story that dates back to 2000.
And the reason that it was not covered is not because it was not interesting or important.
It's because it took me a while before I found other whistleblowers who took me by the hand and brought me to the alternative media.
And as some of the people started taking those stories, it got a little bigger.
But it's still very much of a cover-up.
And I learned the difference Between alternative media and the mainstream media and the fact that the mainstream media is owned by the same financial interests that own the Federal Reserve.
This is something that came later.
But my case is actually perfect for documenting that.
My story makes what happened in the Pentagon Papers and Eric Snowden.
I mean, I'm sorry when I say my story.
It's the World Bank whistleblower story.
It doesn't get any bigger than this.
It doesn't get any bigger than that.
And the fact that the people are not being told this is a perfect example of what you call state capture.
That is when the media is deliberately preventing the citizens from learning what they need to know to hold their government accountable.
That's state capture.
Okay, that's on a worldwide basis we're talking.
Yes, and so this corruption is not just endemic to the United States.
As a matter of fact, I mean, I didn't finish answering your story, your question.
I believe it's Lord Snowden that Elaine Colville had gotten in touch with.
But do you remember when there was this interview on David Letterman?
I don't remember the exact date.
It was just before the presidential election.
And David Letterman Gave David Cameron a terrible time, and there was something called Plebgate, which was that the minister who was in charge of development finance, Andrew, I'm blocking on his name.
Anyway, he was called out for getting on his bicycle to drive out of 10 Downing Street.
He got into a fight and insulted one of the guards at the gate and he called him a pleb, which if you're in the United Kingdom, this is a terrible thing to do.
And so the press then went and said that this man had been a headmaster and whipped all the boys and was a terrible human being.
Anyway, so David Cameron was then embarrassed when David Letterman—David Letterman gave him a terrible time, grilled him on history, when was the Magna Carta written.
He just, you know, he mopped the floor up with David Cameron because I had gone to David Letterman.
I'd gone to CBS before that interview, and I had told him about this corruption and this cover-up.
So then, when there were the presidential debates at CBS, I went back to CBS and I said, I would like for you to make sure that the American public knows that Mitt Romney's national security transition planning chief is Robert Zellick, the man who was denied a second term by the board of the World Bank because of his taking dictation from the corruption.
And they wouldn't ask that question.
Okay.
Let me ask you, though, because this is great backup information all about your story, and I really do appreciate it.
But I'd like to sort of move forward a bit here to kind of an analysis of what has gone on.
With your story and the way you kind of view it at this point, because you've been going through, if you will, an education process, would you say?
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
So I'm curious because what we have here is what you started out was with the World Bank.
You seem like a very conscientious individual, a person who kind of dots their I's and crosses their T's.
You had a somewhat idealistic approach to your job at the World Bank initially, it sounds like.
And then you became more and more knowledgeable as time went on as to sort of, if you will, the insider approach Trading and so on that's going on behind the scenes.
But what I'm curious is whether or not you got to the John Perkins side of the street anytime soon at this point and where that happened.
Okay.
You know, I have had a very wonderful education and dialogue with people about what exactly is the John Perkins story and what exactly is the World Bank.
And...
The thing about the World Bank is you cannot paint any institution with a broad brush.
You have to understand the dynamics and the internal politics before you understand it.
If, for example, people from the outside were talking about what is the United States, you have to break it down into its components.
And what you have in the World Bank is you have whistleblowers.
Who understand what the mandate is of the World Bank.
It's a co-op.
It's owned by the world.
And, you know, these people understand how important it is for the World Bank to be able to achieve its mission.
So you've got, you know, 5%, say, of the World Bank trying to get accountability going and hold the different organs inside the World Bank and its oversight agencies to account.
And then you've got Whatever, you know, we can analyze where's the corruption coming from?
And that's what's responsible for the John Perkins story.
Right.
And then you have all the professionals in the middle that are trying to do their job and trying to figure out what's happening next.
And there is an intense, for lack of a better word, food fight going on between the people who are demanding that the World Bank and the people whose job it is to keep the World Bank on the straight path Trying to get this thing back on track.
And so what you have in the countries, it's kind of a perverse thing.
If it's a weak country that has been corrupted, it will not demand good projects.
And it's going to be getting debt, and it's going to be in a downward spiral.
But if you get a country which is knowledgeable, and its government is knowledgeable, they will demand projects That actually caused the country to grow.
And the World Bank also has two lending windows.
For the very poorest countries, the taxpayers are buying down the interest rate.
So you pay it back over 30 years.
You don't have to pay that much interest.
It's like one or two percent.
And if you get a project, Which has a good payback because it creates an industry, it creates transportation that makes it cheaper for all the other economy.
This is an economic organization that knows what the projects are that have very good paybacks.
So it's not a debt trap if you have a good honest government.
What you have though is if you have a government that's been co-opted, then they are going to be taking money And they're not even going to be building the projects.
They're going to be lining their pockets with it.
Okay, but...
So it's a mixture.
Yeah, yeah, and I hear that.
What I'm curious is, are you familiar with what are called trading programs?
Oh, yeah.
You are.
Okay, and can you describe that as you understand them?
Okay, this is in the market where you're going to have the stocks with the trading programs, the...
Timing of the trading is going to be gained by the models.
Is this what we're talking about?
No, I'm talking about something that has to do with a very exclusive program where the very, very rich get involved on a financial level and they draw only, I believe the minimum investment is a million dollars.
Do you know what I'm talking about?
Okay, I've heard of those, but what I have uncovered, Carrie, is that the entire stock market is totally gained.
Totally gained.
And if you are the Federal Reserve, if you are one of a group that has dominated the market, it has 40% of the assets of all of the companies traded, all 40,000 companies traded on the capital markets, Or 60% of their net earnings.
This is really one entity because what they have done is they have taken the same directors and they have put them on the board.
So that's how you have this collusion on the LIBOR interest rate.
And this is a study that was done by the Federal Institute of Technology, three mathematicians.
And so what you have is that that group It's skimming off the top profits in the capital markets.
Okay, well, let me back up a little bit because the trading programs, I was wrong on the numbers.
I often do that, but it's 100 million is your basic investment level.
So they invest $100 million.
They're supposed to get a huge return.
What often happens, and this whole thing is orchestrated, from what I understand, by the Federal Reserve.
Yes, it's the Federal Reserve.
That's exactly what we're talking about.
And it works hand in hand, though, with the World Bank.
And I'm just wondering if you've ever come across these particular programs.
It does not surprise me.
No, I didn't know about that.
But what the World Bank does is it issues bonds There are 180 billion dollars worth of bonds and it takes the earnings from the investments and those earnings is what pays the World Bank's operating budget.
It's not the taxpayers.
The taxpayers are contributing money to buy down the interest rate for the International Development Association and every now and then there's a capital increase.
That's where the taxpayers come in, but most of the money for the operation of the World Bank I didn't know the specifics.
I knew that the traders were earning money for the World Bank budget.
In terms of the corruption, and we're talking, in a certain sense, we're actually looking for the...
It's like the egg or the chicken kind of thing.
In other words, what do you start with first, and where does it all begin?
In other words, what I'm wondering is, in terms of your model...
Are you taking this back to as far as it needs to go?
Because you clearly have been on a learning curve.
And you seem to have gotten as far as the John Perkins information.
And I realize that that's one side of the street.
And there's another side of the street that has to do with how the money flows into the World Bank.
And that side of the street maybe is not quite as familiar to you because you don't really deal with that side, right?
No, I'm looking at...
Carrie, I'll tell you where I'm coming at it from.
Okay.
I'm coming at it not so much from the Bretton Woods institutions themselves, but now, after I left the organization from 2007 until now, I have been dealing with the countries of the world to get them all to work together so that What I'm dealing with now is rule of law in the world.
That is my beat.
Because I know that if I cannot fight this corruption and make this corruption subject to the rule of law, that the entire world is going to have World War III. That's what bankers are very good at.
They never lose when there's a world war.
They earn profits.
And my job is to take this super entity which consists of the owners of not only the Federal Reserve but the Bank for International Settlements.
My job is to be a cheerleader and to get the states and the Congress to work together with their allies and for the entire world to take this corrupt banking, what do you want to call it?
Some people call it the cabal, the article that I was telling you about Calls it the super entity.
So I'm no longer confined to the Bretton Woods institutions.
I am looking at the international financial system, and I am trying to get it cleaned out before we end up in a world war.
I understand.
I guess where I'm going with this is the idea that they have an intention to do just that, to get involved in a world war.
Carrie, they absolutely do.
I can tell you exactly what they're doing now.
Okay, are you aware, for example...
And when I say I, it's not me.
It's the World Bank whistleblowers.
Once I was fired, I started working with what they call themselves the National Security Whistleblowers.
There's a guy named Mark Nowitzki in particular.
I found him because Elaine Colville said, why don't you go look at the SEC whistleblowers?
Mark had been working for a company called Teletech, which was providing the consumer data for such companies as Best Buy.
He knew exactly about the domestic surveillance and in excruciating detail.
All right.
Long before Edward Snowden came up with him.
He couldn't get the information out.
All right.
Is he still out there?
Oh, he's very much out there.
We're in touch, you know, two, three times a week.
Okay, well, put him in touch with me.
I'm giving him information.
Okay, tell him I'd like to talk to him.
I certainly will.
But along these lines, what I want to do is, first of all, I have been told by certain individuals that the Rothschilds own all the banks except for two or three.
Okay, Carrie, you are giving pieces of information.
They're not telling you about how the Vatican owns Bank of America.
They're not telling you about a group called the Bank of England.
Which is partly, you know, it goes back to 1200 before the Rothschilds were even there.
Okay, fair enough.
Okay, how about City of London?
Have you been told about that?
That's what I'm talking about.
There is an agreement between the City of London and the Vatican and that predates the Rothschilds.
Okay, fair enough.
So what is the agreement?
The agreement is for the bulk of humanity To be on the, you know, the short end of the stick and for the elites to do whatever they want with impunity.
That's what the agreement is.
Okay.
And let me ask you this.
Have you been told back channel information that you're not revealing here in this interview?
All right.
I can tell you in a generic way that yes, I am dealing with the shareholders.
Don't forget, I have been writing these countries.
I've been writing them and reporting on the progress.
And I've been keeping very accurate information.
If you go to my website, you will see the letters that I have.
And once my story started getting out, I was being fed other information.
And I, you know, I'm sort of an internal clearinghouse.
And I say, I, it's not me.
It's this group of whistleblowers.
And we know...
That time is on our side and that we are going to win because we are just, you know, it's like we're the control room and we're reaching out to all the citizens on this planet.
Fair enough.
We're the trustees for them.
Yes.
And part of the reason I've asked you to do this interview, Karen, is because I believe that you are in a sort of central zone in regard to everything that's breaking at this time.
Yes, I am.
Yes.
And so what happens is it does come home to roost in the financial system.
By default, you ended up, and the World Bank is central to that whole scenario.
This idea of taking down countries one after the other, making them indebted to the World Bank, and by virtue of being indebted to the World Bank, they are indebted to what we know of as the Cabal, what you may call something else.
But it's actually different groups, and certainly City of London is among them.
Certainly the Vatican is among them.
But in terms of your understanding, what do you think is going on in terms of the agreements that are happening between the various entities and the money that's flowing back in through the World Bank?
Where is it going from there?
Okay.
I guess what I would say is that there's what you were calling the cabal.
We can call it an unholy alliance.
It's not entirely bankers.
Some of these are industrialists.
Some of these are what President Eisenhower called the military-industrial complex.
They are all one ball of wax.
Let me tell you where things are in my particular case, which is that I have insisted to the US Congress that the Congress do its job.
The information that we're talking about belongs in the American public, and the American public needs to hold its government accountable.
Its government is not serving the interests of the cabal.
Its government is serving the interests of its citizens.
And that's exactly the way it is.
Okay, but in 2008, let's say you got some traction in Congress.
But actually, I have to say since then, there may have been a change.
And I'm just curious if you're aware of how the change took place or where it took place.
Because I would say at this point, I'll bet that although some Congress people may have come to you behind the scenes, for the most part, you're not getting any real response from Congress at this time.
All right.
What Congress did They passed a law that said for the World Bank to get its capital increase.
They appropriated the money, but they said we will not disperse a penny until the whistleblowers, the effects of the retaliation, have been eliminated.
What this means is that the whistleblowers are to be reinstated.
I've been speaking to the major shareholders that do not want to have World War III, that do want to have rule of law, And they're all working together.
It's not just that I'm sending them emails.
I'm getting responses.
I'm having conversations.
And we are talking about the World Bank whistleblowers walking right back in the World Bank.
And we are talking about all of the information that we have being used to hold the people who have been holding the world hostage, holding them accountable.
Okay, and how close do you think you are at this point?
We are so close, Carrie.
We're just days away, if less.
Because we also have a deadline.
There's something called permanent gold backwardation.
That is that all of this paper currency that these bankers have been churning out, and the people have to pay interest on this rather than their treasury issuing the currency.
Well, people are losing confidence in this currency.
And you can see this.
You're talking about the dollar specifically, but what about the euro?
I am talking about paper money.
I'm talking about the precious metals.
I'm talking about the fact that you cannot lease gold anymore because the people are afraid That if they own the gold and they lease it out, there's a risk that they will not get the gold back at the end of the term.
So they're not leasing it out.
The leases are too risky now.
That happened in July.
Are you aware of China?
Are you aware of China buying up all the gold around the world?
Yes, but it's not just China.
It's Russia, it's India, and it's also citizens.
Because people...
There was a lot of manipulation on the price...
of gold, where people were selling the gold in the forward market.
That is, you would take delivery in the future.
And they didn't have any gold to deliver, but they were giving a low price for it.
And, you know, they were making reports that, oh, gold is a terrible commodity.
The price is going to fall.
And so they were manipulating the price of gold down.
Well, you're using past tense.
It's going on right this minute as we speak, is it not?
No, it's not credible.
Nobody is believing that they are going to get gold in the future.
You have to look at the current price of gold and the premium that people are taking to take delivery, but there is an incredible shortage.
People can't find any gold to buy now.
There's been such a run on the bullion banks.
And so we're now in a situation that's called backwardation, which is you usually expect that the price that you're going to have to pay for gold in the future is going to be higher.
But it's not.
It's lower because nobody believes that it's actually going to be delivered.
The price for getting gold now this minute, there's a premium because there's such a shortage.
Because people are starting to hoard gold because they are afraid that the paper money, the fiat money, is worthless.
And when you go into a situation like this and you have no, at a certain point, you will not be able to buy any gold.
At any price using fiat currency.
Well, I just talked to somebody, in fact, George Green, yesterday, and he said the same thing's happening to silver.
Exactly.
This is unprecedented.
This is not something that happens often.
And so what has to happen is that we have got to get ahead of the game.
We have got to have clean currency, which is backed by either precious metals or some other A valuable commodity.
And we've got to have a systematic way of retiring these dollars which are now, you know, seen as an embarrassment rather than a currency.
We've got to do all this in short order and people want the World Bank whistleblowers to go back in and as a kind of a seal of good housekeeping to show that yes, all of this corruption is now We're not going forward that way anymore.
Those people are not calling the shots.
Those people are not buying our governments.
Those people are subject to the rule of law.
That's where we are.
And I'm having that conversation with exactly the people that I need to be having that conversation because we are all in this together.
Nobody wants permanent gold backwardation.
There's a very good expert, Antal Feketa, and he's talking to the states to get them We want a situation where everybody is actually patting themselves on the back.
For having risen to the occasion.
And that's where we are, Carrie.
Absolutely.
Okay, but let me ask you this.
If gold is being hoarded, then we have to look at some of the people who are hoarding it on a very large scale around the world.
And I don't know the status of gold in the U.S. at all.
I do know that there has been gold hidden in the Philippines for many, many years, which is part of the problem With why you may have had such a sort of a big splash when you started to expose some of the corruption in the Philippines as just what seems to be a synchronicity or coincidence in your travels.
But nonetheless, if you look at the Vatican Bank, for example, what is the Vatican Bank's role?
Do you understand it?
Yes, I think I do.
The Vatican's role is...
They are the...
They're the crown.
And the IRS money is flowing to the Vatican.
They're at the very core of this.
Right.
Okay, so in other words, they're holding the strings.
Is that what you feel?
I think, as I said, it's an unholy alliance.
And at this point, it's historic.
Absolutely.
We've kicked them out.
They're scrambling.
They have lost.
They're not in control.
Where is Israel in this story?
Okay.
The Rothschilds.
And I'm trying to remember the name of the other family.
I think Schiff is some of them.
But you know, Carrie, what you have to do is you have to, just like I was saying about the World Bank, you have to unbundle it and Back in...
Right, but we have a very interesting...
You say an unholy alliance, and I want to keep you to that right now because I want to just take three major players and have you comment on them, which is one is Israel...
The next is the Vatican and the next is the City of London.
So in this story, you're having to deal...
These are major, major players.
They've been holding the world hostage in a certain sense.
And certainly the United States has its role.
And some say it's reporting to the Vatican.
Some say the City of London holds precedence.
Other people say that Israel is in some way in a hidden position of power.
What is your position on, if you were to give a sort of short synopsis with those three players in mind, what would you say?
I would start out by saying this system only thrives in secret.
And the secret, the cat, is out of the bag.
So it's the same thing for Israel.
Many of the people in Israel itself Don't know about this.
So when you say it's Israel, no, it's those elites.
Sure.
They're the ones that built the bunkers who thought somehow if you had a nuclear war in the Middle East that they would come out unscathed.
These people are absolutely, you know, at the moment they are scurrying around like cockroaches.
So let's, you know, let's unbundle this.
Okay, well Rothschilds then.
You have to find the language to describe who we're talking about because what I don't want is I don't want there to be recrimination across the board so that people are at each other's throats.
They had nothing to do with it.
They didn't know about it.
It's a given that we're not talking about the people in the countries.
We're talking about the people in power within Israel, within the United States, within City of London, which is basically run by the Rothschilds, an alliance with the Rothschilds, certainly.
Which relates to Israel.
And I'm sure Germany has a role here.
In other words, we're really talking than the Vatican.
In other words, what everyone does, in my sector at least, we try to analyze how these power relationships exist.
And we are only talking about the top players.
Okay, but let's be...
A little more explicit as well.
We say Vatican, but I think we're really talking about Jesuit.
They're the ones that own Bank of America.
Fair enough.
Okay?
So, and also, if you, you know, I've been, so I go to the US Congress, and I go to various either congresspeople or senators and their aides, and a lot of these people are very much Trying to do the right thing and some of them actually pull it off and they manage to do the right thing with all of this corruption.
So, for example, look at what Senator Lugar did having six hearings and then when it was time, he wanted to be re-elected and he wasn't even given the nomination of his party.
So, because there was all of a sudden an attractive candidate with a lot of money there.
I mean, what you're dealing...
And, you know, this group is not just doing this by incentive.
They're playing dirty.
And, you know, I don't want to go into a lot of things that I've been subjected to and the other whistleblowers have been subjected to.
But after a while, you kind of get your lay of the land.
You know what to look out for and you avoid it.
But I'm just saying...
So let's...
Let's not paint with a broad brush.
A lot of people have been looking for the opportunity that we now have, which is to clean up this terrible, terrible corruption.
What is your approach in that regard?
In other words, if the rulers who are running this game are in control of the game, and the game itself is corrupt at every level, especially the highest levels, how are you going to go back and use this leverage that you've got, which is quite substantial, although I can see that you're getting pushback from the mainstream media because they are not paying the attention that they should to you.
No, it's not that I'm getting pushback, it's that they do not understand that we've won.
As soon as they understand that this is the story that has legs and they're ignoring it at their peril, at that point, that's when it'll come forward.
But let's go back to the rulers at the top.
It's not as simple as you think.
So let's talk about Barack Obama, okay?
First of all, he was running in a race where there was a lot of money coming in from the outside going to Mitt Romney.
I went to Organizing for America in 2010, and I said, you will get bipartisan support if you start trying to tackle this corruption.
And what he did was, his person I was speaking to said, you know, they said, we'll get back to you.
And they got back to me in a month.
They said, okay, go to Senator Lugar.
And that was when Senator Lugar published that the Government Accountability Office was pulling out of a study into corruption that three senators asked for, Lugar, Leahy and Biden.
So that was bipartisan, yes?
And then look at who Barack Obama has appointed as his Secretary of Defense, Chuck Hagel.
I spoke to Chuck Hagel in 2008.
I showed him the stakeholder analysis and the minute he became Secretary of Defense, I went to the Inspector General's office in the Secretary of Defense and I said, You know, you all have been working on a stakeholder analysis and the next weekend I got a contact of the person who was the project manager for that stakeholder analysis and I've been in touch with them and three different assistant secretaries of defense and there's a group inside the Department of
Defense where the Homeland Security is also involved and you've got ten governors.
Okay, but what's their position?
You mean, what do they say back to me?
No, I mean, are they supporting you?
Are they attacking you?
What's their position?
They are taking my information and I am keeping them informed and I am holding them accountable and I am giving all of the communications I give to them to the shareholders, the Europeans, and I'm saying we are bound and determined not to lose our alliances.
We are bound and determined to have a smooth transition.
They call it a power transition.
We are not going to have a currency war.
We are going to have rule of law and we're going to transparently sit down and work out a smooth way to retire this fiat currency so that there will not be a sudden breaking in the international trade.
That's what's going on.
It's beautiful.
It's the most beautiful thing you've ever seen, Kerry.
And I can tell you that a lot of the alternative media don't understand where we are and what's happening.
And so they're sitting there and they're coming up with stories designed to outrage the public so that there can be a mass demonstration and some kind of a clampdown.
And whenever that happens, whenever anybody is bound and determined to incite civil unrest, I take that information and I go to the governors and I say, all right, what are you doing to calm down the citizenry?
This is what you need to do.
This is the information you need to give them, that we know what's going on and we are ahead of the game and there's nothing to worry about.
We are on top of it.
Okay.
No, I say, I hold them accountable.
I say, if you can't say that, then you better do what you need to do so that you can say it.
But my understanding of Homeland Security is that they're on the side of the cabal.
Of course, they were set up to be on the side of the cabal, but did you see who left Homeland Security?
Bailed out?
Why did that happen?
Right.
What's her name?
Yeah.
It may have been set up with that intention, but their marching orders are now quite different because the cabal is not in charge.
They lost.
Enough information went out.
We're on to them.
Think of a chess game.
Absolutely.
We have had checkmate.
There's no place they can go.
There's no move they can do without us saying, this is what you're trying to do, and we got there first, and it's too late, and you lost.
They lost their players.
They lost their moves.
They have lost.
Okay.
I've been told by certain groups that there need to be arrests of certain people, especially in the high levels of the U.S. government.
Are you aware of that?
Look, you know, every now and then people come to me and start telling me all of this stuff.
And I say to them, there may be people whose job it is to do that, but I'm certainly trying, you know, to keep on top of what's going on.
And so I just don't I don't have time for that.
That's what I say.
That's not my job.
I can't do everything all at once.
I've been listening to your other interviews, and I heard you talk about that you addressed the Joint Chiefs of Staff, correct?
Well, when you say addressed, I mean, I sent them faxes.
Okay, with that in mind, did they reply?
Yeah, I'll tell you how.
I called them up and I said, okay, you are the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Which other groups should I be involving?
And they told me which other ones.
And so I'm now not only involving them, and also that Homeland Security group I was telling you about, but there's a liaison to the US Congress.
I'm involving them.
And there's also A group that's supposed to deal with the public and when you write them, you know, you get a reference number and I send them emails, you know, and what I'm dealing with on the other groups.
I'm just keeping them updated.
So they are very much, you know, aware of everything I'm doing.
Okay.
All right.
And if you say, well, what do they say back?
I'll tell you one of the things that where things are.
And that is, we have got in very short order to get the states also to be issuing this clean currency.
I mean, you've got Basel III, which is saying that the major banks have to have a certain amount of gold backing them up, but that's not enough.
We also have to have, I think, we also have to have the states like North Dakota, which has its own bank, and Virginia is one of the states that recognizes I understand that, but what about going off the dollar completely?
We know that China is moving.
They've just done a deal with Canada, haven't they, to bypass the US dollar?
Well, it's not just China.
Don't forget the BRICS countries, Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa have set up their own development bank.
They did that just before April, when there was the spring meeting of the World Bank.
Okay, and all of these countries moving off the dollar, basically the dollar will no longer be the reserve currency.
Aren't we really talking about whether the dollar loses its position as the reserve currency?
We are talking about the transition, exactly right, because what I was trying to say about the BRICS is that those countries account for 25% of international trade, and those countries have Now agree that they are going to be what you call bartering.
They're going to add up the different trade and at the end of the year or whatever the period is that they agree, they're going to give each other gold for the difference.
So they don't need dollars to finance 25% of international trade that's no longer denominated in dollars.
Okay, isn't this a threat?
Isn't this a threat to the US economy on some level?
When you say threat, It's going to isolate the U.S., right?
Which is what I think that's their intention.
The U.S. is much, much, much less isolated now because we had a cabal where the people inside the country had no clue about how we were breaking international law, how we were alienating our allies, how we were being a hegemony.
They didn't know any of that.
They know it now, and they are going to be changing the way we do business.
So I would say this is not a bad...
I mean, it's terrible that we had to learn our lesson this way.
It would have been much better if we could have intervened before this happened.
But the cabal was too strong.
We couldn't get through and get our story out.
But we've gotten our story out at a time where we can still have a good outcome.
We can agree how we're going to phase out.
Nobody wants to have fiat currency.
It's a terrible system.
It doesn't make any sense.
We never should have had it.
Let me...
Okay, thank you.
And, you know, you're doing a great job, Karen.
I want to thank you very much.
I really do appreciate all of this.
You're a trooper, and you're really addressing, as best you can, all the questions I'm asking.
And I am throwing things at you here, right and left.
I've got a group of people who are listening, who are asking questions a mile a minute.
So what I want to do at this point is...
I'd like to ask you if you want to take, you know, maybe a four minute break or something of that nature, or if you want to go full steam ahead.
I'm ready to go full steam ahead, except that I want to thank you, Carrie, for a wonderful interview.
I mean, this has been really, it's been a pleasure to be able to interact this way.
I think, you know, if you just sort of sit there and, you know, mumble through your teeth.
People just don't get it.
Absolutely.
And it's a fascinating topic.
I think that more articles should be written on this topic.
It's on people's minds day in and day out, and we really need to address the issues here.
Okay, with that in mind, I've got some questions from the audience.
So, first of all, someone wants to know, what is Canada's position in this?
Okay, that's a wonderful question.
First of all, Canada, the University of Toronto, they say they're not a secretariat, but at the University of Toronto, they have a study center for the G8, the G20, and the BRICS. At a certain point, I tried to get information to these entities, and I was told, no, the University of Toronto does not exist to do that.
But on the other hand, because they're on top of these issues from a very good vantage point, they are a major player in that sense.
And also because...
Their board member was included in discussions that the United States executive director was locked out of.
When I first started working at the World Bank, the executive directors all met together at the same time to talk about what was going on.
And when things got really corrupt and really sick, the US executive director was excluded, whereas the Canadian executive director was very much included.
And, you know, seen as part of the solution.
Okay, but they have moved into this arrangement with China.
And is this because they're trying to protect their own currency, in your view?
They're being realistic.
Of course, it's not that they're betraying the United States.
We have not, you know, we have been dominated by the cabal and the American citizens have been ignorant about what was driving our foreign policy.
They would never have agreed to have the cabal go around alienating everybody from the United States.
But that's where we're at right now.
We've got to take responsibility for what happened, whether we knew it or not, whether we were misled by the mainstream media and didn't hold anybody accountable.
We have to take a little bit of responsibility for that as well.
Maybe we should have been a little bit more on the ball.
Along those lines, is Obama or anyone in his office, have they approached you?
During the re-election, I was very much involved with the people on my block.
who had very good connections and you know I was also going to the Democratic Party and I was you know I was letting people know the power of the stakeholder analysis and the conversations that I was having and who I had testified in front of and so people were taking the information in every now and then I would run into somebody who would say look just Take me off your distribution list.
And I would say to them, there is no distribution list, but if you don't want to know what's going on, I'm not going to bother you anymore.
But you've got no direct communication from that office, specifically.
Terry, I'm not going to take no for an answer.
I have been in touch with a lot of people in a lot of ways.
You know, I'm in Washington.
Kids, so I'll give you a for instance, alright?
About four years ago, my daughter's school, she was in the same elementary school and then the same middle school and then the same high school as Larry Summers' kids.
And so at the PTA meetings, I would just go up to Larry Summers.
He wouldn't want to see me, but I would just give him a piece of my mind.
Yeah?
So that's just the way it is.
Washington is a kind of, you know, it's a hothouse environment.
And I was just making it my business to keep everybody in the loop and to tell them that they were not going to get off the hook and that this is where things were.
And, you know, people...
Understand that this is where we have to go.
Nobody wanted the cabal to be dominating the place.
Okay.
All right.
What about Hillary?
Because initially, I believe you got a positive bit of traction with Hillary back in 2008.
Has that changed?
Oh, I mean, I can...
I don't want to be sitting here and telling tales out of school.
No, but all I'm asking for from you is basically to say that, yes, you've gotten some feedback.
You can't reveal the exact details of it.
But have you gotten any response?
That's all I really want to know.
I have interacted with all of these people on a very human level.
I have shamed them.
I mean, I'll give you a real, for instance, okay?
So you'll get the picture.
At Yale Law School, my mother always thought that I should have spent more time in the library.
You know, I don't think I would have liked the prize that Hillary got, but that's beside the point.
So, anyway, a friend of mine was graduating from American University, and the former dean of Yale Law School, Harold Koh, He was given a prize by that school, and many of the graduates were very, very angry with him, with the drones and all of this.
This is not international law, what was going on in this administration.
I had been all over him.
I had been all over his staff.
I had been copying him on everything.
I'd given him every opportunity to weigh in When it would have been a lot better.
A lot better.
And so there he was.
And when he saw me in the audience, I didn't even know that he was going to be giving this commencement speech.
And when he saw me in the audience, and he, you know, it was just, I was embarrassed for him, Carrie.
Why?
It is a betrayal of international law.
To be dropping drones and murdering people, either American citizens or anyone else.
And that was happening on his beat, and it was his job to say no.
And he said yes.
He facilitated a lot of that stuff.
He should have hung his head.
Fair enough.
Okay, so if we get back to the various contacts that you've made, and we look at the playing field, you've become, to some degree, Holder has it in for you, correct?
No, no.
Holder, you know, a lot of these people have, there's no way that they can make it better.
They've just done too much.
And they see the writing on the wall, but there's just nothing that they can do for themselves anymore.
I feel sorry for them.
In terms of Holder, you know, he had his department prosecuting me for trespass.
This is, you know, I told you I had bought a World Bank bond and I had sued in federal court.
And the 188 countries that, you know, are the members of the World Bank settled my lawsuit.
And they reinstated me and I could not get in the door because the company that employs the security personnel, Allied Barton, just wouldn't give me a security badge.
They were ignoring the fact that they did not run the place because they were owned by the cabal and they thought they could act with impunity.
So what's happening with that firm?
They are going to be replaced.
Every single security personnel that is employed by Allied Barton, if you're listening to this broadcast program, Go out and get yourself another job.
You will not have the job you have very much longer.
It's a matter of days.
There'll be another security firm in there, and I will be in there.
That's where we'll be.
Okay.
Excellent to hear.
Let me ask you this.
A person, it's one of the people who's asking a question in the audience.
They're saying, Mark Carney left the Bank of Canada to lead the Bank of England.
Is he a sellout?
Let's put it this way.
He may have a chance to whitewash himself and stay on.
And I wish him all the best if he can manage to do that.
It's not so much...
I'm not looking to paint anybody.
Let them redeem themselves by doing the right thing.
That's all.
Okay, fair enough.
Another question.
IRS dollars goes to the Vatican?
Yeah, I've seen that.
I've seen that flow.
For people that don't know what we're talking about, this is because somebody in their...
I'm so embarrassed for being a lawyer.
Some lawyer, some imaginative lawyer, decided to incorporate the United States, and they even incorporated the states.
And then they buried certain things in very obscure places, and as a result, the IRS revenue is mostly going to the Vatican, and some of it's going to Bank of England, but it's certainly not paying for the goods and services that We think are part of our government.
It's an embarrassment.
How could they have done this?
Well, embarrassment is an understatement for what it is.
It's a crime.
I find it incredible.
I find it incredible.
Okay, but this is a crime against humanity and certainly against the American people, is it not?
But this is no longer the case.
This is no longer the case.
It was very clear that the agreements as to how we're going to go forward We're not going to go forward to any country where you still have this incorporation.
So that's been erased.
That's been undone.
That's no longer the case.
That's my understanding.
Okay.
Well, it'd be good if you could send us some links or some documentation to back that up.
I just read a document that says that, and I believe it to be the case.
Okay.
All right.
Well, like I said, as a follow-up, anything you want to send me along those lines, I know people We'll want to hear more about it.
Are there other whistleblowers talking about that, what you're just talking about, the fact that the incorporation of the United States and the city of Washington, D.C., and all of this nonsense has been turned around?
You believe that this is really happening?
Let's put it this way, Carrie.
My understanding is that that is now currently the case, but here's the point.
What absolutely has to happen is that people who understand what the issues are have got to follow them up and stay involved so that if for some reason, although my understanding is that it's been fixed, that's not good enough.
Your audience needs to know the absolute state of affairs and needs to hold the people whose job it is to tell them that And the very first place that they have got to go is to their mainstream media and fire them.
Don't buy, you know, don't turn on the TV, don't buy the newspapers, because anything you're getting there has been printed by the same people that brought you the incorporation of your country and your IRS revenue going to the Vatican.
So just don't patronize them and try to find out what's actually the case.
Anywhere but the mainstream media.
Okay.
A person is asking, how do you feel about the average person buying gold and silver?
If you can get your hands on it, go for it.
Okay.
I was actually told last night by George Green, I mean, what you're saying is you have to buy it forward.
They don't have any, they can't, they have no stock.
No, don't buy it forward.
What you're getting there is a piece of paper that's going to be dishonored.
Pay the premium and get the real thing in your hand or don't bother.
Fair enough.
You know, I'm saying this better but wiser.
I bought something called an ETF and those things are, you know, worthless.
Okay.
Another person is asking how many state governors and state attorney generals have replied to your letters and what assurances do you have the states will comply?
That is a marvelous question.
You can see my correspondence from a year ago with the Attorneys General in my lawsuit.
I've got that as an exhibit.
So if you go under Court of Appeals and then you'll get a docket list and you'll have two documents that have exhibits, click on the first one and there you'll see an index and somewhere it says State Attorneys General.
You'll see, you know, what I've been getting and following up with And, you know, I have been declaring victory and people have been criticizing me and saying that I'm overly optimistic.
And one woman in particular, I won't mention the state, but she said, you know, my mortgage was foreclosed on without proper documentation.
My pets were killed.
I protested and I've had a horrible time and I'm blaming my governor.
And, you know, I've This was on my Facebook page.
And I went back to this person and I said, I'm so sorry to hear that you've had this terrible experience.
What on earth can we do about it?
And we thought about it and we came up with the idea of getting the counties involved.
So I went to the National Association of Counties and, you know, I was dealing with the board for a while.
And, you know, having been in this business of being a whistleblower for a while, I knew that doesn't really cut it.
So I called up the board again and I said, okay, I want to get more involved with you all and I'm able now to get through to some people directly who want to hold their county governments accountable.
And they said, well, you know, there's nobody left here because we're all on the way to Fort Worth for the annual meeting.
So I said, oh, okay.
And then I got in touch with one of the people who was on my Facebook page and I said, I'm really busy I'm trying not to get thrown in jail by Eric Holder's Department of Justice.
It was actually the DA for the District of Attorney that was prosecuting me for trespass.
So I said, so I really don't have time to go chasing after the counties.
Could you do it for me?
And they did.
They did.
And I was just talking to somebody else today and I said, we've got to follow up with that organization because that's where it's at.
We've got to get all of the counties to be holding their governors accountable.
I mean, a governor may, in their heart of heart, think that this is a waste of time.
But if they want to be reelected, and if people are on to them, they aren't going to do the right thing.
So that's, you know, all of this is a work in progress.
Okay, someone's asking, if fiat money is being transitioned out, what is it going to be replaced with for the ordinary people?
What would be the medium of exchange?
And you're just saying that we would, in theory, back the dollar with gold.
Is this not what you're saying?
That is not what I'm saying.
Okay.
There may be, look, the banks that are currently, we're not going to get rid of the fiat currency overnight.
There's going to be a period of time where the paper dollars are going to be there, but people will have confidence that the American people are resilient enough and our economy is going to be strong enough and the fact that we don't have to pay interest on fiat paper and it's only going to be getting better, this is going to stand us in good stead.
So what I expect we're going to have, first of all, I'm not in the bank yet.
I haven't been having these conversations, so we're going to be sitting at a table and we're all going to be talking about What makes the most sense?
How are we going to accomplish this?
And, you know, I've been in touch with the states.
I want the states to be having this conversation as well.
And I got a letter back from one of the states saying, I have other things that are more pressing.
And I, you know, I live into them.
I said, you have nothing at all that is more pressing than this.
Let me ask you as a corollary to that then, are you going to be meeting with the banks?
You are going to be meeting with the head of Bank of America, Wells Fargo, etc., etc.?
I doubt that they're going to want to meet with me, frankly, and I don't really particularly want to meet with them.
All right, well then how are you going to have traction in this?
I'll be dealing with all of the different economies that have all these fiat dollars, We are certainly going to be doing everything we can to keep international trade flowing seamlessly and we're going to be very very pragmatic and do whatever works.
So what I expect is going to happen is there's going to be a lot of options and people are going to pick and choose and I expect there are going to be more and more state banks coming online and I think the Treasury is probably going to start issuing the dollars instead of the Fed I think the Fed's days are really numbered.
Okay.
Well, I actually had thought that that already started happening.
Yeah.
Well, it's going to, you know, it's going to pick up.
And all of this is going to be going forward very, very quickly.
Very quickly.
And we're going to also have to think about what happens to these banks when they don't have their, you know, how are we going to be retiring these banks in a way that doesn't, you know, the The dead body falling and crashing everybody when it comes down.
We have to find ways of smoothing the transition.
Along those lines, are you familiar with what is called the revaluation of the Iraqi dinar?
Yeah, I've been reading about that.
Some people were saying that that was what the The cabal thought was going to be the new reset currency.
That's not on the cards.
Nobody wants it.
It's not happening.
If you have a chance to buy Iraqi dinars, I mean, look, don't hold me to it.
I'm not the world's best investment advisor, but I would find it very, very, very unlikely.
Okay, fair enough.
I mean, I know that the Iraqi economy needs currency.
But they will get enough currency for their own economy.
And I understand that the Iraqi dinars has been printed in quantities that, you know, that far surpass that.
Okay.
All right.
What about the notion of black projects and the money that's flowing into black projects?
Are you aware of that?
Yes.
I mean, that's been our economy.
I mean, it has been an incredible Incredible embarrassment.
And there have been all these secret societies too, not to mention our intelligence agencies.
All of this has got to be, you know, just Ended.
It's an embarrassment.
Well, it's all fair and good to say it's got to be ended, but do you have...
Look, are you talking...
Because this is where you actually need, to some degree, a coup in the American government in order for this to take place.
I mean, I don't see these people walking away just because you try to wrap their knuckles and tell them that they've been bad administrators or whatever else you want to call them, which I can think of a lot of worse names.
But you know what I'm saying?
In other words, we're talking about an economy, a secret space program.
And this, in many ways, is Camelot's specialty.
And whereas I didn't call you up to interview you on this score, I mean, one cannot sit here and be naive.
If you know that this is going on, you know that the money is being funneled in that direction, what is your solution?
What are the people that you're in contact with?
How do they intend to deal with that situation to your knowledge?
Have they given you any ideas?
Carrie, I haven't had that conversation, but I can tell you this.
Before I came to the World Bank, I used to work at the U.S. Export-Import Bank.
That was Boeing's bank.
All right?
Okay.
And I'm an economist, in addition to being a lawyer.
So I know that you are not going to shut down these defense industries or these aerospace industries overnight, you know, turn off the crane and retool without huge multiplier effects.
No, nobody has talked to me about the new business plan and turning tanks into something that makes sense domestically.
A lot of people have to be doing this planning now, obviously.
Are you in talks with members of the military, what I call white hats?
I'll tell you how I am, yeah.
There is a network of whistleblowers.
One of the very first publications that I went to was Veterans Today.
That's the stronghold of a lot of these people.
I know they're there.
I know that they're busy and active.
I'll tell you what really depressed me two days ago.
Really depressed me.
I got a phone call from some group that wanted to tell me about the people in the military that were planning on doing some kind of a coup.
I said, you're calling the wrong person.
I'm a lawyer.
You know, don't try to destabilize me by talking to me about stuff that I do not support.
And I don't think you're doing anybody any good at all.
And, you know, I'm hanging up on you.
But I know that these people are out there and that they're, because of the mainstream media, there are people who think that's their only option.
And so what I do when I get calls like that is I turn them around as quickly as I can.
I go to this group that I was telling you about in the Department of Defense.
I don't, you know, I didn't get a phone number or a name, but I said, you know, they're out there and if you don't move this transition along As quickly as you can and as publicly as you can, you are going to really cause a lot of havoc.
Absolutely.
I guess what I would say is that anybody who's listening to this, who feels like they need to do something, find a way to get this story out because we have no...
I mean, I'm very grateful to you, Carrie, for putting me on your show, but if you look at the numbers, Just the sheer numbers of people whose only source of information is the mainstream media.
We are very vulnerable to this kind of destabilization.
I mean, I can say that this is going to happen, but the cabal is certainly a worthy opponent, and I don't think they're ever going to give up.
They just liked the trough too much, those pigs.
Okay, fair enough.
Okay, someone wants to know, how do you keep yourself safe?
This is a good question.
For people who ask me that, I say go back and look at the chronology.
I've been working on this project now for 15 years and when I was the most at risk was in the early stages when nobody knew what I was doing except for the crooks.
And they knew very well what I was doing.
And they knew very well what I was trying to do.
Because I was always very explicit about the fact that I was not going to move for those crooks.
And they were going to move for me.
Okay.
But one of the things that I did, probably at the most dangerous, and this is somebody, you know, I was just very, very lucky to be involved with such wonderful people.
And a lot of the people that were next to me were taking hits, you know.
I mean, think about Michael Hastings, for heaven's sakes.
So what I did at one point was I read an article in Atlantic Monthly about a guy named Larry Garrison who became my public relations guy.
And I went, you know, if you go on my website, you'll see that there's an interview on YouTube from, I guess it's almost two years ago.
Anyway, he stayed with me.
He stayed with me and people knew that if something happened to me, that story was going to be out there and what I was trying to do and what happened to me and who would have been responsible for that.
So there was always going to be huge consequences if something happened to me.
I've just gotten a lot of help.
People have tried everything.
And so, after somebody tries it, then I know to look out for it.
Okay, well, let me just say, it appears that you're using what is, in many ways, the Camelot motto, which is, the best place to hide is out in the open.
Yes.
And you are, the more famous you are, the better off you are, really.
That's right.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Okay, fair enough.
Let's see what we've got here.
The...
Okay, I... The Rothschild bankers holding the race card on behalf of black nobility powerhouses, central bank owners, how can the World Bank possibly trump the Rothschild Vatican City of London?
All right.
You need to hear...
I'm not the one to answer this question.
There's a guy named Jonas Biru who needs to answer this question.
He's from Ethiopia.
And he was a guy who, inside the World Bank, was publishing the premier Journal on development economics.
And they never let him have the title of editor.
And he waited and finally the guy that was, you know, he was doing all the work and this guy was getting all the credit and that guy retired and then came back and was going to continue on as editor.
And Jonas said, no, this isn't happening.
You know, and anyway, so Jonas has gotten all of the black people inside the World Bank who have been just Completely discriminated against and he has documented everything that's happened to them and he's one of the whistleblowers that's going to go right back in that place and the Human Resources Department is certainly not going to be involved in recruiting and making decisions anymore.
Their day is over.
I think the quick answer to that question is that We've learned a lot having lived a system and we know that it's not going to continue that way.
And as long as there are people who are discerning and can see the difference between, you know, what's for real and, you know, what's hypocritical, we'll be fine.
I mean, we know what it is to walk the talk and that's, you know, that's what's going to be going on.
Okay.
All right.
Well, with this situation the way it is, are you feeling that the intelligence agencies, for example, That there is some communication that can be had within those groups and that there are White Hats.
You mentioned Veterans Today.
I certainly know some things about Veterans Today.
And I know that they're also sort of a place where a lot of disclosure on lots of levels is happening right now.
What about the CIA, for example?
I can give you a An anecdote about the CIA. And that is, I got a phone call from a guy who, you know, I had dated his father for many, many years before I got married.
And his father was divorced, and so his children would come and stay with us on the weekends.
And so this guy called me up.
It wasn't his father that called me up.
It was him that called me up.
And, you know, he said, your life sounds a little bit like a Grisham novel.
And then he said, you have to do what's right for you and your family.
And I didn't like that one bit.
So I got off the phone and I googled him and I saw, you know, sure enough, he had been working for the CIA. And I called him back.
And I said, Jerry, You know, I don't know that many people that work for the CIA, but I Googled you and I see that you did.
So if you would do me a really big favor, why don't you, if you happen to bump into some, you know, of your former colleagues, why don't you tell them I don't intimidate?
Okay, fair.
Very good.
Okay.
All right.
Well, I've been bribed, Carrie.
I've been bribed a lot.
Okay.
Well, what you mean is you've been offered bribes, but you haven't taken them.
Is that what you mean?
That is correct.
Yes.
That's not, you know, it's not because I'm such a great human being.
It's because I don't happen to get pleasure by taking money and being a stooge.
I get pleasure by doing the right thing.
That's my reward.
So, yeah.
No, I just...
When these people, when these goons call me up, and, you know, they call me up and bother me and bother my family, and I said to the last one, I said, okay, if you call me up again, I've called the police, and you are a nuisance.
You know, get out of my life.
Okay, someone is asking, it's sort of a no-brainer that this is the case, but I'm going to ask it anyway, just so you can reply and, you know, whatever.
Someone is saying, are you aware that people are the real value?
Yes.
Yes, absolutely.
Absolutely.
And that's, I mean, that's exactly what I was saying before.
When somebody's going to offer me money to do something that's going to make me miserable, And ashamed of myself.
I know what that feels like.
That's not going to be what makes me happy.
That's not what makes me happy.
I mean, I'm somebody who, I know what makes me happy.
I like to play the cello.
Give me, you know, sure, it would be nice to have a Stradivarius, but I'm not that great a cellist that I need to play on a Stradivarius.
You know, I know that people are the value.
Okay, thank you.
Karen, this has been a wonderful interview.
I've enjoyed it.
Your energy is just fabulous.
You're a real trooper, a very, very courageous woman, and it's lovely to talk with you, to get your take on all of these things.
You are fighting the good fight, and I do appreciate it.
I want to thank you for your service to humanity, and I thank you for joining us here at Project Camelot.
Thanks so much for having me, Karen.
All right, you take care.
▲
Export Selection