So many obituaries are little more than, name, date of birth, date of death and an address of where to send flowers.  This truncation of a life was the result of newsprint costing money and thus printing as much in as little space as possible.  But the digital world is changing that. It also represents the ability to share for so many who have lived rich and full lives which should be celebrated – if even in just on last moment post mortem. Here is an example of such a “celebration”:

Blanchard, Michael “Flathead”

1944 ~ 2012

A Celebration of the life of Michael “Flathead” Blanchard will be held on April 14th, 3 pm 8160 Rosemary St, Commerce City. Weary of reading obituaries noting someone’s courageous battle with death, Mike wanted it known that he died as a result of being stubborn, refusing to follow doctors’ orders and raising hell for more than six decades. He enjoyed booze, guns, cars and younger women until the day he died.

Mike was born July 1944 in Colorado to Clyde and Ethel Blanchard. A community activist, he is noted for saving the Dr. Justina Ford house from demolition and defending those who could not defend themselves. He was a Republican delegate, life member of the NRA, founder and President of the Dead Cats MC. He loved music.

Mike was preceded in death by Clyde and Ethel Blanchard, survived by his beloved sons Mike and Chopper, former wife Jane Transue, brother Stephen Blanchard (Susan), Uncle Don and Aunt Cynthia Blanchard (his favorite); Uncle Dill and Aunt Dot, cousins and nephews, Baba Yaga can kiss his butt. So many of his childhood friends that weren’t killed in Vietnam went on to become criminals, prostitutes and/or Democrats. He asks that you stop by and re-tell the stories he can no longer tell. As the Celebration will contain Adult material we respectfully ask that no children under 18 attend.

In a few short paragraphs someone has taken the time to get both the life and the sprit of the man.  Well done!

The problem is this: If you currently wish to invest in business development in Myanmar, you either need to use cash and bypass their local banking system.  So while there is a ban on investing in certain types of industries in Myanmar, even if you worked with a non-banned entity – you still have to encounter and work with their financial system.

From Bloomberg News, April 2012

“The U.S. will allow companies to invest in certain sectors of Southeast Asia’s fourth-smallest economy, Clinton said on April 4, without offering specifics. They may include telecommunications, agriculture, tourism and banking, according to two senior administration officials who briefed reporters the same day. Nothing has been decided, they said. European Union foreign ministers will meet April 23 to reconsider sanctions, which are less restrictive.”

Further,

April 24 the European Union confirmed it was suspending most of its sanctions to reward Myanmar’s recent wave of political reforms.

So while we can see a deliberate effort by Myanmar to open up to the world, an effort in the US and EU acknowledging this – the laws are still the laws… and as of this writing, are still in effect…

But, entrepreneurs are gamblers.  As gamblers, entrepreneurs may be looking for “work-arounds”, which might include:

• Having a family member in Myanmar own everything.
• Working through an offshore company.
• Using a citizen of a county that does not have sanctions against Myanmar and work as a consultant.

We cannot tell you how much worse structuring makes a violation, but it is a bunch.  Not only are you aware you are breaking the law, but by crafting elaborate structures of subterfuge to hide your violations you are demonstrating to the authorities by the act of creating the elaborate structures of subterfuge that you were in the wrong, knew it and tried to hide it.

Yet, you still – even if you get it right, have to know who the counterparties in Myanmar are to insure you are not doing something wrong.

In the end, we recommend compliance, and we are not encouraging anyone to violate the laws in place.  Sanctions Compliance can be tricky, and if in doubt, we suggest that you check with OFAC first. We also suggest that you may be well served to check with proper legal counsel who specializes in these areas of practice before you enter into a business arrangement involving a government sanctioned entity.

But also, as entrepreneurs, we recognize that you want to have that edge.  We understand that.  Perhaps it may be time to schedule that trip to Myanmar and lay the foundations for future opportunities, because as we suspect, the day will likely come when sanctions against Myanmar are lifted. And you will be compliant and ready to strike.

Are we a bunch of robots? No, of course not. We are living, breathing beings who think, feel, love, offer help and support, create, develop ideas, form beliefs and express ourselves in countless ways. There is definitely more to life than our routines. There is an immensely rich spiritual life we can enjoy, if we allow ourselves to.

By building on the spiritual side of your life, you bring balance and a sense of inner peace to your existence. Developing your spiritual side offers numerous benefits, including achieving a sense of purpose for yourself and minimizing the effects of daily stress.

In my autobiography, Another Day Without A Cage: My Breakthrough From Self-Imprisonment To Total Empowerment, I share with my readers several experiences I went through that built me up spiritually. Growing up, I was well aware of a spiritual guidance, and through my many ups and downs, that spiritual sense continued to uphold me and bring serenity. A well-balanced life is one where the spiritual component is strong.

How do you strengthen your own spiritual life? Try these tips:

1.            Pray or meditate – or do both. Do what is most comfortable for you according to your belief system. Meditation will quiet your mind and relax your body, allowing you to think more clearly, feel emotionally stronger, and even rest better. Prayer will connect you to something greater than yourself. Feel free to express your innermost thoughts during prayer, from thankfulness to any concerns you may be experiencing to your heartfelt goals and ambitions. Many people find strength through some form of prayer.

2.            Assess your values. You live by a system of values. Every so often, it is important to reflect on these values. Do you know what your values are? Are they posted where you can see them? Are you living by them? Once you have acknowledged them, assess where you stand with them, and adjust your life as needed so that your choices and actions match up with your core values. For example, if risk-taking is one of your core values, then taking risks should be a part of your life. If honesty is one of your core values, reflect on this value often to verify that you are living true to yourself.

3.            Help someone else. Nothing boosts your spiritual life like reaching out and helping somebody. Whether the recipient is someone in your inner circle or a total stranger doesn’t really matter. What is important is that you take the time to improve someone else’s condition. Remember that our animal friends count, too. Whatever we do to help another will come back to us as spiritual growth. My life changed when I adopted my two Basset Hounds Apollo and Winslow, two of the funniest and most loving characters of my life. They remind me often and eternally of the importance of animal rescue and the power we all have to change others’ lives.

Whatever your own personal meaning of spirituality, find it, develop it, and live it and watch your life evolve.

Fr more on Gail Kasper please do visit  http://www.gailkasper.com  please also visit The Top 1% Club.

The story of the books stores is also the story of so many other retail models; music stores, specialty stores, camera stores, sewing supply stores, mobile phone stores, computer stores, even office supply stores, cigar stores, and travel agents.  So now we have a term we had coined called strip slums.  So many of them litter one’s view in a day’s drive: empty parking lots, damaged buildings, fences up, graffiti everywhere.  It is the natural progress of making certain business models obsolete.  Just like the era of big steel mills came to an end with more efficient mini-mills, the business that used to rent space in strip malls are being replaced by e-commerce.

We are not saying that all strip malls will be closing – no, but at 38 sq feet for each person in the US – strip malls are definitely over-built.  The tenants of today are there because there is no “on line alternative” – things such as barbers, nails, muffler shops, bars, restaurants, dry cleaners, etc…. these are the new tenants.

What I have found funny are those “experts” saying that the future of the strip mall is mixed-use, residential and commercial.  What part of the business model is dead do they not seem to understand. These expert’s opinions are doubly flawed if you want me to live in a space above a muffler shop or a bar.

E-commerce is changing the way consumers interact with merchants, if the merchants do not change the suppliers of the merchants will be hurt too.  Doubling down on a losing proposition is doubling a loss.

Technology effects us in so many ways – even the low tech business of renting space.

Here is the problem:

It is paperwork (e.g. “bureaucracy”)….  The cost and complexity of completing U.S. tax returns for American taxpayers abroad is painful, time-consuming and certainly not for the faint-of-heart.

Things that are tax-free in his current country of residence are not necessarily tax-free in the USA.  He had an opportunity to enter into a startup business with some friends in Europe.  Because he is a U.S. taxpayer, the tax compliance costs are monstrous.  If they use a corporation, he has a Form 5471 problem.  If they use a partnership, he is a U.S. taxpayer with an interest in a foreign partnership.  He has FBAR and Form 8938 problems.  The financial structure of the proposed startup was optimized for the European tax/fiscal landscape, but does not work for US tax purposes. If he has mutual funds, he has Form 8621 problems.

While the tax burden is minimal in the in the US because he pays so much income tax in the EU, it is still messy and adds complexity and cost to his U.S. tax return and related filings. There is a real annual compliance cost of dealing with CFC, PFIC, foreign tax credits and foreign earned income exclusions.

It is not that the grayman will owe any more taxes in the US – this is highly unlikely.  But the compliance cost for working in multiple countries can be enormous and very costly.

While there are work-arounds for short term matter, longer term work requires coming into compliance and the cost of the professionals to assist him in this process.

Also – for another interesting comparison – take a look at the chart for the difference between military security and private security – once you figure in the total cost of deployment and benefits….  

This Executive Protection article was written or edited by Barron James Shortt, the Executive Director of the IBA. http://www.ibabodyguards.com

In February, Aleynikov was able to successfully have the decision overturned on appeal.  The three appellate judges agreed that Goldman went to great lengths to secure the code and that the profits earned by Goldman through the use of this code only worked if nobody else had it.  A clear sign that the judges recognized that the code was real solid Intellectual Property and Critical Information (IPCI).

The DOJ’s argument was trying to convince the judges that the IPCI was a tangible asset,  a hard asset.  The judges said that the 20 year old Economic Espionage Act was clear in it intent to address the transfer of money and not the theft of source code – IPCI.

Do not misunderstand the judges’ knowledge that Aleynikov was a thief and that he breached his agreement with Goldman Sachs.  The judges knew he had stolen the source code from Goldman Sachs. Aleynikov downloaded hundreds of thousands of lines of code and stashed them on a server in Germany, and then tried to erase his tracks at Goldman.  Goldman only noticed an anomaly in the volume of data leaving the network and only then began monitoring what was going on.

Goldman did everything right. I have looked at this case from afar and can see no serious errors on their part. Aleynikov was a programmer and had helped write some of this software code and he was entitled to access the code and work with the code.  A spike in usage occurred and Goldman began monitoring Aleynikov.  Goldman took their own action and got the Feds involved.  The Feds did a good job – for the most part, except for their clearly not understanding the different between tangible and intangible property and having outdated laws to work with.

For a little fun – the Economic Espionage Act  was passed in 1996.  So, what else happened in 1996?

• Apple Computer officially unveils the Newton 2.0 operating system.
• Sun Microsystems ships the Java 1.0 development kit
• Microsoft releases the Windows 95 Service Pack 1 operating system update
• The Fox Broadcasting Company airs The Simpsons TV show in the US
• Palm ships the Palm Pilot handheld computer
• Linus Torvalds releases the Linux kernel version 2.0
• Microsoft releases Microsoft Internet Explorer 3.0
• Apple Computer buys NeXT, Steve Jobs’ software company

The fact is IPCI, its creation, use and deployment, is far, far ahead of the law.  OPSEC, or as I prefer to call OPSEC in private industry OP-IPCI, is ever more mission critical for those who use IPCI as part of their tasks to insure exclusive use of their IPCI.  Relying on the law, when the law is 10 to 20 years behind the IPCI – well, as you can see in this case with Aleynikov  – it simply does not work! Loss prevention is the only reliable way to secure the IPCI assets.

The risks here are two-fold.

A cloud-based application makes a very attractive target for hackers – if you break in you have all of the data – not just one persons or company’s data.  It is a Fort Knox approach – store all the gold (eggs) in one place and make it a fortress.  If you can recall any recent headline some very big virtual fortresses have been hacked.

You would not be the only user of the cloud. I am sure all of your information, especially video and music have been legally obtained.  No stolen software code uploaded from a work site to be downloaded later at a lab in Marseilles, no plans for Nano-satellite swarms uploaded to the cloud to be down loaded to a torre de apartamentos en Ciudad del Este.  But other users of cloud may have done just such things.  Think of the cloud as a computer pool and someone has just peed in the pool. Under such circumstances a government, the US is more aggressive than any one in this regard, can size all of the data and shut down the cloud.  In other words, the government is exercising the power to seize all of the legal property held in a storage facility because a handful of crooks have committed illegal act in their portion of the cloud.

Sound far fetched – look at what the US, Hong Kong and New Zealand did to Mega Upload.

Due diligence’s primary focus is to look for risks and to aid management in quantifying those risks. The gossamer security and operational risks of the cloud are all too real.

It is simply ridiculous to store primary data on and only on ephemeral, third-party servers—or on any servers. Anyone who has years worth of essential work or mission critical data on third party devices without redundant backups is just poking a stick in a tiger’s face, we all know the outcome – it just when not if.

(1) Whether fraud can ever be clearly defined.

(2) Whether fraud can ever be predicted.

(3) Whether fraud can ever be eradicated.

Whether fraud can ever be clearly defined.

Objection 1: Fraud is loose term that is not well defined even in western cultures.  What is considered fraud in one country in one place at one point in time would not even rate as a crime in other locations at other points in time.  Many cultures also grade or have accommodations for various degrees of lying… so why should we not also have accommodations for various degrees of fraud – many of which would harvest little gain and no punishment?

Objection 2: Fraud is nothing more that an undesired consequence of an enchantment.  After all fraud is nothing more than two people entering into an arrangement, for what purposes we might never know, and one is using their skills of enchantment to move the speed of the relationship along.  It everything works out well it is enchantment – if not it is fraud…  It seems so much sits upon poorly formed expectation as opposed to fact.

Objection 3: One mans fraud is another man’s ignorance.  We cannot protect people from their collective ignorance’s and their uninformed and misinformed acts, founded upon these faulty foundations of fact.  So what the law has done, since it is rightly so often hard to prove a fraud – a specific act is now a fraud by statute – thus eliminating any need for a messy complex and tiresome inquiry into the nature of a man’s actions that caused a loss.

On the contrary: We all know a fraud when we see it.

Permit me to address these for you our readers…

We as a population consider fraud, in a commercial transaction, as an unfair outcome.  If one party has more knowledgeable, or superior set of facts, or just is in a position to make better use of that knowledge – and makes what one person seems as an unfair profit or some unfair advantage – this is sufficient to allege fraud.

Fraud is necessarily a dance between two parties were Party B is being steered by Party A to take an action that is favorable to A.  Yet this seems weak, as this would describe any sales transaction.  Fraud thus is not one element but several chiefly consisting of a known lie by Party A to Party B (either by commission or omission) as an inducement into a transaction that based upon the lie B is unable to clearly ascertain the probable outcome(s) of the transaction.

Reply to Objection 1: Fraud is well defined.  What varies from culture to culture is the acceptability of the scope of a fraud, and or ethnic group was the victim, not whether some is or is not a fraud.

Reply to Objection 2: Enchantment or deception is part of the process of a fraud to get a partying to willingly make a choice that is most likely to be detrimental to themselves, if only they had an awareness or understanding of the full ramifications of a choice opportunity.

Reply to Objection 3: Very smart people make some very bad choices, agreed.  Many act impulsively or out of an unfounded trust.  Yet, we ignore in this the subject matter. A doctor of medicine is not likely to know the intricacies of international bonds nor is the bond dealer knowledgeable enough to make a fully informed choice on a new medical device offering a cure for a dreaded ailment. The choices of smart and dim can both be mislead and thus there should be no safe harbor based upon the status or qualifications of a victim. Further, while it is in your authors firmly founded opinion that a fraud should be proven and not permitted by statute I understand how a well meaning though mis-guided choice has been made into law.

Whether fraud can ever be predicted.

Objection 1: Lightening and fraud have similarities, while mostly unpredictable – when the financial storm hit, lighting is more likely to strike the high ground as fraud is to strike the dim wallet.

Objection 2: Fraud is easy to predict it is like any other crime one of opportunity.  If you give someone the opportunity to defraud you they will.

Objection 3: As long as you never hire a criminal and do good background checks people will not commit an act of fraud.  Background checks reveal a great deal.

Again, permit me to address these objections:

We have long been taught that fraud requires Opportunity, Pressure, Rationalization – this is the fraud triangle, but I would also like to add – two more points to give a 2 dimensional model a third dimension – a fraud tetrahedron if you will.  Those two points I would add are Certainty and Chutzpah.  The certainty that in their minds they will “get away with the fraud and the chutzpah to actually commit the fraud.

Reply to Objection 1: The analogy of the storm is a good analogy as the shift in winds and heavy cloud cover precedes most storms and lightening strikes.  So to are the predictable “weather patterns” with fraud. One can see a storm when one finds lax processes and controls, lack of understanding vulnerabilities of a given organization, or choices made without proper due diligence. The weather not always predictable nor is a particular fraud – but we can make educated assumptions based upon ambient conditions and knowledge of fraudulent behavior.

Reply to Objection 2: Fraud is at least a two party dance.  We all know people who, if they came into a store that was for the moment unattended as the attended was in the lavatory would not take even the smallest of items.  We also know others that would pocket goods even if the attendant just glanced the other way.  It is as much about the person and their sense of right and wrong as it is about the climate

Reply to Objection 3: Background checks provide support in choice making if two things and looked at and IF the background checks are done correctly.  The first is to check all of the references and credentials to see if they are congruent to the person in front of you. For example, a 50 year old with 25 yeas experience in one field and 15 years in a second (different) field would have to have started work when they were 10 years old.

The second part of a background check involves checking to see if there are any undisclosed legal matters that would impact negatively on the selection of the person.  For certain checking this type of information is not included in the all too common $35-$50 cheap and cheerful background checks. Further, one also needs to perform follow-up checks to monitor ones employees and professionals to see that they do not subsequently run afoul of the law or?

There is also a growing body of science that will allow one to select away from those who are more likely to become a fraudster if the opportunity were to present itself.  Yet, concurrently one also adversely selects against creativity and initiative. Note 1/3 of all resumes posses exaggerated claims.

Whether fraud can ever be eradicated.

Objection 1: Once one has clearly defined fraud one can clearly defend against a foe that is now both identified and defined.

Objection 2: We already know companies are lax thus we need to pass laws and require all of the companies to have an internal anti fraud division.

Objection 3: With modern computing all we need is to work had and develop the algorithm that can predict the fraud before it occurs.

Permit me to address these objections: 

We are convinced that if we have all of the knowledge and we have all of the right check lists that we can solve all of the problems of the world with diligence.  First assuming that we have all of the knowledge – we only have knowledge of history and that is only if we correctly understood the risks set forth in history.  Clearly we do not as financial crisis after tsunami, after pandemic shows us (or attempts to show us) how ignorant we are about our existence. So much of lie and thus the risks of life are unknown that it is hubris and utter folly to be able to eliminate just one of those risk called fraud.

Response to Objection 1: This assumes that by definition and identification fraud can be prevented.  That also assume we have a correct definition, our identification is accurate and that the circumstances of the risk never change. Clearly there are too many if and imponderables for this to make any sense whatsoever.

Response to Objection 2: This assumes that by passing a law it curbs the behavior.  There are laws against speeding, laws against betting, and laws against pollution.  The innumerable laws we have and will continue to pass do not prevent anything. The law merely provides the state for a mechanism for punishment through fines or imprisonment.

Response to Objection 3: There are many algorithms that both help predict fraud, predict fraudulent behavior as well as those that detect fraud as or after it has occurred.

There are serious  problems with the math – as they use Bayesian math and not fractal math, they are models of what has occurred not what might occur thus they miss the impact of a changing environment and they adversely select when applied to people, against creativity and initiative.  Are models an answer to frau,  no they are not.  A tool with severe limitations that need to be understood – perhaps…

Comment:  I hope this experiment will get more of us to think about fraud and the role due diligence can go a long way to preventing fraud.  Further it is my experience that one must test their systems on a regular basis against potential frauds to make their business models and systems more robust and more effective in identifying or combating fraud.  Only ongoing testing, breaking and fixing of processes and systems will help to make a firm more robust in its fight against fraud. As each business is unique so are the solutions to the problems they are facing are unique.  Sorry – there is no one – or even 20 “common cures” that will work to prevent fraud.

Today we Google them, check both public and restricted databases, we try to peek at their Facebook Account, for professionals we look at Linked-In, we check to see if indeed they graduated from Bistlethike University and try to plumb the depth of their work at previous employers to insure they did a good job, their responsibilities were close to what they have described in their resume etc…  We check court records to look for criminal matters, bad driving incidents, civil litigation and of course all of those lovely domestic relations cases…

What did we do in the old days? We took them and their spouse to lunch and or dinner.

We can all fake it on paper.  For heaven’s sake we never look better then when we are on paper:

Ana Z. – Ph.D. in Peace Studies from Bistlethike University , Miss USA, successful independent professional, skied Antarctica, erected huts in small village where people have large sad looking eyes, and slayer of two dragons with one handsomely bejeweled enchanted sword.  Hobbies are writing romantic poetry and hang gliding.

One fellow I met had to Ph.D.s one in Mechanical Engineering and the Other in Genetics.  He had wowed people from afar and got himself on the board of a public company.  It took less than 5 minutes with to test his knowledge to realize he was a pretender

Yes in the old day we took prospective employees out to dinner.  We talked about all sorts of stuff, weather, relatives, sports, how wonderfully fatty this piece of Ribeye is… and we listened, too.  How did they treat their spouse, how did they work with wait staff, did they have manners. I was told when I was growing up that manners are important.  Since then, I have learned that manners are not just important, manners are vital. Manners are the social equivalent of an adult being house trained, they are the little things that communicate to the rest of your world you have been civilized.

I vividly, and I do mean vividly, recall sitting at a table loaded with Ph.D.s discussing a research matter.  It was a lunch meeting in a beautiful restaurant with a light green linen tablecloth.  The discussion was lively and animated and continued as lunch salads arrived.  One of the Ph.D.s however kept talking while he ate and chewed. He could not wait to make his points and talked over others. He chewed with his mouth open while he kept talking.  The image that came to mind was a bit like a talking cement mixer spewing out bits of leaves as it spun.  There were little bit of masticated shrapnel all around his plate, little bits of green, orange and red of what was once an appetizing salad. The bits of chicken from the main course added off-white bits to the masticated shrapnel splatter pattern on the once clean light green tablecloth.  The tablecloth slowly highlighted each of these bits by adding a darker green halo underneath these bits of masticated shrapnel as the tablecloth absorbed the water and oil from each splattered food bit.   I also can honestly say I could not remember one word he said.  I also know I was not the only one at the table who got the heebeegeebees from this display.  Since this, his first lunch with the group, he has not been invited back.  His lack of manners closed a door of opportunity, which even the best education could not keep open.

Maybe just a lunch for a lower level employee, maybe fine dinning for an executive.  (A partnership may take longer and may have involved a few rounds of golf, a visit to along with a dinner at the country club.)  All of this was normal, as well as using ones social contacts to fine out more about a candidate.  Alcohol usage, political beliefs, family origin, civic work, and organizations that one belonged to were / are fair game and completely out of the personal jacket.

So much so today, we are only interested in hiring unblemished people.  People with easy to read resumes; people who show clear paths and never have had an untoward moment in their lives.  We are looking for the pristine “who”.  Back in the old day we looked at what they were by evidence of their behavior, social circles, manners and what groups they belonged to.  We use to look for the “what” made them.

If I were in charge of hiring for a company, other than my own… (and, which based upon way more than just this article we call safely assume I’ll never get picked for that spot) I would like to use the best of both worlds.

With 30% of people or more outrightlying on their resumes – I believe we have a problem with ethics and forgiveness.  I would like people to come to me with all of their stars and warts, successes and failures clearly displayed.

I would celebrate the sole who was knocked off their horse and got back up again. I would shun those who made excuses about it always being someone else’s fault.  I would celebrate the explorer of words, deeds or our minds. I would shun the anti social boozer and philanderer. I would celebrate the hard worker who was eager to accept and confront challenges. I would shun the thoughtless worker.

If one chooses to leave one’s desk and quit sifting and sorting though wonderfully prepared and puffed résumés – all prepared to ever so slightly lead you, and one chooses not to have a lunch with a candidate as more of a speed date, than one can take the time to dine and enjoy the fruits of a Business Meal.

Our group was asked to assist a person who wanted us to help them get money from the people to whom they lent a 25 million dollar V-Bond.  The bond was lent to set up a bank and an insurance company in an Offshore Financial Center [OFC].  Knowing OFCs we do – the only place these bonds would pass for having any value is in “Wonderlandastan”.  The borrower of the bond had claimed to the lender of the bond that he had been successful in setting up a banks and insurance company and would pay the owner any day as a result of this success in using the V-Bond. Well, heck… that was months ago and the prospective clients wanted the money.

So – as we get the assignment it was for us to collect money for a fraudster who used a Counterfeit of a Fraud V-Bond to raise money that the prospective client had produced?  Thanks – even that would make the White Rabbit’s head spin – too much for him to wrap his ears around… To us, it looked like more jail terms than players.

Our analysis of the circle of frauds was summarily rebuked, and then we were told that we had no idea of what we was talking about – blah, blah, blah, blah…..  and “…since the bond was issued in US dollars the bond was guaranteed by international treaty by the Federal Reserve…”

And as all readers should know, the US Federal Reserve cannot guarantee the value or authenticity of a foreign bond…

OK in short – nothing new but new bond pictures and documents for our discerning readers.

V Bond Summary - though its wrong!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reverse of Venezuelan Bond