Hey, I’ve got an idea. Why don’t we all agree that if a soldier is serving his country and especially if he is serving in harm’s way, the bank should not be permitted to come take that soldier’s home or throw the soldier’s family into the street while he is fighting for his life and ours. We should all be able to agree on that….Right? Because the banksters will not voluntarily agree to such things, there’s even a law that forces them to respect such basic principles.
But the banksters can’t be bothered with pesky laws, Right? I mean even when the laws, like the SCRA, specifically state that they are intended to protect national security the banksters still do not feel compelled to follow the law. Take this comment I recently received about a violation of the SCRA:
My house was forclosed and
sold when I was deployed to Iraq in 2009. They told my family to get out
when i was deployed to combat and before they did that I called them from
Iraq they told me I had 3 days to get my family out because it was sold
Now just how well do you think this soldier was able to focus on his job when all that was going on back home? Right. And despite testimony before Congress and lawsuits all across this country, the banksters continue on their tear. Most disturbing, Congress is refusing to conduct real investigations in to the matter.
If the banksters are able to avoid inquiry into violations of the SCRA, just how hard do you think it will be to get real inquiry into other substantive violations of the law?
I encourage every attorney, judge and advocate to read and understand the Servicemember’s Civil Relief Act, and especially this guide which has been publishd by the American Bar Association: