Canada: Class Action Accuses Banks of Illegal Creation of Money
John Ruiz Dempsey, criminologist and forensic litigation specialist filed a class action suit on behalf of the People of Canada alleging that financial institutions are engaged in illegal creation of money, reports Tom Kennedy, a Canadian activist for economic reform.
One of the best kept secrets is the mechanism of money creation in today's economic system. Although not really a secret at all, the fact that money is created not by and for the people who use it and not even by the government, but is issued by commercial banks when giving loans to private persons or government, is hidden by what could be described as thick clouds of smoke, put out by economists and government departments.
The complaint was filed Friday April 15, 2005 in the Supreme Court of British Columbia at New Westminster. It alleges that all financial institutions who are in the business of lending money have engaged in a deliberate scheme to defraud the borrowers by lending non-existent money which are illegally created by the financial institutions out of "thin air."
The legal action brings to the fore one of the major economic "drag factors" - the interest charged by banks for money that technically and legally is not theirs to lend, because even governments end up paying interest to banks lending money for public spending, and they in turn charge tax payers. A large part of every country's tax revenue goes first and foremost - before any "internal" spending - to payment of interest, largely because of the basic flaw in our way of creating money by the rich and for the rich.
Here is some more detail about the class action filed in Canada.
Class Action Suit Filed on Behalf of the People of Canada
forwarded by Tom Kennedy
New Westminster, B.C., April 15, 2005.
John Ruiz Dempsey BSCr, LL.B, a criminologist and forensic litigation specialist filed a class action suit on behalf of the People of Canada alleging that financial institutions are engaged in illegal creation of money.
The complaint filed Friday April 15, 2005 in the Supreme Court of British Columbia at New Westminster, alleges that all financial institutions who are in the business of lending money have engaged in a deliberate scheme to defraud the borrowers by lending non-existent money which are illegally created by the financial institutions out of "thin air."
Dempsey claims that creation of money out of nothing is ultra vires these defendants' charter or granted corporate power and therefore void and all monies loaned under false pretence contravenes the Criminal Code.
The suit which is the first of its kind ever filed in Canada which could involve millions of Canadians alleges that the contracts entered into between the People ("the borrowers") and the financial institutions were void or voidable and have no force and effect due to anticipated breach and for non-disclosure of material facts.
Dempsey says the transactions constitute counterfeiting and money laundering in that the source of money, if money was indeed advanced by the defendants and deposited into the borrowers' accounts, could not be traced, nor could it be explained or accounted for.
The suit names Envision Credit Union ("Envision"), a credit union; Laurentian Bank of Canada ("Laurentian Bank"), Royal Bank of Canada ("Royal Bank"), Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce ("CIBC"), Bank of Montreal ("BOM"), TD Canada Trust ("Canada Trust") and Canadian Payment Association ("CPA") as civil conspirators.
The plaintiff in the lawsuit is seeking recovery of money and property that was lost by way of confiscation through illegal "debt" collection and foreclosure. The Plaintiff is also seeking for the return of the equities which rightfully belong to the People of Canada, now being held by the defendant financial institutions as constructive trustees without color of right.
At all material times, these defendant banks and all of them have no legal standing to lend any money to borrowers, because:1) these banks and credit unions did not have the money to lend, and therefore they did not have any capacity to enter into a binding contract;
2) the defendants did not have any cash reserve, they are not legally permitted to lend their depositor's or member's money without expressed written authorization form the depositors, and:
3) the defendants have no tangible assets of their own to lend and all their "assets" are "paper assets" which are mainly in the form of "receivables" created by them out of "thin air," derived out of loans whereas the monies loaned out were also created out of thin air.
Other than bookkeeping and computer entries, no money or substance of any value was loaned by the defendants to the Plaintiff. In all of the loan transactions entered into between the Plaintiff and the Defendants, the financial institutions did not bring any equity to any of the transaction.
All the equities were provided by the borrowers. The practices of the defendant financial institutions alleged in the complaint starkly contrast the practices of responsible and ethical money lenders who actually lend real, tangible, legal tender cash money.
The complaint alleges that the loan transactions are fraudulent because no value was ever imparted by the defendants to the Plaintiff; these defendants did not risk anything, nor lost anything and never would have lost anything under any circumstances and therefore no lien has been perfected according to law and equity against the Plaintiff.
The foreclosure proceedings which comes as a result of the borrower defaulting on such fraudulent loans were carried out in bad faith by the defendant banks and credit unions, and as such, these foreclosures were in every respect unlawful acts of conversion and unlawful seizure of property without due process of law which always results in the unjust enrichment of the defendants.
The suit alleges that the defendants utilize fraudulent banking practices whereby they deceive customers into believing that they are actually receiving "credit" or money when in fact no actual money is being loaned to their customers. However, the complaint describes a practice whereby there is realistically no money other than ledger or computer entries being loaned to the borrowers.
Rather than real money being received by the borrowers, "electronic" or "digitally created money", created out of nothing, at no cost to the financial institutions are entered as "loans" into their customers' accounts. The borrowers are then required to pay criminal interest rates for the money they never received. The suit alleges that the defendants effectively turn consumers into virtual debt slaves, forcing them to pay for something they never received, and then seizing their properties if they can no longer pay the banks with real money.
There is no law in Canada that could remotely suggest that the defendant financial institutions have the legal right to create money out of nothing. Dempsey says: "only God has the power to create anything out of nothing."
The class action suit, the first and the biggest of its kind in Canada is intended to give the justice system the opportunity to prove to itself and to the People of Canada who is really in control or whether they would continue to allow itself to be used by the banks as a tool in their unlawful and fraudulent banking practices which always ends in the enslavement of the people and confiscation of the people's properties.
Two other class action suits were filed by John Ruiz Dempsey against the banks. The first one was filed by Dempsey on behalf of Ian Dennis Gravlin of Calgary, Alberta and Pavel Darmantchev of Kelowna, B.C. versus the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce. This matter is set for case management conference hearing on April 26, 2005. The Plaintiff expects a stiff opposition from the defendant's law firm. Madam Justice Garson is the case management judge assigned to the case.
A second class action suit was filed against MBNA CANADA BANK on behalf of Pavel Darmantchev of Kelowna, B.C., Ian Dennis Gravlin of Calgary, Alberta and Dena Alden of Vancouver, B.C.
A copy of the Dempsey legal action as filed can be found here to download as PDF.
- - -
John Dempsey says that the class action that is the subject of this article will be heard in court Feb 27, 28 and Mar 1st, 2006. See the link for more information.
And here a report of what happened in court:
"The People vs The Banks"
Vancouver, British Columbia, February 27, 2006
The People shut the court down after about twenty minutes into the hearing scheduled to be heard on February 27, 28 and March 1, 2006. After intensive questioning by the People represented by John-Ruiz: Dempsey, Pavel-N: Darmantchev, Pedro Liong and Otto Luinenburg, the presiding judge, Nicole Garson got out of the courtroom and left after she gave the Sheriff an order to clear the courtroom. Game over, the banks' motion to dismiss the People's claim will not be heard - at least for now.
The People came prepared, knowing they are being led to the slaughter by the banks' lawyers and the judge who prior to becoming a Supreme Court judge represented the banks lead counsel for one of the defendant banks - TD Canada Trust; obviously a clear conflict of interest which she refused to admit. Pavel said: "she had lots of chances to recuse herself in order to avoid confrontation but she failed miserably, presumably under the order of someone higher than herself."
John filed a Notice of Motion to be heard by the Chief Justice Donald Brenner. Judge Garson took it upon herself to "hear" the motion in clear violation of the Rules of Court which gave the moving party the sole right to set his own motion for hearing. John was never given the opportunity to file a Notice of Hearing; in fact it is not too clear how the motion came to be heard or what caused John's motion to be heard; the People suddenly received a "Reasons for Judgment" released by judge Garson on December 9, 2005. The People have no recollection of any hearings being set or heard regarding John's motion (see - Dempsey et al. v. Envision Credit Union et al., 2005 BCSC 1730). It appears like Garson J. decided to "hear" the motion and become the judge of her own cause - in violation of the legal maxim: nemo judex in sua causa.
Apprehension of bias has been clearly evident since justice Garson was appointed as case management judge. Her first biased act was to prevent John from representing others despite the fact that John had private power of attorney agreements with Pavel, Ian (Gravlin), Pedro and Otto to represent them in court. As attorney-in-fact, it is trite law, established by generations of jurisprudence, John can do all things that his principals can legally do. The law regarding power of attorney has existed long before any statute such as the Legal Profession Act came into existence. Yet, the same judge who is supposed to be our protector and public servant decided to violate and impaired the People's right of contract.
As humans, we have human rights and our rights are not subject to statutory control. It falls within the sovereign individual paradigm as reflected by the following US Supreme Court case:
"The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no such duty to the State, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property. His rights are such as existed by the law of the land [Common Law] long antecedent to the organization of the State, and can only be taken from him by due process of law, and in accordance with the Constitution. Among his rights are a refusal to incriminate himself, and the immunity of himself and his property from arrest or seizure except under a warrant of the law. He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights." Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43 at 47 (1905).
Justice Garson has shown her true colors and where her allegiance lies by barring John to carry out his fiduciary duties to those who have agreed to be his lawful attorney based solely on "judicial discretion." Judicial discretion has no validity when there is positive law; judicial discretion cannot abrogate a living man or woman's natural rights; judicial discretion cannot overturn common law or statutory law. In the case of the said power of attorney contracts entered into between John and the people he represents, the contracts are even protected by the Power of Attorney Act of British Columbia. Garson J's blatant disregard for the law is recorded in her Reasons for Judgment in Gravlin et al. v. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce et al, 2005 BCSC 839.
Justice Garson has shown her willingness and determination to bend over backwards to the whims and wishes of the banks by bulldozing all the bank class actions into one single action despite the objections of all the representative plaintiffs involved in these class actions including "The People vs. The Banks" class action. Although the class actions involve similar causes of actions, not all the defendants are the same. One thing is obvious however; the banks' lawyers are clearly attempting a judicial holocaust by herding all the class actions into one single gas chamber (or judge chamber) so that all the class actions can be slaughtered by one single judge/executioner in one fell swoop. John and his co-plaintiffs will not allow that to happen. They represent the People of Canada; they have the duty to ensure that such a planned massacre against the People does not happen. "The People are counting on us," John said, "this is not up to one single judge to decide on our class actions, it is the People who will ultimately decide on the People's fate, not judge Garson, this is the law of the land."
There are other reasons why John and his friends believe that they are being led to the slaughter such as: Garson J refused to strike the banks' statements of defence that really forms no reasonable defence. For example, all the banks' defence says that the class actions are frivolous, vexatious, scandalous and an abuse of process, a typical boiler plate defence that corrupt court courts always allowed corrupt defendant lawyers to get away with. Such a defence is no defence at all because it does not state why the class action suits are frivolous, vexatious, scandalous or an abuse of process. It is an insult to the People who know the truth.
Garson J has also allowed the banks to get away with serious violations of the Rules of Court and established legal procedures by allowing the banks' lawyers to refuse to produce documents, answer Interrogatories, and Notices to Admit. Based on our observation, it has been the normal practice of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal, the highest courts in the province to apply the rules only when they see fit. Unrepresented litigants, particularly those who are not too familiar with the rules of court have lost their cases due to such unfair double standards. The People must follow the Rules of Court, but the lawyers and judges, particularly those who gets paid handsomely by the banking cartel need not be concerned about any rules. They make up their own rules as they go along, and they have judges that makes them right all the time.
As living men and women, we can only deal in truth. We can only deal with what is wrong and what is right. The admiralty courts like the supreme courts and appellate courts of the province only deal in arguments, in fictions, in make-believe laws created by them, the "just us" society. This is only one of the reasons why we have to shut them down. We have no time for their arguments. Either they deal with us in truth, or we will have nothing to do with their corruption. We are here to set the People free, by way of the truth, not by arguing in court. People lose in court because they argue. People are not allowed to argue in court, only the "officers" of their admiralty courts are allowed to make arguments in court. We play our own rules in their courts - "for we can do nothing against the truth but for the truth."
Justice Garson could not stand truth in her court room. Pavel asked her many times: "are you a public servant?" Garson J refused to answer a simple question with the truth. We already know the answer - she is nothing but a public servant, she is our servant. Garson J. lost it when the People in the court room themselves asked her: "why can't you answer a simple question - are you a public servant?" That was all the heat she could take that day. She stood up and started to leave and ordered the sheriff to clear the court room. However, before she managed to get out of the court room, John and Pavel told her: "You're fired Nicole." And all the People in the court said so: "You're fired."
At any rate, the matter is res judicata or already decided by virtue of the fact that the banks have no answer to John's Affidavit of Truth he filed in court. The affidavit was intended to solicit answers from the banks and establish the truth. In commerce, truth is established by an affidavit. An unrebutted affidavit stands as truth in commerce. The time for filing a reply has now passed. This means that the People have already established the truth in accordance with the law of commerce. In commerce, truth is sovereign and as sovereign, we, the People have already established the truth. We have no time for the banks' and their lawyers' arguments. They are precluded by estoppel.
So that was the end of that. We are ordering the transcript to make sure that no one could tamper with the records if they have not yet done so already. We will publish the contents of the court transcript as soon as we receive it. What's going happen next? Nothing. We, the People are not going back into that temple until the court has established that they have in rem or subject matter jurisdiction over us. As sovereign men and women, they have no power over us, unless it was given to them from above; or unless we accept their assumed power or jurisdiction. God bless you all.
One of Many
- - -
Some earlier updates...
Updage August 10, 2005:
New Westminster, B.C., April 10, 2005. Plaintiffs Lovey Cridge, a retired forensic accountant and John Ruiz Dempsey, a criminologist and forensic litigation specialist, both residents of Surrey, British Columbia, Canada, filed their amended Statement of Claim on August 2, 2005. The original class action suit filed on behalf of the people of Canada was filed on April 22, 2005.
The suit alleges that the government of Canada has engaged in a deliberate scheme to defraud the people of Canada through its illegal use of an invalid or non-existent statute, namely, the Income Tax Act of 1948 which has never been properly enacted according to law. The statement of claim alleges that the Plaintiffs which includes all of the People of Canada as the purported â€žtaxpayersâ€° have been defrauded and continues to be defrauded by the Canadian government, its collection agents, the now privatized Canada Revenue Agency (the former Revenue Canada), and robbed of their wealth and fruits of their labour through an elaborate scheme of coloured, illegal and unlawful seizure of property and money through the use of various coercive schemes, threats of fines and incarceration using the bogus and non-existent tax law, and the unlawful revisions thereof namely the Income Tax Act as contained within the Revised Statutes of Canada.
The class action suit is a result of more than five years of research and study of de facto Canadian federal statutes. The Plaintiffs says that there is no such thing as a lawful Income Tax Act in Canada. This so-called Act, is not a valid and lawful Act; this "Act" was unlawfully fabricated in violation of the Constitution of Canada, namely, the British North America Act of 1867 as it existed at the time of the purported enactment of the illegal Act.
The impugned Income Tax Act of 1948, as well as many other federal acts enacted by the de facto Canadian government since 1931 have not been enacted properly pursuant to the laws of England and Canada. The Income Tax Act of 1948, with unlawfully created versions thereof incorporated within various derivatives of the Revised Statutes of Canada are now fraudulently being used by the Defendants to rob the Plaintiffs and all the people of Canada.
For a bill or Act to be lawful and valid, the bill must be passed by the Canadian Parliament and the Senate. The Income Tax Act of 1948 was never passed by the Senate. After the bill has met the approval of the parliament and the senate, the bill must be assented to by the representative of the real Crown of England - the "Royal Assent" by the Governor General. At no time had this purported Act been given a Royal Assent by the Governor General if at all. And finally, pursuant to the Canadian Constitution, any Act that has been given a Royal Assent must be published in the Canada Gazette. At no time had this purported Act been published in any Gazette.
There has not been a lawfully appointed representative of the Crown since 1931 to the present. In order to circumvent this problem, the then ruling Prime Minister of Canada, William Lyons MacKenzie King signed the infamous Letters Patent of 1947 which gave the de facto Governor Generals all the powers of the Crown, including the power to give Royal Assent. This unlawful practice still goes on today. The ruling Crown of England is precluded by its own law to appoint Governor Generals. Again, to thwart this issue, King and the de facto Prime Ministers who came after him started to appoint their own Governor Generals.
Notwithstanding the fact that the said Income Tax of 1948 has not been lawfully passed by the Parliament, nor had it been given a Royal Assent, nor been published in the Canada Gazette, the Canadian government, took it upon themselves, to collect income taxes and extorted monies from the people of Canada without any colour of right, and without legal or juristic authority from 1948 to the present, and continues to collect and extort monies and properties from the people of Canada unlawfully.
Those who resisted or refused to pay income taxes were either arrested and falsely incarcerated, charged under various false criminal offences and their properties were unlawfully seized or confiscated contrary to the Magna Charta, the English Bill of Rights 1689, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Plaintiffs claim that the government and its agents also violated the Canadian Bill of Rights of 1960 after its enactment as well the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms after it was enacted and accepted as law that is enshrined within the Constitution of 1982 in Canada.
To further carry out its fraud and deception, the Canadian government "revised" the bogus Income Tax Act of 1948 (Income Tax Act - 1948, c. 52) and fraudulently and without colour of right, incorporated the illegal Act within the 1952 Revised Statutes of Canada (see R.S.C. 1952, c. 148). To further conceal their deception, the Defendants again revised the unlawful and counterfeit Income Tax Act (now with the reference to the year â€ž1948â€° removed) and integrated this "new" Act with the 1970 Revised Statutes of Canada (see R.S.C.1970, c. 1-5). Again, to further obscure the truth and complete the "colouring" process, the 1970 (R.S.C. 1970, c. 1-5) Revised Statutes of Canada was again revised and further became the 1985 Revised Statutes of Canada (R.S.C. 1985, c. 1 (5th Supp)).
In all of the above machinations, debauchery and wicked manipulations and fraudulent misrepresentations, the government of Canada failed to fully hide the fact that Canada never had a valid and lawful income tax act or statute that could have justified the colossal crimes and unlawful acts perpetrated by the Canadian government against its own people.
The Plaintiffs, Lovey Cridge and John Ruiz Dempsey on behalf of the People of Canada, with the help of other researchers searched law libraries and archives for any proof that the impugned Income Tax Act might exist. The Plaintiffs found no evidence of it. The Plaintiffs say such "Act" simply did not exist and are therefore claiming for damages including the return of all money and property wrongfully confiscated (stolen) by the Canadian government from its people.
- - -
Update August 22, 2005
THE PEOPLE vs THE BANKS
VANCOUVER, British Columbia: Almost five months to the day of the initial filing of the biggest class action suit in Canada, John Ruiz Dempsey on Behalf of the People of Canada versus Envision Credit Union, Laurentian Bank, CIBC, Royal Bank, Bank of Montreal, TD Canada Trust, The Canadian Payment Association and others, the lawyers representing the financial institutions are gathering steam to try to stop John Ruiz Dempsey, a criminologist and forensic litigation specialist from proceeding with their application to the court to strike Mr. Dempsey's statement of claim in whole or in part. Hearings are set for September 12 and 13 at the Supreme Court in Vancouver. The statement of claim alleges among other things, creation of money out of nothing, fraudulent misrepresentation, money laundering, fraud, charging of criminal interest rates and breach of contract. A copy of the Statement of Claim is available for download through http://www.freewebs.com/classaction/.
"This without a doubt will be a precedent setting case that is sure to change the face of the banking system in Canada forever. Without even taking into consideration the potential damages, the sheer numbers of people alone who potentially can participate in this action, will in my estimation make this case the largest lawsuit ever filed for Class Certification in this nation", stated John Ruiz Dempsey.
The banks are being represented by two of the largest law firms in Canada such as Borden Ladner Gervais with 670 lawyers and Fasken Martineau Dumoulin with 500 lawyers. This is clearly a David and Goliath case where these lawyers are moving to tread heavily on Mr. Dempsey and the People of Canada he represents.
News Conferences are currently being arranged and will be held September 9 in Vancouver and Montreal. Various citizen groups and freedom movements as well as other special interest groups representing thousands of Canadians from across Canada are expected to rally in support of this action.
Media representatives wishing to attend any of the News Conferences, or wanting to ensure that they are on our mailing lists, or wishing to arrange for interviews with legal, forensic and other experts after any of the News. Conferences, should call to ensure that their current information is on file.
In Montreal, Quebec
Contact: Bruce Margolese
Since sending out a News Release in April announcing the filing of the Class Action Law Suit, we have been inundated with calls from persons asking if it is too late to become involved.
The answer is NO. As long as you fit ANY ONE of the five criteria listed below, you can apply for registration for Class Participation. While we would like those interested in becoming involved to do so on a timely basis, as it adds strength to our efforts, a cut-off date for participation will be established (I believe by the court at a future date).The criteria for participation is as follows:
1. If you have been involved in any kind of loan transaction with any bank or financial institution you are eligible to participate;
2. If you did not know that banks and financial institutions are engaged in illegal creation of money, you are eligible to participate;
3. If you were told by your bank or financial institution they loaned you money without receiving "cash" or "legal tender" money or currency, you are eligible to participate;
4. If you were unaware that the bank or financial institution made you sign a promissory note or loan application form and 'monetized' the said note or form by way of your signature, you are eligible to participate;
5. If you or your family have suffered or are facing foreclosure or seizure of property or debt collection by banks or financial institutions as a result of any loan or debt transactions with any bank or financial institution, you are eligible to participate.
It is important to note that you DO NOT have to be object or victim of any debt collection, foreclosure or any other legal proceeding to participate.
It is also important to note that having your "debts" to any bank or financial institution, DOES NOT PRECLUDE YOU from registering to participate in this legal action.
IF YOUR REASON FOR PARTICIPATION IS AS A RESULT OF YOUR SITUATION FALLING INTO CATEGORY 3) OR 5) ABOVE, PLEASE PROVIDE FULL DETAILS.
HOW TO REGISTER:
Information are available from our website: http://www.freewebs.com/classaction/.
Alternatively, you can drop us a note, stating your desire to participate in accordance with the applicable criteria itemized above to effect your participation at this time. However, the above mentioned website contain valuable information regarding banking fraud as well as a very important information regarding class action suits, the legal system, bank fraud and scams, illegal debt collection which you should be aware of prior to your next visit to a bank or financial institution.
If there is more than one person in your family wishing to participate, each participant should fill out a registration form. Where children under the legal age are involved, parents or guardians should complete a registration request for each child, on their behalf.
Please ensure that all requests for registration are legible and contain your full name, complete mailing address, phone numbers and fax numbers and e-mail addresses where applicable. It makes our job of communicating with you that much less costly and more efficient.
The registration forms will provide for a minimum contribution for registrants. However, if your financial situation absolutely prohibits a financial contribution at this time, do not let this dissuade you, send in your form. We have seen first hand and understand some of the devastation that unlawful creation of money has caused. Those who are able to contribute more, please be generous, as many others much less fortunate through no cause of their own, are counting on you.
- - -
Update received from John-Ruiz: Dempsey:
"Vexatious Litigant" back in Court
Vancouver, B.C. November 7, 2005: John-Ruiz: Dempsey, British Columbia's most notorious "vexatious litigant" will be in court on Monday, November 21, 2005 to attend an "Appointment to Settle" filed by the Law Society of British Columbia. Dempsey said he will be attending said appointment subject to payment of $5,000 per hour for a minimum of 8 hours as compensation for all his trouble.
On September 13, 2005, Mr. Justice James W. Williams of the Supreme Court of British Columbia released his decision based on a hearing filed by the law society held on August 4, 2005. Mr. Dempsey attended the hearing but did not participate in it claiming that neither the court nor the Law Society of British Columbia had any jurisdiction over him as a Child of God with indisputable title of Minister of God and as a sovereign, free born, sentient, living and breathing man. Dempsey told Justice Williams that in order for anyone to have jurisdiction over him, they must prove that: they are above God; they are equal to God; they stand between him and God; or they have document upon the face of it has a verifiable signature of God. Dempsey claims that neither Justice Williams nor the Law Society of British Columbia was able to produce any of the above.
Notwithstanding, Mr. Justice Williams ordered that until such time as John-Ruiz: Dempsey becomes a member in good standing of the Law Society of British Columbia, Dempsey among other things is permanently prohibited from holding himself out as a lawyer, appearing as counsel or advocate, drawing, revising or settling a document for use in a proceeding, judicial or extra-judicial, commencing, prosecuting or defending a proceeding in any court in his own name or in the name of another except where he is an individual party to a proceeding acting solely on his own behalf.
Justice Williams also declared Dempsey a "vexatious litigant" pursuant to section 18 of the Supreme Court Act and required that Dempsey must inform the Law Society of British Columbia of any proceedings presently initiated or which may be initiated or may be instituted in any court in British Columbia.
John-Ruiz: Dempsey rejected the court order by returning the copy of Justice Williams' decision marked "VOID FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION" 3 times on the face of the document. Dempsey said no one, not even a judge have the power to create laws or court orders out of thin air especially when such order violates a man or woman's inalienable rights as free men and women. This is an area where statute law is in direct conflict with universally guaranteed and God-given human rights. Dempsey further said that the court or the law society have no rights other than the ones we give to them as sovereign men and women as opposed to "persons."
Dempsey has filed a formal Constructive Notice of Child of God Status in the Supreme Court of British Columbia on August 4, 2005. Mr. Justice Williams is not too happy with such Notice.
Dempsey also claims that Mr. Justice Williams has violated his Oath of Office which Dempsey has accepted under the terms and conditions of his Notice of Acceptance of Oath of Office he served Justice Williams on August 9, 2005. Dempsey served Justice Williams a Notice of Default for violating his Oath of Office and is asking the judge to pay him 10 million dollars for damages. Associate Chief Justice Patrick Dohm wrote Mr. Dempsey a letter saying they (the judges) will not be replying to Dempsey now or in the future. Mr. Dempsey served Mr. Justice Williams a Notice of Dishonor dated October 21, 2005 as formal acceptance to the judge's decision to ignore Dempsey's claims.
Dempsey is also claiming damages against the Law Society of British Columbia and the law firm Hunter Voith for interfering with his contractual relationship with various individuals as attorney-in-fact.
John-Ruiz: Dempsey has gained world-wide notoriety for the class action suits he filed on behalf of the People of Canada against Canada's major financial institutions regarding illegal creation of money out of nothing. The lawsuit is the first of its kind where anyone has filed any major lawsuit on behalf of the people of a nation against banking institutions.
Dempsey and a retired accountant, Lovey Cridge have also filed a class action suit against the government of Canada claiming that the Income Tax Act does not exist because the said Act has not been properly or lawfully enacted. Mr. Dempsey claims that Canada has never existed as a sovereign nation and therefore cannot lawfully create laws out of thin air without the mandate of its people. He says Canada ceased to become a dominion of Great Britain since 1901 after the death of Queen Victoria and that after 1931, Canada has been existing as a de facto state controlled by anarchists and international "banksters."
Dempsey says, it is the truth that sets people free but the legal profession and the courts see Dempsey as a threat to their de facto existence and are therefore endeavoring to eliminate or silence him at all costs. He says Canada does not have a lawful and validly enacted constitution because the people of Canada have always been in slave status. The British North America Act (BNA) 1867 and its derivatives, Constitution Act of 1867 and 1982 are de facto British statutes which ceased to exist after the death of Queen Victoria in 1901.
Update April 2006:
The People vs The Banks - First Anniversary
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, April 15, 2006.
Exactly a year ago today, on April 15, 2005, we filed the biggest class action suit in Canada - "The People vs The Banks." This class action created shock waves in the heart of the world's banking business that deals in unlawfully created, non-tangible, non-existent digital money.
The class action involves millions of people in Canada. Despite the mainstream media's continued biased reporting, the news of the class action suit has traveled all over the world. The whole world is watching, waiting to see how the banks and the courts are going to stop John-Ruiz: Dempsey from proceeding with this major lawsuit.
The suit arises from the fact that banks as credit-lenders flourish only because of fraud and deception, breach of contract, deception, unjust enrichment, unlawful conversion and illegal creation of money. The Plaintiff (as well as the other millions of people), the "borrower" is always the source of the principal amount of any alleged loan by virtue of his "promise" to pay (the "promissory note"), from which a negotiable instrument is generated, i.e. "money," pursuant to commonly accepted banking practice which the credit-lender then converts into another form (bank draft, cashier's check) in accordance with their lending policies which is then reissued in the form of a "loan." This "loan" is nothing more than accounting entries on the bank's ledgers, because the financial institutions like the defendant banks, loans nothing of substance, and are forbidden by banking regulations from loaning the bank's cash or assets.
Money simply does not exist. What we call money, the Canadian bank note they call "legal tender" is not money. It has no intrinsic value. It costs two cents to make a five dollar bill as well as it is for a hundred dollar bill. It is money by decree; it is money only because the government says it is money. Worse, in this case, the "money" in question in this lawsuit is the privately created, digital, computer generated money surreptitiously created by the banks and "loaned" to their unsuspecting borrowers with criminal interest at no cost to themselves.
As far as the representative Plaintiff, John-Ruiz: Dempsey is concerned, the People of Canada do not owe the banks any debt or money. It was the other way around. John says: "How can we owe them anything when we never received anything of any value [substance] from these banks?" The money which was assumed to have been credited into the borrower's account was derived from "thin air" - God's money, or money that never belonged to the banks at all. The banks have no legal right to use God's money and pass them on to the unsuspecting borrowers and call it a loan and then start charging usury. This is nothing but pure skullduggery.
"Only God can create something of value out of nothing ... no action will lie to recover on a claim based upon, or in any manner depending upon, a fraudulent, illegal, or immoral transaction to which Plaintiff [the bank] was a party." Per Justice Mahoney in First National Bank of Montgomery v. Jerome Daly, 12/07/1968.
In First National Bank above, (more popularly known as the Credit River decision) further stated: "The [bank's] act of creating credit is not authorized by the Constitution and laws of the United States, is unconstitutional and void, and is not lawful consideration in the eyes of the law to support anything or upon which any lawful right can be built." - Justice Martin V. Mahoney.
The above Minnesota trial court's decision is holding the federal reserve act unconstitutional and void; holding the National Banking Act unconstitutional and void; declaring a mortgage acquired by the First National Bank of Montgomery, Minnesota in the regular course of its business, along with the foreclosure and the sheriff's sale to be void. This decision, which is legally sound, has the effect of declaring all private mortgages on real and personal property, and all U.S. and state bonds held by the Federal Reserve, national and state banks to be null and void. This amounts to an emancipation of the nation from personal, national and state debt purportedly owed to this banking system. Every American (as well as Canadian) owes it to himself, his country, and to the people of the world for that matter to study this decision very carefully and to understand it, for upon it hangs the question of freedom or slavery.
The above statement by Justice Mahoney also holds true in Canada because there is no law in Canada, whether federal or provincial, that remotely suggests that it is lawful for any bank to create money out of thin air and then use this created money as valuable consideration whereby they could now loan this created money as principal and then charge their unsuspecting victims interest for the rest of their lives! This is legalized slavery.
An earlier decision by the Supreme Court of Canada which dealt with the same issue of lack of consideration per Henry J.: "...I know of no law to oblige me to pay it. When I deliver and execute a note, I am presumed to have received a consideration for it, and I am therefore bound to pay the legal holder or endorsee, but it would be contrary to every equitable, and I may say legal, principle to make me pay in the other case, where I received no value, or did no act from which such may be presumed." Scott v. R. (1878), 2 S.C.R. 349.
The People have a strong case. The only problem is money, and the banks have lots of it. The banks have been known to spend $100,000.00 or more trying to collect a $5,000.00 claim. The banks simply cannot afford to have any precedents. They can afford to pay their highly paid lawyers and perhaps even bribe the judges in order to achieve their evil goals.
Just recently, the banks and The People were compelled to appear before Madam Justice Garson, the assigned case management judge who heard the banks' lawyers argue that the statement of claim should be struck in whole or in part. The banks argue that the People's claim has no merit based on their flimsy arguments that the pleadings are either vexatious, frivolous, scandalous and abuse of process. However they all failed to show why the claims are vexatious, frivolous, scandalous and abuse of process.
John and his team, submitted the truth, that the court has no jurisdiction to hear or decide the case simply because the judge herself is in direct conflict of interest. Prior to Judge Garson becoming a judge of the Supreme Court of British Columbia, she worked for one of the defendant banks, TD Canada Trust. John filed a motion to have Garson recused. This motion was intended to be heard by the Chief Justice himself. Notwithstanding, Garson took it upon herself to decide on the motion to recuse without any notice of hearing being filed which violates the maxim: "nemo judex in sua causa" which means that one cannot be the judge of his/her own cause. Garson saw nothing wrong with that.
During the last hearing on April 6, 2006, John personally served Garson a Writ of Summons and Statement of Claim. John and others filed this lawsuit against Garson in her personal capacity for interfering with John's personal right of unlimited contract with his principals. The suit also named another judge, Justice James Williams who, without proving any jurisdiction or proof of claim or evidence against John decided to grant an injunction against him from representing other people in court because he is not a member of the BAR or law society. With this writ filed against Garson as a defendant, this judge is now in clear conflict without any excuse.
At the hearing on April 6, John and the others told Garson they will not accept any decision or order made or done while she is in direct conflict of interest and without proper jurisdiction. However, knowing how she made her previous decisions that have no foundation in law or fact, it will not come as a surprise if this judge puts her blindfold and ignores the law in order to give the banks a great favour. The whole world will have the opportunity to see whether or not the courts deserve the kind of respect they think we owed them. Needless to say, the ball is in their court.
Whatever happens, this is only the beginning. The greatest battle, "The People vs. The Banks" has only begun. This battle will continue until the tables of the money changers have been overturned once more. If God be for us, who can be against us? May God Bless Us All.
Please contact us by email at:
Visit our websites at:
- - -
Update February 2007:
Day of Reckoning
February 24, 2007
Free again, free, free again. I have just returned from jail a few hours ago. As you already know, I was unlawfully incarcerated because I openly exercised my own set of values. Now their admiralty/maritime, statutorial court(s) have decided that full exercise of my inalienable human rights is now a contemptible act. Since when has it become a crime to exercise your natural God-given human rights?
As you are [mostly] all aware, I was sent to jail for doing what is right; I was unlawfully confined by the paper government who calls themselves, "The Province of British Columbia;" The Law Society of British Columbia; The Supreme Court of British Columbia, etc. My unlawful incarceration meant nothing to anyone. It was a total waste of my time which can never be regained.
Their only accomplishment is that they were able to delay my schedule which they know is very important because it involves a lot of people who are depending on me to complete. Please accept my profoundest apology for any problem my unlawful incarceration has caused you.
Notwithstanding, I just wish to express my deepest appreciation to all of you who in spirit and in truth did express love and care while the powers that be decided they must punish me for defending people's internationally guaranteed and recognized human rights. Thank you all so much because your love and care have shielded me from any pain or suffering our common enemies have sought to inflict upon me. Your prayers worked too. The Lord stayed with me all the time.
From the bottom of my heart, I also thank all of you who sent me wonderful cards and letters. Words may never be able to describe how your loving support had become a pillar of strength for me. You are all so wonderful, I love you all.
The law society and the evil judge who conspired with them failed to inflict any pain. It was a time well spent. I turned to Psalm 142:7 "Bring my soul out of prison, that I may praise thy name: the righteous shall compass me about; for thou shalt deal bountifully with me." They may think that they have imprisoned me but my heart, soul and spirit was free.
Even though I was held in unlawful confinement, my incarceration was nothing but an unlawful deprivation of my liberty, robbing me of time and money that I can never regain; it was also a violation of my human rights and the human rights of those who depended on me. Such violation of human rights was carried out without due process of law.
I can't say that all went exactly as planned because I really did not have any plans other than to go in and place all my bets on the truth which no one there was able to refute. While in jail, I was surrounded by righteous people, indigenous peoples from all parts of land, which made me feel more secure than when I was outside of those walls. I never felt I was imprisoned at all.
The entire hearing was a fraud, complete with circus-like atmosphere. The legal system can't handle the truth. But the Law is the Law of Truth. The Law Society of British Columbia could not understand truth; therefore their judges, all of which are the products of that man-made "just us" system have no idea what is required to be a man of the truth.
I also thank these criminals for doing what they do; it makes me want to keep going forward, with more fervor, more zeal, more determination, to keep fighting the good fight of faith. The good fight is never over, so we never lose.
What is truth?
This is a question asked by Pontius Pilate before the Lord Jesus Christ who never answered the Procurator. That question has been asked and answered when He said, "I am The Way, The Truth and The Life, no one cometh to the Father but by Me."
Pontius Pilate knew what The Truth was, because he declared it when he said regarding Jesus Christ, "I find no fault in this Man." The Truth then is when one cannot find fault in anything.
"For we can do nothing against the truth but for the truth." 2 Corinthians 13:8
In my life, I have always followed the truth no matter where the truth might lead me. I have always been good to all people in need. The truth can be seen in the eyes of the people who know me.
What is Justice?
The greatest trick Satan pulled is that he did not exist. He revealed his own version of the truth, that evil is good and that good is evil. But Satan does exist; I saw his face when I looked at the judge, Barry M. Davies and the lawyers for the law society, Peter G. Voith and Shannon Ramsay. These people have sold themselves to the devil. They are the devil incarnate.
When I took up the fight against the devil himself in the form a Supreme Court judge and the hordes of demons who call themselves the Law Society of British Columbia, my battle was fought tooth and nail, fire with fire. Phil 4:13 "I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me." I cannot fear because God is with me.
Even the biggest bully in the block – the de facto paper government is small because my God is bigger than all of them. God is my right, and God is my justice.
These bullies could not even define justice if it strikes them in the face. They have no idea what justice is because all the days of their lives are spent inflicting injustice in exchange for money. Their entire legal system was created out of injustice and therefore anything created out of injustice can only breed further injustice. Injustice is the only thing all of them could understand because injustice happens to all of us. The so-called "justice" these lawyers and judges waves in front of us is nothing but outright fraud; a lovely ideal that manifested itself when that evil judge sent me to jail without just cause.
When we come face to face with these infidels, there is only one question we need to ask them: "What is justice?" Only a man and woman, with a pure heart can answer that question. These judges and lawyers who have sold their hearts and minds to the devil will never be able to answer that question – three words: "What is justice?"
Good judges follow the law; weak judges follow their superiors. Justice can only be achieved when truth supports the argument. Justice is a result of being just.
In their "just us" legal system, the judges' job is to decide who has the best lawyer. Therefore the lay person who comes unrepresented or self-represented is guaranteed to lose, 99% of the time. They do not only bend the law in their "just us" system, they also break it at will without due regard to those who might be hurt or be damaged by it.
Their laws are like cobwebs that catch harmless little flies but lets wasps and hornets to break through. They allowed the banksters to continue to rob us and their taxmen to continue extort taxes against us under non-existent laws.
Those who are in that "just us" system believe their system is like science when the truth is, they are a few degrees from witchcraft, their system is always subject to being manipulated.
Truth and justice has to prevail, the people are behind me. It is far from over. They have made their bed and now they have to lie in it. What goes around comes around.
You, my friends, my people, my fellow human beings are all that stand between the victims of injustice and the authors of such injustice. It is all up to you do the right thing. There is wrong that needs to be set right.
Innocent people declare their innocence loud and long. The criminals and their lawyers and judges hide behind their man-made, copyrighted statutes because that is all they have. They are cowards, afraid of the truth, afraid of the light, because the truth will indite them. Every one of them is guilty; the law society their lawyers, their judges, they are also guilty of assault and battery, even the correctional officer and the attorney general for permitting it.
The law society and that evil judge knew I was innocent of any crime; I was an innocent victim of their heartless and discriminatory system, infested with out-of-control, runaway judiciary.
They claim I showed no remorse. What a bunch of claptrap. I have neither guilt nor reason for it. If anyone must show any remorse, it was judge Davies and Peter G. Voith, the guilty parties who ought to show it, not me.
But they are all members of the law society or more aptly, the law[less] society. What do they care about the law?
I have no time to wrestle with these pigs; wrestling with them will only make me dirty. And what's worse, is the pigs will only love it. All I did in court that day was that I bore witness of the truth, nothing more.
They call that hellhole a "correctional facility". What a misnomer, what a joke. If anything needed any correcting, it is the way these A-holes do to the people under the guise of "protecting the public." Protecting the public from what? The public could well do without these A-holes and their bogus claim that they are there to protect any human being. The truth is, they exist to serve the best interest of the corporations, the legal fictions, man-made paper entities created by them and for them only. The protection of people's human rights does not even come into the picture.
My day in court had been a total joke. It was a sickly event, the judge was a sick puppy who enjoyed abusing his power by openly violating and defying my international rights as a human being by committing crimes against humanity contrary to the Convention of Civil and Political Rights; the U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948. The judge refused to even read these internationally guaranteed human rights into record.
Some people think we are crazy, but I don't think so. Because Christ said: "Whatever you do to the least of my brethren, you do it to me." "Blessed [are] they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 5:10.
I will not let anyone beat me. I will take what I have to take; and I will give what I have to give and when it comes time to do what I have to do what I have to do, I will not allow them to stop me. Isa 54:17 – "No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; and every tongue [that] shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn. This [is] the heritage of the servants of the LORD, and their righteousness [is] of me, saith the LORD."
I was sentenced to go to jail because I did what was right. I would absolutely do it again, I have walked the walk, I have shown mercy and I have suffered for righteousness sakes.
If we run away, they will win. If there is anything I can do to make it right, I will do it. I have no fear anymore, I am completely free. What was done to me created me.
Their prisons are but stop over places to delay and deny justice. They placed me in one of their man-made hell. But my Creator did not take me this far to let me down. They handcuffed me, placed shackles on me, they treated me like a common criminal; the treatment I received was horrific. But in spite of all that, it was a place for the weary to rest. And for me it was a haven of rest. The Lord was there with me all the time. He gave me the truth and the determination not to let their criminal legal/justice system to break or faze me.
The Paper Government
This may come as a surprise to you to hear for the first time that "Canada" does not exist. But after you have read my message, you shall begin to know and understand that "Canada" not only does not exist, you will also learn that "Canada" is only a paper corporation much like Canadian Tire" or other forms of legal fiction (ens legis) or paper entity created by unscrupulous men and women to rule, plunder, exploit and to dominate other people.
Today, "Canada" is a "paper nation" created, controlled and dominated by criminal banksters and lawyers who work for the corporation government. It is certainly not a government of the people as most paper "Canadians" might think of what "Canada" is. It is neither a democratic government simply because the people have been given the privilege of suffrage with regards to some de facto right to vote their favorite politicians into certain positions within their corporate provincial and federal governments. Being allowed to elect politicians to rule over them does not make anything democratic, if at all. As mere paper corporation, "Canada" is anything but democratic. Neither is it a republic. "Canada" only exists on paper, in maps, legal claims, concessions, treaties, contracts, leases, grants and the list goes on ad infinitum. It does not exist lawfully and in truth.
The Government of Canada is neither a nation nor a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. It is a government owned and operated by international banksters. The "Government of Canada" comes in many forms: the "Crown"; "Her Majesty the Queen"; "Regina", are simply some of the many front names used by the legal owner(s) and operators of the said paper corporation.
Ownership of the corporation is sometimes attributed to the "Royal Family". Are we talking about the "Royal Family" that now lives at Buckingham Palace? Then we are talking about the British crime family which is nothing but a criminal organization, the oldest crime family in the world. These are the people, along with their merciless hordes who committed the worst crimes against humanity such as genocide, ethnic cleansing, colonization, germ warfare, and other heinous crimes against humanity.
British law is nothing but a trip wire, designed to keep human beings poor. Their legal system is designed to keep us in our "proper place" – the total slavery of everyone; their version of the maxim "equal justice for all," which in reality is equal injustice to all. They treat every slave the same. But the slave cannot rise above his master.
None of their laws were made by the people and for the people. Their "law" is a broken record that testifies against the powers that be, statutes that warns the people not to tamper with their corrupt order of things, all designed to make the rich richer and the poor more poorer, to put everyone in jail if we decide to disagree with their "order of things", like "practicing law without a license which is total bullshit. The jail that they put me in tells it like it is. I did not see any rich kids in there. They have a separate jail for the ritz. I am not rich so they incarcerated me in a place where they warehoused all the criminals and drug addicts so they can create bonds that can be bought and sold to other paper corporations. Jailing people is big business which makes merchandise of human cattle.
They have decided that natural law no longer applies to them so they have created their own maritime/admiralty/statute laws which they claim now apply to us human beings. All these laws are paper laws; they only exist on paper. Now they claim they own the world because they claim they have the paperwork to prove it. They hate it when we rip their paper apart.
They have no money, so they use and abuse our human rights by stealing our labor, they steal our energy by not paying us quid pro quo. They steal our labor when they pay us with "paper money".
Those who claim that they are protecting the public [whatever that may be?] through the use of their suppressive man-made statutes [all paper based] are not really protecting anyone but those who are charged of such laws. The judges have laws to protect them from harm, they call it immunity, whatever that may be. The justice system, consisting of judges and lawyers who have turned the justice system into a monopolistic "just us" system for those who are "licensed" by the system to operate and profit from it. This is basically a license to steal, a license to do anything that would otherwise be illegal within their corporate paper world. The rest of the people who are not members of these exclusive societies are forced to pay dearly for the use of their legal system. Those who refuse or could not afford to pay for the services provided by the system are completely shut out from the "just us" system.
In other words, in their paper based system, if you have the paper, you are now licensed to do whatever the paperwork you hold says you can do. But that will not work for me. Unless you can produce, the paper that I signed that says you can do to me what I would otherwise not allow anyone to do, please get thee behind me Satan.
The world of fiction.
There is no such thing as "Canada". Such has been tacitly admitted by its own "Justice Department" by their own failure to produce any cogent evidence that "Canada" and its so-called government are in lawful possession of any lawful authority to exist as a nation. This fact has been admitted by its own "Governor Generals" that the Government of Canada is de facto, meaning, it exists in fact only but it does not exist lawfully. This is a well known fact that is well-supported by history.
The brief history of "Canada" speaks for itself about the plunder, fraud, deception, genocide, slavery, mass murder, ethnic cleansing, germ warfare and all forms of crimes against humanity. They are all criminals. What is a natural thing for criminals to do? Commit crimes of course, such is what they have done to me.
"Canada" is an illegal colony of Great Britain, a dominion, meaning a possession, whose owner is a foreign power. It really doesn't matter what this foreign power now calls "Canada" these days, the undeniable truth remains that "Canada" is a colony, owned and operated unlawfully, in total violation of the United Nations Convention and International Law. Merely because the powers that be no longer use the words "dominion" or "colony" can hide the truth that "Canada" is a British colony. Neither does it alter the fact that "Canada" is stolen property.
The British came into North America (Turtle Island) and saw the vast area that yearned to be populated and "governed". They found the solution to their own British problem, that of over-population, too many people living and competing with each other in one tiny area called the British Isles. So they dumped all their vassals, serfs and slaves over here and changed the name of the place to "Canada" and made it a "dominion" or "colony" in violation of all existing international law. Under color of law, which was based only on paper, they created a paper colony. They stole the nation from under those whose rights are antecedent of any paper law that they created unlawfully to legalize their heinous crimes.
Simply repainting a stolen car does not exonerate the thief who stole the car. Neither does it alter the fact that the car had been stolen from the real owner. This is called "coloring the law". The British legal system operates within "Canada" under the same colored law.
And as this says
So shall it be,
 This fact was tacitly admitted by the Justice Department on July 26, 2003 [or even prior] by its failure to respond to David Butterfield's challenge of jurisdiction and lawful authority under the maxim: "he that is silent is deemed to agree."
- - -
Class action suits in the US for the monetary problem - June 2, 2005
A class action was filed on May 27, 2005 in the U.S. District Court, Southern District Court of Ohio by the Plaintiff, Patrick Rudd from Rhode Island. The file number is C205523. The class action in Ohio is based on some class actions launched in Canada:
More class actions are being prepared in Philadelphia, Texas and other states.
Beyond Greed and Scarcity
An interview with Bernard Lietaer
posted by Sepp Hasslberger on Tuesday April 19 2005
updated on Wednesday November 17 2010
URL of this article:
The subject of economics is an extremely difficult one to make understandable, partly because there is enough official mumbo-jumbo to confuse anyone and partly because our economists are full of vague ideas of how things work, one contradicting the next. Surely enough to make anyone throw the towel and "leave it to the experts". Unfortunately, as long as we do so, we will be completely at the effect end of... [read more]
June 25, 2003 - Sepp Hasslberger
Hovering at the edge of bankruptcy
Leaving aside the grave problem of oppressive foreign debts facing developing nations, let's take a look at the industrial nations, which are - technically speaking - no better off than their poorer brethren. The US has accumulated a debt close to an astounding 7 trillion dollars which, according to the Congressional Budget Office is conservatively estimated to grow to 9 trillion within this decade. The average industrialized nation is indebted... [read more]
September 18, 2003 - Sepp Hasslberger
Your Bank - a Money Making Machine
Do you know where the bank gets the $160,000 for your mortgage? It's very simple. Someone walks over to a computer and types 160,000 beside your name. With only $27.93 of cash reserves for every $10,000 of assets (as of June 1999) the bank has just created the remaining $159,553 of that interest-earning money out of thin air. When, after 25 years of hard work, you pay off your mortgage,... [read more]
October 21, 2003 - Sepp Hasslberger
Usury Free Currencies - Hour time is NOW!
Most people I know complain about lack of money and high taxes, high prices, inflation and their personal difficulties in making ends meet. It's almost like a sport, like the football games that come our way with unnerving regularity. There is hardly a family that can survive on the paycheck of one person alone, so mothers often "park" their kids at school and pre-school services to make some of that... [read more]
January 26, 2004 - Sepp Hasslberger
Argentina Defies Monetary Fund - Gives Economic Lesson to Big Finance
Three years after the collapse of Argentina's economy under IMF and World Bank recipes for development, the South American country's budding recovery is stunning international observers. Defying the IMF's prescriptions, president Kirchner and his economic advisers have told creditors to get in line and wait, while building the economy from the bottom up. An excellent article in the New York Times relates the story. The looting of Argentina by international... [read more]
December 30, 2004 - Sepp Hasslberger
World Bank Chief: It's Time to Restore Balance
In our world of 6 billion people, one billion own 80 percent of global GDP, while another billion struggle to survive on less than a dollar a day. This is a world out of balance. When James Wolfensohn, president of the World Bank, addressed the Board of Governors of the Bank at a meeting in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, on September 23, he concluded his talk with an appeal to... [read more]
December 17, 2003 - Sepp Hasslberger