Paul Hellyer’s The Money Mafia – a World in Crisis— copyright 2014
A comment by Connie Fogal, October 2014
Hellyer sets the stage for the rationale of his book with a quote from President Abraham Lincoln:
“I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country…corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all the wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed.”
Why should we read and share this book? In my opinion, this is Hellyer’s most important written contribution to humanity. It is his best work at pulling together crucial information of how the world now functions- who is in control, their agenda, and their power. This is an encyclopedic reference for quick access to descriptions of every form of abuse of money power exerted by the “money mafia”. Once again Hellyer eloquently sets out the deception imposed on the masses about the creation and power of money, and the exploitation of the masses by that deception. It is an excellent depiction of the “End Game” of the New World Order; i.e., the substitution of elite rule for democracy.
Many of us already know much of the information he presents in The Money Mafia. His presentation here is comprehensive, readable and understandable. But this book goes much further than ever before. I have been waiting for that reach.
He informs about the extraterrestrial presence and technology, and about the exploitive abuse of it and us by an elite earthly cabal. The information is necessary to help us know the steps we must take for our salvation. We need to know that sophisticated free energy exists here on earth now, that used for the benefit of all, it can restore the earth to its glory, that it is in the control of an evil cabal who withholds the technology from us while they exploit its use for their greed and power grievously harming earth and its inhabitants in the process. It was that information which compelled me to write this comment in hope of impressing on others the necessity of reading and sharing this book.
Hellyer sets out a do-able necessary action plan in chapter 14: actions for the US President, the US Congress, the G20, Ending the Great Recession, Full Disclosure, Tree Planting, 7 year Transformation to Clean Energy, Writing Off Third World Debt, Winding Up the IMF, a Tobin Tax taxing every exchange of one country’s currency for another to stop speculation in currencies- gambling, a Universal World Currency and a World Bank publicly owned by the people of the world with formula preventing undue influence by any country or region, rolling back the World Trade Organization to a General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs, using the Marquess of Queensbury rules for Trade and Investment, massive reduction of Defence Expenditures and Atomic Weapons worldwide, Reorganizing and Streamlining the United Nations, Limiting Executive Salaries.
Hellyer summarizes his three most important directions: return the control and creation of money to the public interest, taking it out of the hands of private banking; stop the exploitation of the earth’s fossil fuel resources in order to halt global warming; provide full disclosure of the extraterrestrial presence and their advanced technology in order to benefit the public and remove its harmful exploitation by the cabal.
My only criticism is that he does not acknowledge the role of the cabal in the devastating geo-engineering of the environment using the advanced technology at their disposal in manipulation of weather and the atmosphere causing hurricanes, storms, earthquakes, tsunamis. He has omitted reference to the deliberate spraying of harmful chemicals into earth’s atmosphere. (Look up! Look up!) He does not discuss what they are spraying or why. He does not reference the fact that weather warfare exists and is being used as a tool to tyrannize countries (and maybe is an attempt to conquer space control and extraterrestrial life.). It is no longer just, “We can bomb countries out of existence.” It is now, “We can destroy them with drought, deluge, wind, or earthquake.” A Japanese politician confirmed the use of such threats before the Fukushima disaster.
In my opinion, Hellyer’s urgent concern re global warming is flawed because he fails to recognize geo-engineering as the culprit. The calamitous environmental destruction is real and rapid! Geo-engineering is the culprit. It must be stopped.
Still, his urgent message on all other respects is on point and compelling.
In my many years of learning about the evil side of globalization, its power structure and agenda, and sharing what I learned, the common question always came back, “But what can we do about it?” Those of us communicating on the issues answered: “Learn! Be informed! Know that power is within each of us.”
A recurring response was, “Well, what does that mean? How do we find our power, and how do we use it to halt the evil overtaking the world?” I struggled with how to answer. Now I think I know. Hellyer’s The Money Mafia gives me confidence that what I think on this is the way. His information therein about visitors from “starry realms”, and full disclosure about them, and their technology, and the disclosure of the usurpation of that technology by the “money mafia” is the key.
Hellyer has connected those dots well. The power and control of this planet is totally out of the hands of responsible government. It is totally in the hands of unaccountable privatized military, and industrial and banking cartels. The source of their incredible power is the extremely advanced technology at their disposal from downed spaceships which they have co-opted, studied, and reverse- engineered for decades funded by taxpayer trillions. This is the biggest secret of all time. They use the technology in military conquest for world domination and power and greed which process is killing the earth and its peoples. Deals have been made with other world beings which our side have breached respecting the disclosure of the technology which could save this planet from the environmental destruction the military industrial banking complex is creating. The technology could be used for housing, transportation, health, energy— providing earth’s creatures with comfort and peace and happiness as exist elsewhere in the cosmos. But it is used for destruction and conquest.
Hellyer expertly presents information on the evidence of reliable sources, from military to aeronautical, to scientists, to human contactees, most of whom have been sworn to silence based on “national security”, or, worse yet, reprisals and death.
But disclosure of the extraterrestrial existence and its relevance to us has been happening incrementally over time. This book is an example of that.
Hellyer pulls no punches on disclosing who the “money mafia” are, their evil, and the fact that no powerful politician any longer serves us, the masses of the world. They cannot under “money mafia” rule! No political leader of any political stripe gets where he/ she is unless he does as he /she is told by the “money mafia”, those who rule. Hellyer calls them the Three Sisters- the Bilderbugers, the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations. They manipulate, coerce, and lie to the public to accomplish their ends.
At page 246 Hellyer points out that there are two governments in the U.S. — the permanent and the provisional. The permanent is the secular oligarchy that comprises the Fortune 500 companies and lobbyists, the civil and military services, the larger research facilities and law firms, public relations firms, the international banks with close ties to the Fed, the World Treasury Department, the IMF, and the World Bank, the Bretton Woods institutions and the State Department, the information conglomerates that blur the lines between the manufacture of news, and culture and its dissemination. “These are all parts of the permanent government that holds the reins of power. It is a power camouflaged by the antics of the politicians comprising the provisional government.”
Hellyer refers to the permanent government as the “cabal”, the shadow government. He reminds us of President Clinton’s comment to a reporter that that there is a government within the government that he does not control. So, the President is not in control. Nor is the Congress in control even though it approves hundreds of billions on Black Ops that it is not even aware of.
The evil of the cabal is incredible. My information from other sources tells me that now the “money mafia” are implementing mind control on which they have been experimenting for years with HAARP and chemtrails (geo-engineering). Also, they are creating and releasing viruses to make and keep people sick and weak. Why does a patent on the Ebola virus exist in the U.S.? A sick, weak, dumbed down public will not resist because it cannot resist or make change.
Fortunes are made in mass vaccinations. There is a plan unfolding re mass compulsory harmful vaccinations in the U.S. re Ebola, HIV, Polio and other combined vaccines, vaccination cards reminiscent of Nazi Germany, and quarantine for refusal to submit. Canadians must not be smug because Canada now follows the U.S. protocol on command. There is no question that the human masses are under attack by the “money mafia”.
Hellyer juxtaposes the “money mafia” power and control with the potential for salvation through disclosure about the technology from space, and more importantly, the fact of the existence of other civilizations out there— how they live and govern. Why? Because the money mafia will lose their power and control if we learn what they know and withhold from us. They fear our reaction to their lies. But therein lies our power.
Here is the crunch. There exists a Galactic Federation. Earth is a tiny part of the cosmos but is a jewel in its capacities as a planet. Earth humans are one kind of Being. The Galactic Federation is concerned that those in control of earth are rapidly destroying it by the military use of the technology they have reverse engineered. Their rapacious use of nuclear technology is a threat not only to earth but to space.
It is said that the Galactic Federation has the power to intervene on earth to assist in transferring the power into the hands of those who will share for the benefit of all, but a policy of non interference in free will and self determination exists. We cannot sit around twiddling our thumbs waiting for a knight in shining armor. We have to show our own mettle. Humans have to decide we will not tolerate the power being held and used as it is. We have to decide we do not want that destruction, and we will not allow it. We must show our intention to live otherwise, and to share the technology for the benefit of everyone, not for a few.
So, back to the fundamental question: how do we do this? Be informed! Say “No More”! The outrage of a fully informed public will terminate the “end game” of the cabal. A fully informed public will end the rule of the military /industrial /financial complex. Iceland has done it. Iceland jailed its fraudulent bankers and said NO to the IMF. Iceland is thriving.
Hellyer has taken a major step in writing this book. First, we must have knowledge. He gives us knowledge. What he and others like him have been telling us seems incredible. We must satisfy ourselves by studying the evidence presented. I am satisfied.
Hellyer tells us at page 172 to fulfill our responsibilities as citizens by going to www.paradigmresearchgroup.org and watch the proceedings until we are convinced of the reality of UFO’s and the ET presence. This is important to do because the next step of the cabal is to fake an attack from space. They can do this because they have perfected the reverse-engineering of spaceships to the extent that they have duplicated them. Hellyer advises us to ignore that whole new show as being one more monstrous deception. In so doing, he says we can finally strike out the New World Order Pretenders.
Next, I say we must follow all the other excellent, fascinating work ongoing exposing the evil in process by the power structure, like mind control which suppresses thought and resistance. Activists say that is part of what chemtrails are about (as well as climate manipulation). Orwell’s thought-police apparatus is being implemented. A conference in Brussels on this Agenda is set for November, 20 2014. http://covertharassmentconference.com/
Further, we must inform ourselves of what really happened on 9/11. At pages 167 and 168 Hellyer sets out the evidence of Dr. Judy Wood that the buildings were not crushed or pulverized, nor were they heated to the point where they vaporized. They mostly were turned to dust in midair, or dustified. This proves that a technology that can cause such a thing to happen does exist. It is a technology that is capable of providing enormous quantities of free energy. We can be free from being slaves to the energy industry. Free energy is already here, but it has been used for evil purposes, not good. The buildings did not come down because they were hit by planes. “They did not collapse from fire nor from bombs in the building,(or conventional controlled demolition),” said an eye witness. ”They were turned to powder in mid-air.”
Dr Judy Wood wrote in Where Did the Towers Go? “There were 14 survivors in Stairway B of WTC1; when the dust cleared they looked up to see blue sky and walked out on their own. If the building had collapsed, they would have been crushed. If fires or high heat had caused the destruction, they would have been cooked to death and people in southern Manhattan would have been blinded by the light from the tremendous heat required to destroy the building.”
Hellyer tells us that the events of 9/11 were “an attack on human consciousness that affected the whole planet. Hundreds of years of hard won victories against the arbitrary rule of tyrants went down the tube in an infamous day that crowned and confirmed the cult of deceit and disinformation that had become endemic since WW2.”
Why follow all this and keep learning? Because the cabal will run when they know we know; when we say, “No! No more!”
Where is the action or activism in that? The action is in the process of your will and determination being set to live a different way – a way of peace and prosperity for all, not a few. This intention that is building around the world is a way to transmit our request for Galactic Assistance in our reach for a better and different world. (My words, not Hellyer’s). Our will to live otherwise on this planet is manifested by our learning and our intention. This is how we access the Galactic aid— by peaceful intent fuelled by our knowledge, and by our refusal to submit to fear and mind control. This is not just thinking thoughts. We are acting when we learn and share and participate in conferences and talk about the truth. To refuse to stand down or submit is action. In other words, we carry on our various forms of activism! I do not deny that there have been and will be circumstances that extract a great personal sacrifice from some. The whistle blower, Snowden, has not had it easy, but his contribution has been phenomenal. How each of us deals with any efforts to force vaccinations on us may be difficult.
We must resist with knowledge and the refusal to accept the lies as we did for H1N1. We need knowledge before we can take any action wisely. Alternative medicine sites tell us that colloidal silver and vitamin C prevent and cure Ebola. The inhumanity of CODEX that limits and criminalizes natural supplements is part of the agenda of the cabal to eliminate many of us “useless eaters” as Brezinsky (I think it was) called the masses. .
Hellyer’s chapter on “The Two Americas” outlines the rapid destruction by the globalists of the good life as it was in the USA. It is a frightening depiction. At one point he wonders whether the German fascist leaders are, in fact, still in control since their best scientists and best thinkers were imported into the US at the end of WW2 to provide ongoing control. My own husband, Harry Rankin, deceased, who fought in WW2 and was wounded there twice said, “We thought we defeated the Fascists, only now to discover that they never went away.”
We face an evil future of subservience and suffering for those of the masses who will be allowed to live as slaves to the elite few, (provided the cabal does not blow up this earth in its abuse of power and technology.) The movie Elysium portrays such a world, one with the elite living off-planet in an abundance with phenomenal technology including machines that cure all diseases all of which is denied to the surviving servile masses who occupy an environmentally ravaged earth.
But it does not have to be. That is Hellyer’s message.
Hellyer’s book has motivated me to lay it out to you as I see it. We can manifest our will to live otherwise by being informed and sharing our knowledge of what is going on, and by saying NO to the cabal. We must protect our minds. We must reject the manipulation that caused one young woman in England immediately after the 9/11 event to say,“I have to give up my liberty to be free”.
We can learn how to communicate telepathically to the Galactic Federation in order to be a part of a peaceful existence of abundance on this earth which is capable of such a bounty. We can demonstrate our intent by accepting no excuses from the vapid politicians, and by refusing to be ruled by fear even though we may feel it deeply.
Despite the evil perpetrated against the earth and human beings, extraterrestrials recommend against retribution. Hellyer refers to a message from extraterrestrials to grant amnesty to the “civilians and members of the armed forces who have broken numerous laws in the course of what they were led to believe was their duty”. This comes from a book by Jim Sparks in an interview with many extraterrestrials entitled The Keepers: an Alien Message for the Human Race .
Hellyer says that the extraterrestrials admitted that serious crimes had been committed, but not by them. “They urged amnesty in the interests of disclosure,” writes Hellyer. But he says, “While a total amnesty may be appropriate for most misdemeanors, it may be considered inappropriate in cases of murder, or complicity in mass murder like 9/11 where lack of some punishment could not be justified.”
Hellyer contends that the year 2014 is the Year of Decision for Humankind. He quotes some key points from the story of Charlie Paz Wells and his brother who had been in direct contact with several species from afar. “…there are more than 80 different civilizations interacting within our solar system, all of which have gone through an evolutionary process. Now there is peace in the universe and they want to keep it that way. Earth and human beings are going through their own evolutionary process and
are unstable. Humans risk destroying themselves and their planet. Humanity is not in balance with the universe, and the universal laws that control it. The extraterrestrials explained that they want to help us realize that we are not alone and that there is a better way of living and evolving that is sustainable. But before they give us the tools and technology to continue our evolution, they need to be assured that whatever they do for us must be used for ALL humanity. Not just for those in power who will use it to further their own agenda.” Hellyer says they were told in 1974 that in 30+ 10 years we would reach our own year of decision, our watershed when we would have to change our ways dramatically or it would be too late to reverse the trend and we would be subject to great calamities.
Hellyer says, “We are writing our own history day by day, and will determine our future by the choices we make and the actions that we take or fail to take.”
From what I read and follow, I know there is much good work on-going. The “money mafia” is running hard to stay ahead of this good work which will defeat them. I think that the whistle blowers and the powerful good intentions are stronger than the “money mafia”, but only because the whistle blowers and exposers, like Hellyer, do exist. And they do. They do “blow” and they do “expose” courageously.
Many of us are paying attention. We are learning and reaching for that better way of living. We are saying no to vaccines, no to geo-engineering, no to chemtrails, no to mind control, no to private creation and control of money.
In comment I have focused on the extraterrestrial information and technology in this book because that is what resonates for me. But there is so much more here on the power structure in the world and its direction which will resonate with everyone. It is knowledge— knowledge essential to handle this watershed.
The Money Mafia- A World in Crisis is available on Amazon.com
3570 Hull St.
Vancouver British Columbia V5N 4R9
You are subscribed to this mailing list as email@example.com. Please click here to modify your message preferences or to unsubscribe from any future mailings. We will respect all unsubscribe requests.
Harper government asks public servants to delete emails
The Conservative government is telling public servants to delete emails with no “business value,” possibly opening the door to the destruction of potentially valuable or embarrassing records, say critics.
Adrian Wyld / THE CANADIAN PRESS file photo
Treasury Board President Tony Clement notes that federal departments and agencies are releasing an increasing volume of documents in response to growth in requests made through access to information legislation.
By: Mike De Souza Ottawa Bureau, Published on Wed Aug 27 2014
OTTAWA—The Conservative government is telling public servants to delete emails with no “business value,” opening the door to the destruction of potentially valuable records, say critics.
Employees must still preserve information as required by law, a government spokeswoman says, but instructions obtained by the Star show that employees were being told to delete some reference materials related to their work, including memos and copies of departmental documents.
Several departments have issued the instructions in recent weeks to delete records as part of a new two-gigabyte limit imposed on email inboxes for all federal employees based on a new standard , introduced by the secretariat of Treasury Board President Tony Clement .
“Clean up your mailbox and delete everything of no business value,” said a recent message sent to Environment Canada employees this summer.
The Environment Canada message included a poster listing different categories of what could be deleted and what should be preserved.
Documents “approved by your manager” were among the records that the department told employees to save. But some business-related emails fell into a “transitory” category that also includes “messages from your friends” or an “invitation to a party.”
The Environment Canada poster described these as “transitory reference” materials — which could include memorandums, copies of government reports, or reference material for subsequent work. The poster, which identified memos with an image of a paper airplane, showed these types of “transitory” documents going into a trash can.
The NDP’s access to information critic, MP Charlie Angus (Timmins-James Bay) , slammed the instructions, warning that they might erase evidence of political interference or mistakes by managers prior to decisions on federal policies.
“We’ve seen many times where draft reports may contain very vital political information that could be changed, either through political interference or an attempt to whitewash an issue,” Angus said in an interview.
“I have great faith in Canada’s civil service, but I don’t have faith in the embedded political officers who are now operating throughout these departments to protect the rear ends of the ministers.”
The instructions could also lead to the elimination of records, including personal correspondence, that would otherwise be available to the public under the Access to Information Act .
A spokesman for Environment Canada told the Star that its employees were responsible for retaining all information of “business value.”
Environment Canada also told its employees in its internal message that they could take a 60-minute online course, offered by the Canada School of Public Service — a government-owned training school for civil servants — for guidance on what to preserve and what to delete.
The Treasury Board Secretariat , which oversees application of Canada’s access to information legislation, added that government information management policies haven’t changed and continue to “clearly outline employee responsibilities” for information of “business value.”
Clement (Parry Sound-Muskoka) has touted the government’s record on transparency, noting that federal departments and agencies are releasing an increasing volume of documents in response to growth in requests made through access to information legislation.
But the union representing government professionals and scientists is skeptical about the new instructions.
“Given the current government’s track record, a red flag has to go up anytime our members are instructed to delete information,” said Debi Daviau, president of the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada.
“Gathering, maintaining, and assessing evidence has become increasingly difficult under this government and its fondness for secrecy, which has led to muzzling of government scientists.”
The new limits on inboxes are part of a system-wide overhaul of government emails, that would convert 63 separate email systems into a single “@canada.ca” email address for all employees.
A consortium led by Bell Canada was awarded a seven-year contract, worth up to $400 million, to deliver this system.
Daviau said her union was also concerned that the government hasn’t considered using its own employees to manage the email restructuring. She warned that it means profit motives could be conflicting with what’s in the public interest.
“In this case, it could certainly mean that a corporate bottom line decision undermines services and threatens accountability while the price to taxpayers goes up,” she told the Star.
The Treasury Board Secretariat wasn’t immediately able to say Tuesday who had recommended the new email management standard, which came into force on Jan. 1, 2014 and will be phased in over three years. It told the Star that someone set the two-gigabyte limit to “accommodate the significant variance in account sizes” across the government.
Canada’s information watchdog said she wasn’t concerned about the government setting limits on the size of email inboxes as long as it creates systems to preserve “valuable information.”
“It’s important to note, however, that the right of access isn’t confined to information of business value,” said Josée Villeneuve, a spokeswoman for Suzanne Legault, the federal information commissioner. “It applies to all records in existence at the time an institution receives a request (for information), including transitory information.”
In a recent report concluding an investigation into record-keeping of mobile text messages across the government, Legault noted that the right of access to government information is a “quasi-constitutional” right under existing legislation, and that it’s also protected under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which guarantees the right to freedom of expression.
NEW WORLD ORDER
scheme is coming down
THE WATER WARS
Mass Judicial Resignations in Canada Linked to Water War Crimes Corruption
The mass resignations and early retirement of suspected crooked
Canadian judges has gone unreported in the Canadian and international mainstream media but it is clear evidence supporting the accuracy of the allegations set out on this web site that theCanadian system of a politically appointed and, practically, unaccountable judiciary had become riddled with nepotism corruption and croneyism.
Out of approximately 100 superior court judges in British Columbia, nine superior court judges resigned – retired, in December 2011 and Janaury, 2012; Anne Rowles, Carol Huddart, Kenneth MacKenzie, James Shabbits, Dean Wilson, and Grant Burnyeat, or took a supernumary* appointment, Risa Levine, Pamela Kirkpatrick, and David Tysoe. In addition,Supreme Court Master Alan Donaldson suddenly retired on December 31, 2011.
*A supernumary appointment is similar to a retirement but the judge gets half-pay and works half-time over the next year so that he or she has some cash income especially if they don’t have a full pension to draw on. Nine (9) judicial retirements in British Columbia, in two months, is highly unusual (more than 4 x times the estimate average of 1 per month) and corroborates the opinion that a judicial clean-up is going on as a result of the crimes.
Click here to review list of judicial retirements
These judicial retirements follow upon the recent, sudden, early retirements of Supreme Court of Canada Justice, Ian Binnieand Canadian Federal Court Chief Justice, Alan Lutfy, both of whom are deeply linked to the corruption that surrounds the Water War Crimes. Incidentally, former British Columbia Attorney General, Barry Penner announced he would be resigning on August 18, 2011, a mere two days after former Canadian Federal Court Chief Justice, Alan Lutfy announcedhe would be resigning. It was no co-incidence because both Penner and Lutfy were covering up the Water War Crimes.
Immediately after the judicial retirements, British Columbia Premier Christy Clark announced a complete review of theBritish Columbia justice system. Subsequent to that announcement, the three Chief Judges, Finch, Bauman, andCrabtree, in British Columbia, issued two unprecedented joint judicial press releases in defence of judicial independence and most recently, the man in charge of the British Columbia criminal justice system, Robert Gillen, suddenly retired.
Click here to read joint judicial press release
There is very definitely a major change taking place in Canada`s legal and judicial systems.
Canadian Government Corruption Clean Up Continues with Mass Layoffs
Following mass judicial and legal resignations in British Columbia, Canada‘s Central Government announced the firing 12, 000 employees, many of whom were involved in the cover up of the Water War Crimes and other criminal activity by employees and officers of Canada’s Government. The prime target of the cuts was the notoriously corrupt Derparment of Foreign Affairs and International Trade.
These mass civil service layoffs follows on the mass judicial resignations in British Columbia where a group of judges linked to the Water War Crimes and other cover up of criminal activity
suddenly resigned in December, 2011, and January, 2012, (see Mass Judicial Resignations in British Columbia posted March 24, 2012) followed by the sudden “retirement” on March 9, 2012, ofRobert Gillen who was deeply involved in the Water War Crimes cover up and the near death experiernce ofCanada’s Minister of Public Safety Vic Toews on April 3, 2012 who was rushed ot hospital suffering from “chest pains” after covering up the Water War Cimes for over eight long years.
The Canadian Government is obviously co-ordinating its mass layoffs with the mass clean out of high level officer holders inside the world’s banking, financial and investment sectors where, like inCanada’s government, corruption has run unchecked over the past decades.
Click here for list of 700 International Banking Resignations
Canada’s Department of Foreign Affiairs and International Trade has beeen singled out as one of the key agencies that needs a clean out with over 6,000 employees to be laid off. TheDepartment of Foreign Affairs and International Trade is has a long and sordid history of fraud, corruption, blackmail, treaty violations, sexual deviancy and other criminal activites that has prompted average Canadians to demand a complete removal of all of the Canada’s foreign service personnel.
Prime Minister Harper, exercising the power of his new majority government, has taken a necessary first step towards refrorm of Canada corrupt Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade and we applaud this initiative.
The Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade played a key role in the initiation of theWater War Crimes and successive Canadian Ministers, Ambassadors and other officers have been part of a continuiingcriminal conspiracy to conceal the criminal activity that took place.
Canada’s Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade was first identified as having been infiltrated by international communism during World War 2 when Lester Pearson, then working for Canada, in Washington, D.C., was oberved by theAmericans to be leaking top secrets to the Soviets.
Pearson returned to Canada, entered poltics, and led Canada to dramatically to the left by recruiting the norotious self admittedCommunist intellectual, Pierre Trudeau, to the Liberal Party of Canada. Trudeau completed what Pearson set out to do and pushed Canada into the hands of a globalist cabal that intended to take over all of the resources of the world including Canada’swater resources that are critical to the long term survival of theAmerican economy.
The Globalist Cabal, that included Queen Elizabeth and her husband, have been temporarily defeated in their plans but it remains to be seen what Prime Minister Stephen Harper has done in his secret negotiations with the American that took place over the past six years wirth respect to the issue of fresh water exports.
Did Prime Minister Harper protect the interests of Canadians or did he sell out to the Globalist Cabal??
The truth will be more fully revealed as the investigations are now moving into iother realms.
CANADA’S SUPREME COURT
PROTECTS POLITICAL CRIMINALS
On April 5, 2012, the criminal organization that has infiltrated theCanadian Government proved that it still controlled the politically appointed judges of the Supreme Court of Canada that whenJustices Cromwell, Abella, and Lebel (shown above) issued their order refusing to hear the case brought by Mr. Carten andMs. Gibbs because it threatened to expose and destroy the criminal network, allegedly including Queen Elizabeth and her dying husband, that was involved in the Water War Crimes carried out against the people of Canada.
The action in the Canadian Federal Courts has been a great military victory in the onging war against corruption in Canadabecause the forces of freedom and justice have killed and destroyed 27 of Canada’s criminal class and wounded many others without firing a single bullet.
THE WAR ON CORRUPTION CONTINUES
The corruption in Canada’s legal and judicial institutions is deep, pervasive and widespread.
Many more corrupt insiders must be hunted and destroyed.
The Canadian justice system, its lawyers and judges, are notoriously corrupt.
From the bottom to the top and the top to the bottom, from coast to coast to coast, in every city, village and hamlet, politically appointed, unaccountable, unreliable, untrustworthy, dishonest, and sexually perverted judges and lawyers are involved in racketeering, money laundering, corruption, treaty violations, and other criminal activity.
The war for freedom from the judicial and legal criminal tyranny that dominates Canada will continue and more will die because the insiders are now murdering each other in order to protect themsleves from exposure.
Will Vic Toews be the next Victim of the Water War Crimes?
Canadian Publicd Safety, Minister Vic Toews, was rushed to hospital in Ottawa yesterday with a life threatening illness, just likePrince Phillip in December, 2011, and readers of this web site are asking if Vic Toews will soon be buried in the Graveyard of the Guilty along with 31 other persons who have covered up theWater War Crimes in order to protect the guilty.
Co-incidentally both Toews and Prince Philip are Freemasonsand are both linked to members of the Freemason Brotherhood in British Columbia who violated the principles of that ancient fraternity when they carried out the Water War Crimes.
Toews has been covering up the Water War Crimes for years and he is in big, big, trouble both metaphysically, psychologically, and now it appears, physically.
Click read more on right to continue >>>>
When Vic Toews was a lowly opposition member and the Liberal Party of Canada was the government of Canada under Prime Minister Jean Chretien and, later, under Prime Minister Paul Martin, Mr. Carten provided Vic Toews with proof that LiberalParty Ministers, Stephen Owen and Ujjal Dosanjh, had been in charge of the Ministry of the Attorney General in British Columbia when employees of that Ministry had committed the crimes of fraud, perjury and obstruction of justice.
The evidence crimes were committed, was clear and well documented but Vic Toews, who had the opportunity to destroy his political opponents, remained silent and concealed the crimes from the Canadian people and protected the crooked insiders.
When Stephen Harper took over as Prime Minister of Canadain 2006, he appointed Vic Toews to be his Minister of Public Safety which is the Ministry in charge of the Canada’s national police force, the RCMP.
Under the RCMP Act, the Commissioner of the RCMP, at present Commissioner Bob Paulson, must follow the directions of the Minister of Public Safety. So, if Vic Toews orders theRCMP not to investigate certain crimes, the RCMP must follow orders and not investigate those crimes. In this way, Canada’s national police force has become corrupted at the top, crooked politicians and insiders are protected, police morale declines and corruption spreads throughout the force.
Corruption at the top breeds corruption at the bottom.
It was expected that when he was elected the Prime Minister of Canada, Harper would order an investigation of the Water War Crimes because while campaigning for the job of Prime Minister he was provided the same documents provided to Toews and, shortly afterwards, he villified the past government corruption in British Columbia as part of his campaign rhetoric.
If Toews does die from his sudden serious illness, he will be another lesson for those in high office in Canada who cover up crimes against the people of Canada.
God has no mercy on wicked leaders who cheat and deceive their people.
Three Amigos Summit
Water is necessary for life.
Canada has plenty, Mexico and the American southwest do not.
Briefly stated, the ecomonies of the United States andMexico will wither and die without additional supplies of water and the only realistic source of that water is Canada. Furthermore, Canada’s ecomony is utterly and completely dependant on the success or failure of the econonies of its neighbours and it is in Canada’s best interests to do whatever is reasonably possible to insure that success and this includes massive diversions of fresh water to the American southwest andMexico.
It is also consistent with the Golden Rule – the Supreme Lawgoverning relations among friends and neighbours.
Click read more on right to continue reading ……………….
When Prime Minister Harper was elected, he took over a mess of intrigue and corruption related to water exports. A large part of the Canadian population were opposed to water exports as a result of massive illegal fraudulent media campaign by environmental groups that had been funded with foreign money.
These foreign controlled anti-American political lobby groups are still at work in Canada but, as a result of the 2012 Canadian Government budget, they will now fall under close supervision and monitoring by Canada Revenue Agency to insure they use their foreign money in accordance with Canadian law instead of using it for political propaganda causing confusion and mis-understanding on the part of the Canadian public who are particularly vulnerable to distortion, deceit and dishonesty.
Due to his minority government position, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper has had to be extremely cautious making and public announcements about water export because foreign agents in Canada’s media and the opposingCanadian political parties would have used the issue against him.
Nevertheless, Prime Minister Harper went to work and after six years of minority governments, backroom meetings, intimidation, arm-twisting, legal negotiations and other maneouvering,Canadian Prime Minister Stpehen Harper is finally in a position to begin the process of making good on the promises that previousCanadian Prime Ministers made to deliver water to the UnitedStates and Mexico on a massive basis.
Tory – NDP Leadership Prepares
Massive Water Exports
The Canadian political puppet show, apparently controlled from above, continues to move forward towards massive bulk water exports to the United States and Mexico with the election of Thomas Mulcair, (shown in photo on right) a historic supporter of bulk water exports as new leader of Canada’s left wing, socialist, New Democratic Party (NDP) and the introduction of the Canada’s first budget in over 20 years under a right wing majority Conservative Government by Canadian Finance Minister, James Flaherty (shown in photo on left). The budget contains little understood provisions that will assist the water export plans to move forward.
Canadians recall that American President, Ronald Regan, and Canadian Prime Minister, Brian Mulroney, attempted to open the floodgates of massive bulk water exports with the introduction the Canada US Free Trade Agreement in 1989 but those plan were thwarted by the political corruption in Canada, especially in Ottawa and Victoria, BC, when a group of Canadian political insiders attempted to capture an illegal monopoly position so they could enrich themselves from a resource that belonged to all Canadians.
Click here to read the Grand Plan to Steal Canada’s Water
Hidden in the small print of Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s 2012 federal budget are measures that are intended to assist the Government of Canada keep its past agreements with the Government of the United States to export vast amounts of fresh water to both the United States and Mexico.
Firstly, the Conservative Government has shortened of the maximum length of time for an environmental review of a major project, from 48 months to a maximum of 24 months. This means that the various projects can be reviewed, approved, contracts signed and construction initiated and, in some cases completed, prior to the election of a new government that might be opposed to the projects.
Secondly, the Harper government has ordered the Canada Revenue Agency to closely monitor environmental groups that accept money from foreign sources, such as the Sierra Club, that was used by foreign agents to obstruct the export of fresh water to the United States in 1991 by lobbying for a moratorium of water exports that was, in reality, created to assist inisders obtain a monopoly export position.
Click here to link to 2012 Conservative Budget
It is a well established fact that additional supplies of fresh water are critical to the long term survival of the United States economy and, incidentally, Canada’s economy, so America’s enemies have used Canadian environmentalists and their political stooges as part of their ongoing war against America and what is stands for.
Thomas Mulcair has been more blunt and is the only Canadianpolitician, since the late 1980’s in British Colubmia, to openly support managed water exports from Canada to the United States.
Mulcair’s position is based on reason and sound environmental principles. The opposition is based on anti-Americanism and anational delusion that water is Canada’s most prescious resouce when, clearly, Canada has an overabundance of water that caused massive annual flooding and flows into the ocean in massive quantities without any attempt to save it. Unlike gold, diamonds precious minerals, trees, and other resourses, raw water, fresh water, is freely available in Canada and has a negligible market value.
When politicians tell Canadians that water is Canada’s most prescious resource they are outright lying.
Due to its peculiar location and geography, water is the most plentiful renewable resource in Canada and, by any rational measure, water, or snow as it exists in Canada for 6+ months each year, should be the first resource that Canadians would decide to export instead of depleting mines, cutting down old growth forests, exterminiating its natural wildlife or draining its fossil fuel energy reserves.
Mulcair has to be careful because, traditionally, the NDP has been controlled by anti-American globalists and the party has opposed to helping our American neighbours but he does deserves credit for his honesty about water exporets in the past and it is expected he will lead his party in a new direction because theQuebec members of his caucus are not as anti- American as theEnglish speaking members who are, generally, controlled by theLondon based financial interests who have been manipulating Canadian politics and the Harper government through lies and deception.
Click here to link to Mulcair and Water Exports
Over the past several years, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, British Columbia’s disgraced and Ex-Premier, Gordon Campbell, now in hiding in London, England, and Canada’s other western Premiers, US President Barack Obama, California Ex-Governor, Arnold Schwarznegger and several western US Governors, along with the Queen Elizabeth and Prince Charles, have been, quietly and secretively, signing documents that will establish the legal and financial framework for the creation of a North American Water Supply System based largely on Canadian water.
Click here to read and Queen Elizabeth and water exports
The issues are extremely serious. Thirty (30) witnesses have died; many of whom suddenly and in circumstances that suggest they were murdered.
Click here to visit the Graveyard of the Guilty
The water issue will, without doubt, be part of the discussions at the Three Amigos Conference in Washington on April 2, 2012, when US President Barack Obama, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe Claderon meet to discuss trilateral issues.
The Graveyard of the Guilty
A Roll Call of the Dead
Click link or scroll down page for more information.
1. Michel Trudeau, son of former Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, sudden death Friday, November 13, 1998 – by a freak avalanche. Michel Trudeau had nothing to do with the Water War Crimes except he was the son of Pierre Trudeau who was intimately involved with the crimes. There is reason to believe Michel Trudeau’s death was part of a ritual or symbolic murder.
2. John Tait, former Canadian Deputy Minister of Justice, 1988 to 1995 when many Water War Crimes took place aided by Department of Justice. Dies suddenly in 1999 after brief illenss that commences when claim of Sun Belt Water Inc. shifted to Ottawa from British Columbia. Murder is suspected.
3. Pierre Trudean, former Prime Minister of Canada, died September 2000. Trudeau’s role in Water War Crimes remains closely guarded Canadian secret.
4. Mr. Justice James Taylor, crooked decision against Mr. Carten, October 2001, death by sudden unexpected heart attack while in excellent health, January, 2006. Murder suspected.
5. Judge Sid Clark, crooked decision against Mr. Carten, June 1998, death 2007, cause unknown.
6. Mr. Justice Robert Edwards, crooked decision against Mr. Carten, May 1996, death by sudden unexpected heart attack while in excellent health, November 5, 2007. Probably murdered.
7. Mr. Justice Antonio Lamer crooked decisions at Judicial Council against Mr. Carten and Ms Gibbs, 1998 -99, sudden death November, 2007, due to heart issues.
8. Chief Justice Allan McEachern, crooked decisions at Judicial Council against Mr. Carten and Ms Gibbs, 1998-2001, sudden death January, 2008
9. Mr. Justice Ralph Hutchinson, crooked decision 1997 against Ms. Gibbs, sudden death March, 2008. Murder a possibility.
10. Mr. Stan Hagen, crooked activities against Sun Belt water – 1991 – and against Mr. Carten 2005 -2008, sudden death by heart attaack January 2009, two hours after meeting with crooked BC Premeir Gordon Campbell. Murder suspected.
11. Jean Pellitier, a long time friend and close ally of Prime Minister Jean Chretien. Died by sudden onset cancer on January 10, 2009. Pellitier was Chief of Staff for Prime Minister Jean Chretien from 1993 to 2001 when many of the Water War Crimes were carried out. Murder by cancer a possibility.
12. Chief Judge Hugh Stansfield, malicious prosecution of Mr. Carten 2008, sudden death May, 2009, allegedly by sudden cancer. Murder or suicide probable.
13. Mr. Justice David Vickers, crooked activities aganist Mr. Carten 1996, dead November, 2009.
14. Mr. Justice John Bouck crooked decisions against Sun Belt Water 1997, dead January2010.
15. Mr. Jack Ebbels, crooked activities relating to water exports 1988 to 1991, sudden death by heart attack, February, 2010, murder probable.
17.Mr. Glen Shortliffe, crooked activities relating to water exports 1988 to 1992, sudden death by unexpected heart attack, May, 2010, murder probable.
18. Mr. Mario Lague, top water export insider, Privy Council adviser to Prime Ministers Chretien and Paul Martin 1998 to 2005, sudden death by “alleged” motor vehicle accident, August 12, 2010. Murder possible.
19. Senator Norm Atkins, linked to Water War Crimes insiders, death from heart complications September 26, 2010,
20. Maurice Foster, top advisor to Prime Minister Jean Chretien succumbs to lingering illness October 10, 2010.
21. Jack Hooper, part of Canada’s Spy Agency that spied on Mr. Carten, Ms. Gibbs and Sun Belt Water Inc., death from sudden heart attack, at age 57, November 12, 2010. Murder probable.
22.David Lam, Lieutenant Governor of BC who signed illegal orders in council enacting illegal moratorium on bulk water exports in March 1991. Death, at age 87, on November 22, 2010, murder not suspected.
22. Michel Gratton, press secretary for Prime Minister Mulroney, 1985 to 1988, found dead January 13, 2011, cause of death not stated, age 58. Author of Spyworld the exposure of Canada’s intelligence establishment. Murder is suspected.
23. Audrey Best Bouchard, dead by cancer Janaury 25, 2011. Wife of former Quebec separatist leader, Lucien Bouchard who attempted to confer an illegal water export monopoly onW.C.W. Western Canada Water Enterprises Ltd. In 2000, Best Bouchard joined the law firm of Heenan Blaikie a safe haven for several players in the Water War Crimes. Cancer is the alleged cause of death.
24. Mr. Justice H.A.D. (Bert) Oliver, retired B.C. Supreme Court Justice and top Freemason. Died January 14, 2011 after suddenly falling ill 2 month prior. Leading British Columbia judicial insider and keeper of many corrupt secrets. Murder a possibility.
25. Gillian Wallace, Assistant Deputy and Deputy Attorney General of British Columbia with links to federal Department of Justice, dead March 1, 2011, allegedly by cancer. Responsible for crimes of fraud perjury and obstruction of justice in Water War Crimes. Linked to other major crime by Ministry of Attorney General for British Columbia. Top government insider.
26. Donald Brenner, former Chief Justice of Supreme Court of British Columbia, dead March 13, 2011, from sudden heart attack when in excellent health. Brenner made corrupt rulings against Mr. Carten and was a member of judicial mafia and linked to other judicial crimes. Murder is suspected.
27. Martin Mason, senior partner at Gowlings. Represented Canadian Judicial Ccouncil and several crooked judges. Acted corruptly by opposing justice and protecting the guilty. Died suddenly June 18, 2011. Possible murder victim.
28. Jack Layton, dead on August 22, 2011. Leader of Canada’s New Democratic Party. Layton played a key role in the cover up of the Water War Crimes and mis-leading the Canadian public over water export issues. Layton developed cancer in early 2011, seemed to be recovering, and suddenly died. Murder a possibility.
29. Sandra Gail Roberts, dead September 30, 2011. Allegedly an integral part of Government of Premier Gordon Campbell when Campbell was covering up crimes by insiders. Death
by rapidly developing cancer after leaving Premier’s office, murder suspected
30. Reg Alcock, dead October 14, 2011. Was a member of Governments of Jean Chretien and Paul Martin when they commenced illegal and despicable attack on Mr. Carten and Ms. Gibbs. Dropped dead from alleged sudden heart attack at Winnipeg International Airport. Probable murder victim.
SCROLL DOWN FOR MORE INFORMATION
Dead Judges Don’t Lie
This is where things start to get spooky. Eleven crooked judges linked to this one lawsuit suddenly started dying when Mr. Carten started exposing their crimes. Fifteen other key witnesses also suddenly dropped as the case heated up.
In addition, former Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeausuddenly died in September, 2000, while the rats in Ottawa were juming ship.
The eleven judges were in a postion to blow the whistle on the judicial mafia and how it operates in Canada, especially in British Columbia. Did someone have a motive for murder?
You bet they did.
The dead judges were not the masterminds behind the Water War Crimes. They were merely the footsoldiers directed to attack anyone exposing the Water War Crimes. Their targets were,Sun Belt Water Inc., Aquasource Ltd., Mr. Carten and his family and, collaterally, Ms. Gibbsand her family. The generals in this aspect of the Water War Crimes remain hidden but they are there, nonetheless, and their soldiers, the judges, are expendable.
Soldiers On A Battlefield
In every war, there are the dead and the wounded; the casualties.
There is a war going on, between Canada and the United States, over fresh water. It is a political war and a legal war. Some say it could lead to a military war.
Mr. Carten and Ms Gibbs were caught in the cross-fire. So were nine Canadian judges. They are dead. Mr. Carten and Ms. Gibbs have survived- so far….
The Canadian and British Columbia Governments targeted Mr. Carten and attempted to destroy him because he was helping the American corporation, Sun Belt Water, Inc., in a lawsuit that threatened to expose political corruption related to fresh water exports at the highest levels of government in Ottawa, Canada’s capital, and in Victoria, the capital of British Columbia, Canada’s western most province.
The Governmentr strategy was simple, destroy Sun Belt’s case by destroying its lawyer, Mr. Carten, and by destroying the woman who had been helping him, Ms. Gibbs, a divorced, single mother with five children. The tools were readily available. Trap them in litigation, insert crooked judges into the cases and create chaos in their lives with crooked judicial rulings. Attack Mr. Carten through the Law Society of British Columbia (a government controlled agency), attempt to get him disbarred, use corrupt psychiatrists to try to discredit him, prevent him from practicing law, railroad him into jail, and bring fraudulent criminal charges against him.
The strategy worked. They were reduced to poverty. Their assests were looted by perverse judicial rulings. Mr. Carten, although never disbarred or suspended, was prevented from practising law in British Columbia.
Their enemies thought they had won but they underestimated who they were dealing with.
Mr. Carten and Ms. Gibbs fought back. They searched for information that would prove to destroy those who had attacked them. They interviewed private citizens from all over British Columbia, Alberta and other parts of Canada who had similar horror stories about the Canadian judiciary and certain prominent Canadian law firms. They spoke with private investigators and police officers. They contacted people outside Canada for information.
They learned about the judicial mafia, a secret group of select judges who control the agenda in Canada’s court system and fix cases for the benefit of their friends and colleagues.
Documents and information came into their possession which proved there had been a criminal conspiracy related to bulk water exports that included the Chief Justice of British Columbia, several BC Attorney Generals, a number of Premiers, one, possibly more, Prime Ministers of Canada and several judges who had acted against us in various court cases.
How Stephen Harper Kept His Promise To Clean Up the Justice System
On October 8, 2005, Mr. Carten hand delivered to Stephen Harper, the Second Police Report, a 100 plus page book of documents showing that Paul Martin’s fellow cabinet, Stephen Owen, Ujjal Dosanjh, and Anne McLellan had been involved in a classic political cover up of criminal misconduct carried out by government employees in the Sun Belt Water Inc litigation. Within eight weeks, Stephen Harper had persuaded NDP leader, Jack Layton, and Bloc Quebecois leader, Gilles Duceppe, to join with him and to vote Prime Minister Paul Martin’s minority government out of power.
Did Stpehen Harper use the Second Police report to persuade Jack Layton and Gilles Duceppe to destroy Paul Martin? You will have to ask Stephen Harper about that.
Nonetheless, within weeks, Mr. Harper was elected and the first of the eleven judges, suddenly, dropped dead.
We are not accusing Stephen Harper of murder but the reader should keep in mind that Stephen Harper promised to fix the justice system and it is assumed that his investigations may have put pressure on some of the bad guys in the system. The litany of judicial deaths set out below reads like an execution process.
Number 1. – Mr. Justice James Taylor – January 10, 2006
At the same time that we delivered our evidence to Stephen Harper, we began to report to the appropriate authorities, the serious criminal misconduct of Mr. Justice James Taylor of the Supreme Court of British Columbia, appointed to office by Mr. Jean Chretien, and, on January 10, 2006, at his ski cabin on Mt. Washington, Vancouver Island, Judge Taylor suddenly dropped dead, at age 64, in excellent health, from an alleged heart attack. Mr. James Taylor was dead judge number one. Little did we know that by June 3, 2011 eleven crooked judges, all of whom abused their positions of trust and authority in order to cause us harm, would be dead along with 12 others.
In retrospect, we suspect Mr. Justice Taylor was murdered or committed suicide to avoid public humiliation to himself and his family for the crimes he had committed which were in addition to his judicial attack on Mr. Carten and his family.
We conducted an analysis of the cases Justice Taylor was assigned to. Time and time again,Justice Taylor was inserted by his masters into cases that had a political dimension and, in those cases, he protected dirty politicians or other government insiders at the expense of the average citizen.
In our opinion, Justice Taylor and the remaining eleven dead judges were part of the “judicial mafia”, a term used by an RCMP inspector to describe the group of judges who fix cases in Canada. Since the days of Pierre Trudeau’s government, the RCMP have been restrained from investigating the “judicial mafia” and political crimes because the RCMP have been under direct political control of the federal government by virtue of provisions in the RCMP Act inserted byMr. Trudeau’s government.
However, as private citizens, we were not restrained from carrying out investigations of those who attacked us. As we collected information from multiple sources about our enemies and starting publishing it, they started dropping dead.
Click here to read more about Justice James Taylor
Number 2. – Provincial Court Judge Sid Clark – Deceased Sometime 2007
The second death occurred sometime during 2007, at a date we have not yet confirmed when British Columbia Provincial Court Judge Sid Clark died. Judge Sid Clarkwas a early player in the strategic judicial attack on Mr. Carten by the Government of Canada. He denied Mr. Carten his fundamental right to call witnesses in his own defence at a trail where his liberty was in issue and set the stage for the subsequent imprisonment of Mr. Carten by another handpicked Provincial Court judge. Judge Clark had hung his head in shame, and stared at his desk when he made his judgment that was part of the railroading of Mr. Carten in 1998. Was Judge Clark’s death in 2007 a co-incidence? Was it related to the fact that Mr. Carten had been publishing the facts of Judge Clark’s misconduct to various authorities in 2006 and 2007? Was Judge Clark murdered to silence him?
Prior to his appointment to the bench Judge Clark was a fine and honourable man and, with the exception of what he did that particular monring in the summer of 1998, we have no information otherwise. The people that compromised the integrity of Sid Clark on that summer morning in 1998 should be hunted down and put in jail.
Click here to read more about Judge Sid Clark.
Number 3. – Mr. Justice Robert Edwards – deceased – November 5, 2007
On November 5, 2007, the third crooked judge, Mr. Justice Robert Edwards, dropped dead from a sudden unexpected heart attack. In May 1996, Justice Edwardswas inserted by his masters into a case involving Mr. Carten and made orders that caused serious harm to Mr. Carten, his children and his ex-wife. At the time, we did not understand why Mr. Edwards would attack Mr. Carten but, a year later, documents came into our hands that proved that Mr. Justice Edwards was a key player in the bulk water export crimes when he was Deputy Attorney General of British Columbia.
Other investigations have proved that Mr. Justice Edwards was a key player in the Dr. Kuntz affair, a multi-million dollar medical insurance fraud carried out by the offices of some of Canada’s premier law firms located in Vancouver. What was unsettling about the death of Mr. Justice Edwards was its date. We had been complaining about Mr. Justice Edwards for several years with no apparent result but he dropped dead less than 10 days after we served his former employer, the Attorney General of British Columbia, with legal papers that implicated Justice Edwards as a major player in the criminal conspiracy related to bulk water exports. In addition, November 5th is Guy Fawkes Day in recognition of the Englishman, Guy Fawkes, who attempted to blow up the British Parliament in 1605. As a result of his criminal activities, which violated the laws passed by Parliament and the British Columbia legislature, it was fitting that Mr. Justice Edwards died, was murdered, or committed suicide on Guy Fawkes Day.
Click here to read more about Justice Robert Edwards
Number 4. – Chief Justice Antonio Lamer – retired – Deceased November24, 2007
On November 24, 2007, the fourth judge, retired Canadian Chief Judge, Antonio Lamer, died, allegedly, from heart disease. Mr. Lamer’s death was less than one month after we served legal papers on the Government of Canada directly implicating retired Justice Lamer in high level corruption that was related to bulk water exports. Was this another co-incidence? Did Mr. Lamer’s health suddenly fail because he knew his crimes were now being exposed? Was Justice Lamer murdered in order to silence him?
Click here to read more about Chief Justice Antonio Lamer and the Water War Crimes
Number 5. – British Columbia Chief Justice Alan McEachern – Deceased – January 5, 2008
On January 11, 2008, the fifth judge died. Retired British Columbia Chief Justice, Alan McEachern, allegedly succumbed to cancer. He was 81. His death was about two months after after we served his former employer, the Government of Canada, with the same legal papers that implicated Edwards and Lamer. Those legal papers placedMr. McEachern squarely in the center of a the criminal conspiracy involving bulk water exports while he was the Chief Justice of British Columbia. Was this another mere co-incidence? Was his death hastened by the realization that involvement in high level corruption was now part of the public record in court proceedings?
Mr. McEachern was a key player in the judicial mafia inBritish Columbia and, along with Beverley McLachlin he used his influence at the Canadian Judicial Council to block many investigations of judicial corruption.
Click here to read more about Chief Justice Alan McEachern and the Water War Crimes
Number 6. – Mr. Justice Rafe Hutchinson – Retired – Deceased – March 2008
On March, 20 2008, the sixth judge died. Retired Justice Ralph Hutchinson, age 77, died less than three weeks after he was served with a copy of the Statement of Claim in the Water War Crimes lawsuit that accused him of participating in a judicial conspiracy to cause harm to Karen Gibbs and her young family as part of the despicable strategy of the Government of Canada.
His obituary stated he had been in excellent health but slipped into an illness a few weeks before his death and passed away. Was this another co-incidence?
Did Justice Hutchinson develop a guilty conscience so severe that it killed him?
Was Justice Hutchinson murdered to prevent him from talking?
Click here to read more about Justice Ralph Hutchinson and the Water War Crimes.
Number 7. – Provincial Court of British Columbia Chief Judge Hugh Stansfield – Deceased May 7, 2009
For a time, it appeared the dying was over when, on May 7, 2009, judge number seven dropped dead when Provincial Court Chief Judge, Hugh Stansfield, suddenly and mysteriously, died, allegedly, from cancer. Judge Stansfield’s death came a few days after documents were exchanged over the internet that implicated Judge Stansfield in the sexual abuse of children as young as six. This information was being gathered and put into a legal format in the last two weeks of April, 2009, with the intent of filing it in a court in support of a petition to remove Judge Stansfieldfrom office. Agents of the Government of Canada were monitoring that e-mail exhange. Immediately Jim Judd, head of CSIS and Kevin Lynch, Clerk of the Privy Council, announced they would be resigning and Chief Judge Hugh Stansfield was dead by May 7, 2009.
Death by cancer was a convenient alibi because, five years earlier, Judge Stansfield had been treated for cancer but death by cancer defied common sense because Judge Stansfield was seen to be in robust good health at a public hearing on April 25, 2009, yet 12 days later he was dead from a disease that kills slowly over months or years. Did Judge Stansfield really die of cancer? Was he murdered? Did he commit suicide?
If you don’t understand this pedofile stuff then let’s make it very plain. If you want to control a judge, police officer or a bureaucrat, you can bribe him, but that is expensive. If is cheaper and more effective to control him or her through blackmail and a pedofile or someone who delights in child porn is very easy to blackmail. There have been persistent rmumours that there was a nest of pedofiles operating in the justice and police systems in Canada. This is no co-incidence.
Judge Stansfield and his legal assistant had been a key player in the malicious prosecution and attempted railroading of former Sun Belt Water lawyer, John Carten, by insiders with the Government of British Columbia. That prosecution commenced January 30, 2008, nine days after the Statement of Claim in Action T-95-08 was filed in the Federal Court.
This was a mean-minded, dirty prosecution based on fraudulent statements given to the police byChief Judge Stansfield’s legal assistant, Brenda Edwards, complaints were filled with Premier Gordon Campbell and BC Attorney General, Wally Oppal, that Chief Judge Stansfield was refusing to carry out an investigation of BC Provincal Court Judge Brian Klaver and BC Law Society CEO, Tim McGee, who had been secretly communicating with each other in some mysterious way to set aside subpoenas that had been issued to compel Mr. McGee to appear in court as a witness in a case where the BC Government was trying to put the accused in jail and the Law Society was a party to the offence in question. Judge Brian Klaver was the trial judge.
Chief Judge Stansfield was a dirty judge appointed to his position by Premier Gordon Campbell. Prior to his appointment to the bench Judge Stansfield was also a significant player in the medical insurance fraud we have previously referred to as the Dr. Kuntz Affair.
Within a month of the death of Judge Stansfield, on June 11, 2009, another Defendant in Federal Court Action, T-95-08, BC Supreme Court Chief Justice, Donald Brenner, suddenly announced he was taking early retirement. It was obvious that Mr. Brenner was beginning to feel the heat and, perhaps, someone was starting to ask him questions he did not wish to answer.
Mr. Brenner’s early retirement, at age 64, when he could sit to age 75, reminded us of the early retirements taken by Canada’s Chief Justice, Antonio Lamer, in August 1999, and BC Supreme Court Chief Justice, Bryan Williams, in February 2000 after complaints had been filed about Williams between July and December 1999 that linked mis-conduct by Williams to then sitting Prime Minister Jean Chretien. Mr. Brenner had been a shadowy figure in the judicial attack on Mr. Carten. As Chief Justice, Mr. Brenner was probably responsible for assigning the crooked Mr. Justice Taylor to Mr. Carten’s case. The role of Mr. Brenner in this matter is not fully explored due to the stalling and delay by Mr. Justice Lutfy and the prothonotary Mr Lafreniere in the Federal Court and the refusal of the Minister of Justice to respond to our requests for an investigation.
The resignation of Bryan Williams was front page news in British Columbia in the first week of February, 2000, but the Canadian Judicial Council Executive Director, Jeannie Thomas, andBritish Columbia’s Chief Justice, Allan McEachern, both defendants in Action T-95-08, immediately set out to deceive and bamboozle the Canadian public by falsely denying that there had been any complaints about or investigation of Chief Justice Williams prior to his resignation. There certainly were complaints and there certainly had been an investigation. Canada’s new Chief Justice Beverly McLachlin and every member of her court was advised that the statements by Mr. McEachern and Ms. Thomas were fraudulent but, to date, no action has been taken to amend the public record.
We have added Chief Justice McLachlin as a defendant to our action because she is the Chairperson of the Canadian Judicial Council and, as such, she has a legal and ethical duty to insure the Canadian Judicial Council does not engage in fraud, deception, or deceit as it has.
Mr. Carten contacted Globe and Mail reporter Robert Matas who, in a story he had written, quoted the fraudulent statement by Jeannie Thomas and he informed Mr. Matas that both Ms. Thomas and Chief Justice McEachern were not telling the truth. Although initially interested,Mr. Matas and his publisher declined to issue a public correction or retraction and, arguably, theGlobe and Mail has been a party to a fraud.
The Vancouver Sun and the Victoria Times Colonist were also contacted and advised their stories about the events leading to the resignation of Chief Justice Williams were factually wrong and they too refused to print a retraction.
So, ask yourself. What is going on?
Why did NINE judges, all connected to one case, suddenly begin to drop dead when our legal process exposed them as participants in a criminal scheme?
Were any of them murdered?
Why did two Chief Justices of the BC Supreme Court, who played a role in this matter and who were appointed to office by Prime Minister Jean Chretien and his colleagues, suddenly resign?
Why did the Chief Justice of BC and the official spokesperson for the judiciary in Canada lie to the public in March of 2000?
Why did the Globe and Mail, the Vancouver Sun other newspapers publish false information that has misled the Canadian public for almost a decade?
Why has the CBC never explained to Canadians the facts about the corruption that took place in relation to bulk water exports to the USA when it has broadcast a number of stories about bulk water exports but always steering clear of the political corruption issues?
Why did the Federal Court prothonotary Mr. Roger Lafreniere refuse to process two relatively simple court applications in Action T-95-08 for over a year?
Was Roger Lafreniere acting under directions to stall and delay?
Why did Chief Justice Lutfy, who was so close to Jean Chretien that he interviewed potential cabinet ministers, appoint Roger Lafreniere, a prothonotary, to be the case management judge in Action T-95-08 when we had requested a real judge because of the seriousness of the case?
Why is the present Minister of Justice, Rob Nicholson, and the present BC Attorney General,Mike Dejong, opposing our application to have our case heard by a judge who enjoys security of tenure instead of a clerk of the court, Mr. Lafreniere, who has no security of tenure, and who can fired at the will of Stepehn Harper’s Conservative government or by some future Liberal government?
Cick here to read more about Provincial Court Chief Judge Hugh Campbell Stansfield and the Water war Crimes
Number 8. – Mr. Justice David Vickers – November 15, 2009
And then there was the death of Mr. Justice David Vickers on November 15, 2009 another prediction come true.
According to his obituary, David Vickers was diagnosed with terminal cancer in July, 2009, only two months after Mr. Carten and Ms. Gibbs predicted “more destruction and death” in a letter to Prime Minister Harper, Justice Minister Nicholson, Kevin Lynch, Clerk of the Privy Council, and John Sims, Deputy Minister of Justice.
On page two of the letter Mr. Carten and Ms. Gibbs wrote:
“Once again, we are offering you and your colleagues the opportunity to settle our claim justly and on established principles of law and equity, instead of compelling us to move forward in a manner that will, under karmic law lead to more death and destruction”.
The offer was rejected and David Vickers died on November 15, 2009.
David Vickers had been Deputy Attorney General for British Columbia from 1973 to 1976.
Due to his connections with the Ministry of the Attorney General he was close to Robert Edwards, the former Deputy Attorney General who guided the British Columbia government in its breach of the Free Trade Agreement, the GATT and the Water Act.
David Vickers was also close to long term employee of the Minstry of the Attorney General,William Pearce, the lawyer who led the strategy of fraud, fraudulent concealment, perjury and obstruction of justice in the Sun Belt Water lawsuit. Like William Pearce, David Vickers had a second home on Thetis Island, a small island located north of the City of Victoria.
We have not yet determined if David Vickers had his home provided to him “free of charge” like one was provided to William Pearce by an unknown benefactor.
David Vickers played a central role in the cover up of the War War Crimes which included his participation in two perverse judgments that prevented Aquasource Ltd., a company hoping to develop a water export business, from obtaining access to the “cabinet submission” that proved the British Columbia government was violating international trade law in order to favour “friends of the government”.
Because of David Vickers fraudulent application of the law, Aquasource Ltd. and Sun Belt Water Inc. were forced into lengthy and costly litigation.
If David Vickers had not been a crooked judge, both cases might have been resolved long long ago.
In addition, David Vickers showed up as a secret agent for the British Columbia government in 1996 as presiding judge at a pre-trial conference in Mr. Carten’s divorce proceedings and he fed back critical information that allowed the BC Government to sabotage Mr. Carten by later inserting its agent, Robert Edwards, as the judge at the divorce trial. This is how the Government manipulated the strings in the court system.
While most people think cancer is a physical dis-ease it often has its genesis in emotional issues. David Vickers knew he had done wrong. He knew he had harmed people by it. His conscience worked on him. He was ill at ease with himself because of it and became dis-eased. He developed cancer and died.
Or was David Vickers murdered by insiders who gave him one a dose of some of the chemical weapon often used to actually cause cancer in intended victims. David Vickers knew some secrets and he was a liability.
Click here to read more about Justice David Vickers and the Water War Crimes.
Number 9. – Mr. Justice John Bouck deceased January 18, 2010
Justice John Bouck is dead judge number nine. He was retired and aged 79. So, we aren’t trying to persuade you there was a murder here.
Justice John Bouck was one of the players in the cover up of the WaterWarCrimes. In 1997, he made a perverse, i.e. crooked ruling, against Sun Belt Water Inc. There were two cases that stated the applicable law. One by the Supreme Court of Canada, the other by the Ontario Court of Appeal. Mr. Justice Bouck decided he would not follow the law that was given to him by lawyers for both the Crown and Sun Belt. This was wrong. Mr. Bouck caused a lot of harm to some innocent people by not following the law. He earned bad karma.
Justice John Bouck, probably acting under instructions from insiders, also made unnecessary and legally incorrect comments about the likelihood of success of the claim of Sun Belt Water Inc. This also earned him bad karma.
Mr. Justice John Bouck loved the law. He wrote many books and articles. He also blew the whistle on the inordinate powers of the Chief Justice in a series of articles that appeared in Canadian newspapers in 1998 that may have been prompted by the pressure put upon him in 1997 to make a false judgment against Sun Belt Water Inc.
Our sources have advised Mr. Justice John Bouck was personally threatened for publishing this material about the powers of the Chief Justice.
Our opinion of Justice John Bouck was later corroborated by e-mail correspondence from a gentleman, who will remain anonymous, but who suggested John Bouck was in league with drug dealers.
Click here to read more about Justice John C. Bouck and the Water War Crimes.
NUMBER 10 – JUSTICE H.A.D. (BERT) OLIVER
DECEASED JANUARY 12, 2011
The death of former British Columbia Supreme Court Justice H.A.D. Oliver on January 12, 2011, was a not a complete surprise. After all, he was 89. However, until 2 months before his deaht he was in excellent health.
Oliver, shown on the right in the photo, was extremely well connected, internationally, and it is suspected he was a sleeper agent for British Intelligence operating in Canada.
Click here to read more about Justice H.A.D. Oliver and his sudden death.
No 11 – FORMER BRITISH COLUMBIA CHIEF JUSTICE DONALD BRENNER DECEASED ON MARCH 12, 2011.
Donald Brenner was appointed a judge of the Supreme Court of British Columbia, in 1992, when the notoriousJohn Tait was Deputy Attorney General for Canada.
Donald Brenner was appointed Chief Justice of theSupreme Court of British Columbia by Prime Minister Jean Chretien in 2000 to replace Chief Justice Brian Williams who was forced to resign in February, 2000, after Mr. Carten blew the whistle onhim for caught him manipulating the judicial process.
Mr. Brenner suddenly resigned from his position as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of British Columbia in June, 2009, one month after British Columbia Provincial Court Chief Judge Hugh Stansfield suddenly dropped in circumstances that suggest he was murdered or committed suicide. It appeared that Donald Brenner was frightened for his life.
Then, almost 2 years later, Donald Brenner dropped dead from an unexpected heart attack on March 12, 2011. Murder is suspected.
Click here to read more about Chief Justice Donald Brenner and his role in the Water War Crimes.
The Foregoing are the Eleven Dead Judges linked to this Lawsuit.
Who will be next?
There are several judges named in the Water War Crimeswho deliberately did injustice and who remain alive. There are some against whom our allegations may be wrong and, if so, we deeply apologize and encourage you to clarify your position by contacting us at firstname.lastname@example.org.
But, there are others who know that they did wrong.
We encourage those who know they did wrong to make amends by coming clean. Doing so will help to balance your karma.
Seventeen Other Sudden Deaths
Michel Trudeau was the youngest son of Canada’s most famous Prime Minister, Pierre Elliott Trudeau.
On November 13, 1998, exactly one month after theGovernment of Canada escalated its war against John Frederick Carten, by illegally putting Carten, a man who had committed no crime, into a prison on Vancouver Island, Pierre Trudeau’s son was dead. Carten was imprisioned after a trial where he was not permitted to call necessary witnesses in his defence. Trial was fixed by agents of the Trudeau mob.
On Novemvver 13, 1999, Michel Trudeau was back country skiing in Canada’s Rocky mountians when an avalanche crashed down a mountain side and swept him to and icy death in a lake below.
Avalanches are extremely rare, in November, in Canada’s Rocky Mountains and there are those who say that the death of Michel Trudeau was the result of pre-meditated murder in retaliation against Pierre Trudeau.
In the backwoods of British Columbia, there live men, many on the run from the Government of Canada, who know every rock and every tree and who know exactly where to place an explosive device in order to create an avalanche that would kill the unsuspecting son of a Prime Minister they despised.
There are those who say that agents of Mr. Carten set up explosive charges in the mountains to induce the avalanche that swept Michel Trudeau to his death.
This is unlikely because, at the time, Carten was unaware of the involvement of Pierre Trudeau in the Water War Crimes. The RCMP, Canada’s national police force, scoured the area buy could not find the body of Michel Trudeau and the cause of death remains unknown.
There are others who say the devil had come to collect on the bargain he made with Pierre Trudeau in exchange for giving Trudeau the power, position and prestige he craved.
But there are others who say that Michel Trudeau was also the target of an earlier failed assassination attempt on July 17, 1998.
Click here to read more about the role of Pierre Trudeau in the Water War Crimes and the probable murder of his son Michel.
WAS FORMER DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR CANADA
JOHN TAIT MURDERED?
John Tait was Deputy Attorney General for Canadafrom 1988 to 1993, when some of the key steps in theWater War Crimes took place and John Tait was probably involved due to his position. .
While John Tait was Deputy Attorney Geneal for Canada several of the above mentionned dead judges were appointed to the bench or elevated to the position of Chief Jsutice. In Canada’s system of Government, these are positions that require the approval of the Deputy Attorney General.
Eventually, John Tait’s proverbial chickens came home to roost when, in 1998, Sun Belt Water Inc. moved its cae from Canada domestic courts, where agents of Canada’s Department od Justice had boxed it in and were burying the case, to a proceeding under the arbitration provisions of the NAFTA. The case sent shock waves through Canada’s establishnent and, soon afterwards, John Tait got sick and died and there is good reasons to believe he was murdered because he could have ratted on the insiders involved in the Water War Crimes and several prominent Canadians would have gone to jail.
Click here to read more about John Tait and the Water War crimes:
Click here to read more about Canada’s Department of Justice and the Water War Crimes
FORMER CANADIAN PRIME MINISTER PIERRE TRUDEAU
PSYCHIC ATTACK INDUCES DEATH
Shortly after the Sun Belt Water Inc. bombshell landed in Ottawa, in September, 2000, former Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau died.
Was Trudeau another victim of the Water War Crimes?
The Canadian government is very secretive about the financial profiteering by Trudeau and his cabinet whenTrudeau was Prime Minister. Files realted to the establishment of Canada’s national oil company, Petro Canada, using taxpayers money to purchase shares of a company allegedly owned by the Trudeau family, at highly inflated prices, have been ordered sealed for over 50 years.
Trudeau was dirty.
Click here to read more about Pierre Trudeau and the Water War Crimes.
Was British Columbia Politician Stan Hagen Murdered January 2009
Long time Comox Valley politician, Stan Hagen died from a sudden heart attack, in January 2009, only a few hours after a meeting with former BC Premier Gordon Campbell. We suspect he was murdered.
Hagen had been in the cabinet of former British columbiaPremier Bill Vander Zalm when illegal benefits were conferred upon W.C.W. Western Canada Water Enterprises Ltd.
In a private conversation with investors from the Comox Valley, on Vancouver Island, Hagen advised that there was really big money behind W.C.W Western Canada Water Enterprises Ltd.
A few years before his death, Stan hagen had had a private meeting with US Billionaire, David Rockerfeller, who controls a company called CEDE and Company that was heavily invested in W.C.W. Westenr Canada Water Enterprises Ltd. and that appears to have lost millions due to corruption in Canada.
Stan Hagen knew a lot and certain Canadian insiders had a motive to murder him.
CHIEF OF STAFF TO PRIME MINISTER CHRETIEN -JEAN PELLITIER –
Jean Pellitier was the Chief of Staff to former Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien from 1993 to 2001 and, as such, he played a key role in many of the Water War Crimes, especially the attack upon Sun Belt Water Inc. , its lawyer, John Carten and his friend and colleague, Karen Gibbs.
Pelletier was probably part of the team that planned the Liberal Party of Canada orgainzed police putsch that removed British Columbia Premier Glen Clark from office in 1999,
Pelletier was also close to Alan Gottlieb the former Canadian Ambassador to Washington when the Water War Crimes were carried out and who now works for the Calgary law firm ofBennett Jones a law firm that that has provided sanctuary to several individuals who were involved in the Water War Crimes and that has close links to former Prime Minister Jean Chretien.
Pelletier knew the dirty secrets of Canada’s government under Prime Minister Jean Chretien. Pelletier allegedly died of sudden onset cancer on January 10, 2009.
Murder is suspected.
In 1985, Pelletier was made a Member of the Order of Canada in recognition for having “played
a pivotal role in many social, cultural and philanthropic organizations in the Old Capital”. He was promoted to Officer of the Order of Canada by the crooked Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin, in 2003, in recognition for having “dedicated his life to public service“.
WAS TOP FORMER BRITISH COLUMBIA
CIVI L SERVANT JACK EBBELS
MURDERED IN FEBRUARY, 2010
Jack Ebbels had been a top civil servant in British Columbia and he died of a sudden heart attack in February 2010.
Jack Ebbels had been senior legal counsel, under the directiom of Deputy Attorney General Robert Edwards, who also died of a suddne heart attack. Jack Ebbels was the lawyer who was in charge of crafting the legal documents that conferred a secret illegal contract upon W.C.W. Western Canada Water Enterprises Ltd.
In the criminal overworld, as in the criminal underworld, there are what they call “rites of passage”. Jack Ebbels had passed a cricial “rite of passage” and, after successfully putting the crooked deal together for “friends of the government” inside W.C.W. Western Canada Water Enterprises Ltd., Jack Ebbels moved up in the crooked civil service circles that administer the Canadian Government.
In January of 2010, we began posting the story of Jack Ebbels on this web site, he was a liability to the insiders, and he was dead by February 25, 2010.
It is probable that Jack Ebbels was murdered in order to silence him.
Click here to read more about Jack Ebbels and his sudden death.
Was former Clark of Canada’s Privy Council
Glen Shortliffe Murdered
in May 2010.
Glen Shortliffe, the former Clerk of the Privy Council for Canada, was dying of cancer when on May 6, 2010, he suddenly dropped dead fron what Canada’s self appointed national newspaper, the Globe and Mail called a sudden unexpected heart attack.
Glen Shortliffe had been Deputy Minister of Transport for Canada when British Columbia Attorney General, Brian Smith , was appointed Chairman of CN Rail a company owned by Canada’s Natioanl Government.
There is good reason to beleive Glen Shortliffe was murdered in order to silence him. A man dying of cancer had no reason to take his secrets to the grave but others did.
Clck here to read more about Glen Shortliffe.
Was former Privy Council Staffer Mario Lague Murdered
August 11, 2010
Mario Lague was an insider in Canadian politics. He was known as a hard ball player who abused his power to destroy people’s careers.
He was a staff person at Canada’s Privy Council when theWater War Crimes cover up was taking place.
Mario Lague knew some of Canada’s top dirty secrets. He was a target. He died in a mysterious motor cycle accident that occurred on August 11, 2010. There is reason to believe Mario Lague was murdered in order to silence him.
Click here to read more about Mario Lague and the Water War Crimes.
Senator Norm Atkins and the Water War Crimes
Deceased September 2010
Senator Norm Atkins
Norm Atkins had many linksd to the Water War Crimes insiders.
It is difficult to know the extent of his involvement due ot the stonewalling and cover up by Canada’s Government.
If Senator Atkins was a criminal insider then, by September 2010, he must have been getting very very nervous watching all the other players droppiong dead.
Senator Norm Atkins developed heart trouble. He checked into a New Brunswick Hospital and died shortly afterwards. Were his heart problems normal or where they induced by insiders who wished to silence him?
Click here to go to new developments blog and go to Norm Atkins link on the right hand side to read more about and hte Water War Crimes.
Former Canadian Politician Maurice Foster,
Deceased, October 2010
Maurice Foster had been a top advisor to former Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien. He was a life long member of the Liberal Party of Canada
He died in October 2010.
Click here to read more about Maurice foster at the new developments blog, scroll down links to his name in the right hand column.
Jack Hooper – Former Associate Director of CSIS :
“Of course he was murdered”
Deceased November 2010
Former CSIS Director Jack Hooper
Former Canadian Security and Intelligence Service Associate Director Jack Hooper, dropped dead in November 2010, at age 57, while in excellent from a sudden unexpected heart attack.
Hooper knew all the secrets.
There was motive to murder him.
An undercover investigator advised “Of course he was murdered”
Click here to read more about the sudden death of Jack hooper and the role of CSIS in the Water War Crimes
Found Dead January 12, 2011
Intelligence Expert Michel Gratton
The sudden death at age 58 of Michel Gratton, an Ottawa insider, on or about January 12, 2011, intelligence expert and press secretary to formerCanadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney brings to nineteen the number of sudden deaths linked to theWater War Crimes.
The death of Michel Gratton marks the third in a seriies of sudden deaths of intelligence experts in North America in sixty days. On November 12, 2010, former associate director of Canada’s Securuty and Intelligence Service, Jack Hooper,dropped dead allegedly from a sudden heart attack, at age 57, and in excellent health. Some intelligence experts suspect Jack Hooper was murdered. On January, 6, 2011, retiredPentagon intelligence advisor, John Wheeler’s bodty was found in a garbage dump near Washington, D.C.,the police regard the death as a murde.
Mr. Gratton was highly regarded as an excpert in the intelligence business as a result of the bookSpyworld, an inside look at the Canadian and American intelligence establishment, a book that co-authored with Mike Frost a former Canadian Security Establishment insider in 1994.
Due to his work as press secretary to former Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney,Michel Gratton would have also been familiar with the many of the insiders linked to the Water War Crimes.
Given his background and the sudden unexplained nature of his death, Canadians are justifiably asking if Michel Gratton was murdered?
The editors of this web site wish to advise the readers that they have seen no evidence thatMichell Gratton was involved in any wrong doing. However, given his position as an intelligence insider and journalist, Mr. Gratton was certainly knew some dark secrets in Ottawa and he was also in a position to speak about those secrets through his media contacts thereby creating a motive for murder.
Deceased January 25, 2011
Audrey Best Bouchard
Audrey Best Bouchard was the wife of Lucien Bouchard who was the Minister of the Environment in the Brian Mulroney Government when Fred Doucet, the former pal and Chief of Staff for Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, was lobbying the Canadian Ministry of the Environment on behalf of W.C.W. Western Canada Water Enterprises Ltd.
As Minister of the Environment, Lucien Bouchard attempted to introduce legislation that would have conferred upon W.C.W. Western Canada Water Enterprises Ltd. a monopoly on bulk water exports from Canada by prohibiting bulk water exports from Canada except for firms with existing contracts or permits such as the one W.C.W. Western Canada Water Enterprises Ltd.. had negotiated with theGovernment of British Columbia secretly and illegally on September 25, 1989.
The legislation was never adopted, Lucien Bouchard threw a temper tantrum and in May of 1990 quit his position in the Progressive Conservative Party and turned his back on Prime Minister Brain Mulroney, the man that elevated him from his humble beginnings to international prominence as Canada’s Ambassador to France.
Audrey Best Bouchard was born in France but raised in California. As a Californian, she would have had an implicit understanding of the huge market potential for Canadian fresh water in the American southwest and the huge profits one could make if one had a monopoly
export position. As the wife of Lucien Bouchard, she would have known what her husband was trying to do and she may have been complicit.
It is surprising that Heenan Blaikie, the law firm where Canada’s strong federalist Prime Minister, Pierre Trudeau was a partner would hire the wife of the man who was determined to break up Canada as leader of the Bloc Quebecois.
However, all of this begins to make perfect sense when it has now been revealed that Pierre Trudeau, along with Queen Elizabeth II, were also an investors in W.C.W. Western Canada Water Enterprises Ltd.
And these revelations also explain why Jean Chretien joined Heenan Blaikie when he retired from politics and why it was a sexy lady lawyer from Heenan Blaikie who seduced Victoria City Chief of Police Paul Battershill and sabotaged his career after he had promised to carry out an investigation of crimes committed inside the Ministry of the Attorney General for British Columbia that benefited W.C.W. Western Canada Water Enterprises Ltd. It is also an astonishing co-incidence that the Attorney General for British Colubmia is regularly representd by the same Ottawa lawyer as Fred Doucet, namely, Robert Houston.
And these revelations may explain why Audrey Best Bouchard died “prematurely” at age 50, as stated in the press release issued by Heenan Blaikie, on January 25, 2011.
It is interesting that the cancer that allegedly killed her was allegedly diagnosed three years prior to her death which would be after the Federal Court lawsuit action T-95-08 was filed and these matters were becoming exposed in Canada’s courts and government offices.
Like the 29 others interred in the Graveyard of the Guilty, Audrey Best Bouchard
knew too much.
Like many diseases, cancer, the disease Audrey Best Bouchard is alleged to have died from, is a physical manifestation of an underlying disease of the spirit and mind
Click here to read more about Heenan Blaikie and the Water War Crimes
Deceased February 2011
Former British Columbia Lieutenant Governor
As if riding an outgoing tide, David Lam the former Lieutenant Governor of British Columbia who, in 1991, died in February, 2011.
The editors of this web site beleive that Mr. Lam was a criminal who signed into law illegal orders-in council conferring illegal benefits on W.C.W. Western canada Water Enterprises Ltd that gave that company an effective monopoly over water exports to the United States.
David Lam caused a lot of harm for a lot of innocent people who were victims of his illegal conduct and earned a lot of bad karma. Moreover, as Lieutenant Governor David Lam knew some state secrets and now he is silent so we will let the reader decide if he was murdered alos.
Deceased March 1, 2011,
Former Deputy Attorney General for British Columbia
Photo not available
Gillian Wallace had been an employee of Canada’s Department of Justicewhen the Water War Crimes were first set in motion. Later she was moved by insiders to the Government of British Columbia where she took a position as Assistant Deputy Attorney General and proceeded to suppress evidence and otherwise conceal documents that would have proved the commission of the initial stages of the Water War Crimes.
In the opinon of the editors of this web site Gillian Wallace was a major criminal, committed many many crimes and was guilty of treason.
Click here to read more about Gillian Wallace and the Water War Crimes
Deceased June 18, 2011, Martin Mason, Legal Counsel for the Canadian Judicial Council and Several Crooked Judges
Martin Mason was legal counsel for the Canadian Judicial Council and several Canadians judges who were involved in the Water War Crimes.
He suddenly died on June 18, 2011, after using his skills for several years to cover up judicial crimes and to obstruct the course of justice. He deserved to die. Like many lawyers involved in theWater War Crimes filed, Mr. Mason could have used his skills to do justice but he did not. As a result, he earned the wages of sin.
Martin Mason knew some secrets and there is good reason to believe he may have been murdered .
Jack Layton Dead August 22, 2011
Jack Layton, like many of the dead depicted here, was guilty of the crime of cover up.
Jack Layton was a dynamic, lying, cheating, politician who, like many among Canada’s crooked political elites, was fully informed of the corruption that lay behind the Water War Crimes.
Jack Layton had the opportunity to use his public office to help clean up the corruption that has become endemic in Canada and give good government back to Canadians but, Jack Laytonchose to protect the criminals, he developed cancer because of his duplicity and he died on August 22, 2011.
This is the price one pays for cheating and lying to those who give you their trust.
Sandra Gail Roberts: Death September 30, 2011
Sandra Gail Roberts worked in the office of British Columbia Premier Gordon Campbell from June 2001 to March 2011. It appears that she developed cancer after she left the Premiers office and died six months later.
This is very convenient death for people carrying out investigations of the corrruption that took place inside the Premier’s office and it is possible she was murdered through the use of an agent that causes cancer in order that her mouth would be shit forever.
Reg Alcock – Sudden Death October 14, 2011.
Reg Alcock was part of the dirty Governments of Jean Chretien andPaul Martin from 1993 to 2006 when they launched their dispicable and illegal attacks on Mr. Carten and Ms. Gibbs.
Alcock was born and raised in Winnipeg,. the capital city of the Canadian province of Manitoba. As a result, it is probable he had connections with some of the Winnipeg crowd that was linked to W.C.W. Western Canada Water Enterprises Ltd., such as Chretien’s pal Izzy Asper, Canada’s dirty Foreign Affairs Minister, Lloyd Axworthy, Winnipeg raised Vancouver lawyer an Gordon Campbell pal, Paul Fraser, Margaret Annett, the President of W.C.W. Western Canada Water Enterprises Ltd., and many many others.
In January 2007, Alcock was appointed to the faculty of the University
of Manitoba then under the direction of Water WAr Crimes insider Lloyd Axworthy as an executive in residence at the I. H. Asper School of Busines. He was also appointed as a Research Affiliate with the Leadership Network at the Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, the same institution where former Canadian Prime Minister Kim Campbell hid out for a few years after she was forced to leave her position as Canadian Consul General inLos Angeles.
Reg Alcock was in a position to blow the whistle on the insiders but now he is dead and dead men don’t talk. He died at the Winnipeg International Airport from an alleged sudden heart attack. Murder is suspected.
The foregoing represents those who have died and whom we believe were involved in the Water War Crimes either as participants or as concealers.
There are now at least 30 who are dead and, sure, some were old and on their way out but the others were healthy and showed no signs of illness and, well, dead men and women don’t talk do they.
So, we will let the reader be the judge and decide if any of these people were murdered and by who.
One thing is certain, there will be more sudden deaths unless and until the murderers are brought to justice.
CANADA’s MONEY PROBLEM
Who Changed The Bank Of Canada’s Policies In 1974 And Why?
April 5th, 2012
With great efforts by the Canadian Action Party, institutions like COMER, and a host of alternative news outlets in Canada. Many Canadians are becoming more and more aware about the the biggest robbery in Canadian history. A robbery that still continues to this very day, with 170 million dollars being stolen from us everyday.
The crime has been and is being perpetrated right under our very noses. It lies in the creation of the Canadian dollar. For those of you who are still unaware of this crime, here is a great video explaining the robbery.
Over the past 4 years, the Canadian people have paid $137.4 billion in interest on money borrowed from private banks whereas the Bank of Canada could legally print the public’s money into existence rather than borrowing it at interest. “They’ve paid out this huge sum because our government has failed to abide by the law.” Abram, a retired high school teacher and activist on Vancouver Island, B.C., explicates the trick of fractional reserve banking (part 1 of a series; snowshoefilms yoryevrah
COMER – Committee on Monetary and Economic Reform, in 2011 filed a lawsuit against the Bank Of Canada and the finance minister.
Rocco Galati explains the lawsuit against the Bank Of Canada and the Finance minister. Apologies for video quality and shakiness, When I got there and started setting up the camera, it literally died [not the battery but the camera itself] right there on the spot. Got what I could on cell phone camera. Full press release: Canadian constitutional lawyer, Rocco Galati, on behalf of Canadians William Krehm, and Ann Emmett, and COMER (Committee for Monetary and Economic Reform) on December 12th, 2011 filed an action in Federal Court, to restore the use of the Bank of Canada to its original purpose, by exercising its public statutory duty and responsibility. That purpose includes making interest free loans to municipal/provincial/federal governments for “human capital” expenditures (education, health, other social services) and /or infrastructure expenditures. The action also constitutionally challenges the government’s fallacious accounting methods in its tabling of the budget by not calculating nor revealing the true and total revenues of the nation before transferring back “tax credits” to corporations and other taxpayers. The Plaintiffs state that since 1974 there has been a gradual but sure slide into the reality that the Bank of Canada and Canada’s monetary and financial policy are dictated by private foreign banks and financial interests contrary to the Bank of Canada Act. The Plaintiffs state that the Bank of International Settlements (BIS), the Financial Stability Forum (FSF) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) were all created with the cognizant intent of keeping poorer nations in their place which has now expanded to all nations in that these financial institutions largely succeed in over-riding governments and constitutional orders in countries such as Canada over which they exert financial control. The Plaintiffs state that the meetings of the BIS and Financial Stability Board (FSB) (successor of FSF), their minutes, their discussions and deliberations are secret and not available nor accountable to Parliament, the executive, nor the Canadian public notwithstanding that the Bank of Canada policies directly emanate from these meetings. These organizations are essentially private, foreign entities controlling Canada’s banking system and socio-economic policies. The Plaintiffs state that the defendants (officials) are unwittingly and /or wittingly, in varying degrees, knowledge and intent engaged in a conspiracy, along with the BIS, FSB, IMF to render impotent the Bank of Canada Act as well as Canadian sovereignty over financial, monetary, and socio-economic policy, and bypass the sovereign rule of Canada through its Parliament by means of banking and financial systems.
One of the biggest questions I encounter when talking about restoring the Bank of Canada, is who changed the policy in 1974? And who is responsible for the billion dollar robbery since then?
First we must look at who was in political power at the time and who held the key positions.
Prime Minister: Pierre Trudeau
Minister of Finance: John Turner
Governor of the Bank of Canada: Gerald Bouey
Pierre Elliot Trudeau, like many other Canadian prime ministers attended the Bilderberg group meetings before being elected. Trudeau also served in the mid-1990s on Power Corp.’s international advisory board.
Gerald Bouey was a member of David Rockefeller’s Trilateral Commission. Rockefeller is also a chairman of the Bilderberg group.
Both the trilateral commission and Bilderberg group are very well known for promoting a global government or what others have called a “new world order”.
“Some even believe we (the Rockefeller family) are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”
– David Rockefeller, Memoirs, page 405
David Rockefeller Sept. 23, 1994 “This present window of opportunity, during which a truly peaceful and interdependent world order might be built, will not be open for too long — We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order.”
With everyday that passes a global economic collapse seems to be only a matter of time. Mainly due to the massive amounts of debt. Could this be the the right major crisis that he spoke of?
Because of the changes to the Bank of Canada in 1974 our national debt has skyrocketed from 18 billion to nearly 600 billion. Which is owed to private banks like CIBC, TD Bank, the Royal bank, and Scotia bank. Everyone of these banks have Bilderberg attendee’s on a regular basis.
And secondly, what was the reasoning for the change in policy?
The change in policy came, to help the Canadian economy recover from what the government billed as a major recession. When in reality the recession was small at best, as seen in this graph.
As the figure shows, Canada had two very deep and prolonged recessions from 1961 to 2007 and a third that began in 2008 (the broken line represents my forecast to 2010).
So to put it simply. The changes to the Bank of Canada where made under the false pretenses of a major recession. By a group of globalist who openly admit their goals of creating a one world government.
Why hasn’t the media reported on this?
Why would Bilderberg members report on themselves? Peter Mansbridge and countless others in Canadian media have attended Bilderberg.
And as David Rockefeller was quoted in 1991 about American media:
“We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years.”
It seems that even until this very day, Canadian media are remaining silent on the issue. I have been sending the video of the lawsuit against the Bank of Canada to all of the main stream outlets repeatedly for months. But have not even received a email response back yet. I have also sent it to MP’s from every party. Same thing, zero responses.
Politicians routinely laugh at the idea of restoring the Bank of Canada, and label those who raise questions as “conspiracy theorists”.
A friend of mine, Jamie Scott in British Columbia got the oppertunity to meet the new leader of the NDP Thomas Mulcaire today, and asked him about the debt-based monetary system. Here is what was said.
I asked him about the Debt-Based Monetary System.
“I have not studied that, no”. He says the idea that the chartered banks being able to create currency through loans is “conspiracy theory” and told me if I wanted the Bank of Canada to issue all our loot to “go start your own party”
I kept peppering him and the crowd turned on me quick. He said, “Excuse me, but I was a Finance Minister in Quebec for 5 years” (cheers) to which I said “then its all the more startling that you have no idea what I’m talking about.” Boos (jeers?) then rained down.
He said “I’m the only one who will stand up to Stephen Harper”. I said ‘big deal. That’s not hard. He’s a weak, unpopular leader with a fake majority. Anyone can stand up to Steve. We need someone who will stand up to the banks.
“Go start your own party then.”
Please watch this video to find out who Jamie Scott is.
The bought and paid for media, and politicians in Canada are not going to correct this problem. They are part of it. We the Canadian people MUST take action now, or forever be indebted to the global bankers and loose what little sovereignty we have left.
Stephen Harper said the true reality that we face, at the Toronto G20 in 2010!
” I know some people don’t like it. It is a loss of national sovereignty, but it is reality.”
“As I constantly remind Canadians, there isn’t really a Canadian economy anymore. It is a global economy.”
Stephen Harper at a news conference in Toronto. At the end of the G20 summit. Here are the two quotes Harper should be remembered by: ” I know some people don’t like it. It is a loss of national sovereignty, but it is reality.” “As I constantly remind Canadians, there isnt really a Canadian economy anymore. It is a global economy.”
Article By Terry Wilson – Canadian Awareness Network
WAKE THE FUCK UP PEOPLE BEFORE WERE COMPLETELY FUCKED
BY THESE SCUMSLIME PRIVATE BANKERS
THE SUPER WEALTHY CANADIAN ELITES, THE POLITICIANS, THE CIBC, TD BANK, ROYAL BANK, and SCOTIA BANK are all subservient paid puppet criminals of the IMF, THE WORLD BANK, all under THE ROTHSCHILD DYNASTY of the GLOBAL CRIMINAL BANKER CABAL
There Criminal Currency is called FIAT CURRENCY It is used in every country under the IMF-World Bank System of the Cabal
FIAT Currency Is a Debt Based Currency
All It creates is Debt,Debt,and more Debt
Hence Canada’s Skyrocketing Debt to which we have never defaulted on but instead of our national debt going down it just keeps going up
It’s a Debt that can never be fully repaid. Why because when new money-debt is created into the system through LOANS-Debt the interest on that Debt-Loans is not created and therefore leaving the money system always short on cash.
ARE YOU MAD YET???
Lets investigate FIAT CURRENCY and see it for what it is a Complete FRAUD
FIAT CURRENCY and FRACTIONAL RESERVE BANKING go hand in hand and are both Criminal one is basically a PYRAMID SCHEME and the other COUNTERFEITING.
so ARE YOU MAD YET???
15 Fundamental Problems with Fiat Currencies
BY RON HERA03/26/2012
Value Subjectivism and Monetary Instability
Subjectivism is the philosophy that reality is what we perceive to be real and that no underlying, true reality exists independent of human perception. In other words, the nature of reality for an individual person is dependent on that individual’s own consciousness. It follows that each person experiences their own reality that is not shared with others. What is true and what seems moral to one person may not be true or moral for another person, i.e., truth and morality are relative. In contrast, objectivism is the philosophy that reality exists independent of human consciousness; that human beings have direct contact with reality through sense perception; and that objective knowledge of reality can be obtained through perception, evidence and logic, e.g., through scientific methods.
A subjectivist might view the stock market as a perpetual bubble floating on the hopes and dreams of entrepreneurs and investors who invest in stocks in the same way that gamblers place chips on a craps table in a casino, without any concept of an objective economic reality outside of the game. A subjectivist might view technical analysis, which is based purely on trading activity in the stock market, as the ideal tool to understand financial markets, despite the fact that is has no direct connection to the objective economic realities of the companies that stocks represent. In contrast, an objectivist might view the stock market as a venue for participation in business ownership where stocks have value as a function of the particular businesses that they represent and because of the goods and services that the businesses provide in the objective world. A subjectivist might say that “everything is relative” (although the statement is self contradictory), while an objectivist might say that they “…believe in justification, not by faith, but by verification” (Thomas H. Huxley 1825-1895). Although they may not know it, Keynesian economists, bankers and day traders are often philosophical subjectivists while Austrian economists, advocates of the gold standard and value investors are often philosophical objectivists.
An objectivist interpretation of morality is that morality flows naturally from people pursuing their own interests and that immorality results from coercion. For the vast majority of individuals, “self interest” includes supporting their own family and community, simply because human beings are social animals. Parents naturally care for their own children, for example. Morality is a natural phenomenon, not a product of coercion. Human beings naturally live peacefully together in communities and the vast majority of individuals experience empathy. Both charity and resistance to coercion occur naturally and voluntarily in human communities. Those who do not experience empathy (sociopaths) and who disregard the interests of their fellow human beings or act in ways that harm the community are extremely rare. Philosopher Ayn Rand wrote “Force and mind are opposites; morality ends where a gun begins.” Human beings do not act morally because they are being watched by police or because a gun is held to their heads. In all cultures and at all times and places throughout recorded history, and certainly before, what is immoral is initiating violent force or coercion without cause, most especially when it harms the community. Although particular rules vary from one culture to another, morality is neither subjective nor relative.
Ironically, the objectivist view of morality has been widely misconstrued as a sanction for selfishness. Selfishness typically results in the deprivation or coercion of others. In contrast, pursuing their own self interest is what human beings naturally and voluntarily do in the absence of coercion. In fact, the idea that what is moral arises in a natural way based on the freedom to pursue one’s own self interest, i.e., freedom from coercion, is precisely the moral doctrine of the 1776 American Declaration of Independence:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
Where money is concerned, there are two fundamentally different concepts of “value”, one rooted in subjectivism and one rooted in objectivism. In a monetary context, value subjectivism means that money has value simply because people believe that it does and that whatever people can be persuaded or coerced into using as money, such as a piece of paper bearing a government stamp, therefore has “value”. In other words, value subjectivism is the view that the only “value” that exists resides in the minds of human beings as a concept or belief and that, therefore, “value” can be created ex nihilo by persuasion or coercion, i.e., by influencing or controlling (through coercion or fear of coercion) the minds of human beings. Value objectivism means that money has value because it contains the resources and labor required to produce it in the same way that clothing or shelter have value for the survival requirements of human life.
Of course, subjective value, e.g., the value of a Picasso painting to an art lover, does indeed exist but it is different in kind compared to value linked to biological survival (literally, life and death). The former refers to subjective mental states, while the latter refers to an objective biological reality that exists independent of human consciousness. Residents of the Warsaw Ghetto in 1943, for example, didn’t value guns in the same way they valued Picasso paintings. Generally, a product of human labor that has real-world utility, such as a physical tool, will be recognized by human beings as having value relative to the material needs and survival requirements of human life. This “survival value” is absolutely pragmatic and is rooted in the natural understanding that human beings have about their biological needs and their physical relationship to the objective world.
Commodity money comes about in a natural and voluntary way and does not depend on governments or banks. Natural money develops wherever and whenever human beings obtain things that they do not strictly need purely for the purpose of exchanging them for something else. The good most commonly used as a tool of exchange is de facto money. The Greek philosopher Aristotle first defined the characteristics of a commodity that can be used as money as (1) divisibility, (2) durability, (3) portability and (4) scarcity, i.e., rare and valuable. More recently, money has been described as a medium of exchange, a unit of account, e.g., a standard weight of gold or silver, and a store of value. Of course, money must also be widely accepted, which can be accomplished either through natural forces or through coercion.
The supply of commodity money naturally remains constrained in proportion to the production of other goods. The resources and labor required to produce natural commodity money exist in relation to other economic resources needed for the survival requirements of human life. Production of commodity money subtracts resources that have direct survival value from other economic activities. Therefore, the law that regulates the production of commodity money is the law of survival. The law of survival is not a proscriptive law (declared by a human authority) but a descriptive law based on observation. The production of commodity money is regulated automatically according to the biological needs of human beings. Thus, commodity money is tightly coupled or “tethered” to physical economic activity in the objective world in the same way as building shelter. Human beings very rarely build more shelter than they need because the economic inputs required to do so are better spent elsewhere once sufficient shelter exists. The price mechanism in modern economics is a reflection of this underlying reality.
While it is commonly believed that any token can be used as money, this refers only to the medium of exchange, i.e., currency. Currency is precisely a “money substitute”, which is a convenience, but is not, strictly speaking, money. Land deeds, for example, can circulate as a currency but they are not the land itself. Creating more currency units in a vacuum, in this case un-backed “land deeds” with no land attached, does not create more land or any other form of wealth in the objective world even if it increases the number of transactions and the size of the economy measured in “land deeds”.
Throughout history, schemes have been attempted whereby currencies that cost virtually nothing to produce, and that have no survival value, have been substituted for commodity money. Artificial money, known as ‘fiat currency’ has putative “value” simply because it is declared to have a value by a government or central bank. Fiat currency schemes replace the survival value of commodity money with subjective value and substitute a mere medium of exchange for natural commodity money. Modern currencies, including the U.S. dollar, the British pound, the euro and the Japanese yen, are all fiat currency schemes. As a practical matter, a fiat currency unit is worth whatever it can purchase but it is not a standard by which value can be measured because its purchasing power is unstable. In fact, there are several fundamental problems with fiat currencies.
1. There Is No Spoon – In the popular 1999 film The Matrix, written by Lana and Andy Wachowski (“The Wachowski Brothers”), the protagonist, Neo, has the following conversation with a gifted child who can bend spoons with his mind:
Child: Do not try and bend the spoon. That’s impossible. Instead… only try to realize the truth.
Neo: What truth?
Child: There is no spoon.
Neo: There is no spoon?
Child: Then you’ll see, that it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself.
There is a difference between an abstraction and an abstract concept. “Money” is an abstraction in the same way that “container” encompasses both a bottle and a jar. Abstractions are artifacts of language that generally describe the world. In contrast, an abstract concept is the mental representation of an idea, such as liberty. Abstract concepts are literally ideas that exist in the human mind. Law, for example, expresses the concept of justice but an arbitrary law is not just merely because it is law. Unjust laws certainly exist. Declaring that a stone is a seafaring vessel does not imbue it with the ability to float on water, even if it can skip on the surface if it has enough spin. Such a declaration would be an illogical misuse of language masking an obvious absurdity. Nonetheless, the same obvious absurdity underlies fiat currencies. The erroneous conflation of “money”, which is an abstraction, and “value”, which is an abstract concept, is an example of sophistry; a trick of words played on unsophisticated minds. In fact, fiat currencies which exist today, not principally as notes or coins, but as electronic digits in computers, have no value.
2. Coercion – Coercion characterizes fiat currencies because most people would not accept them unless forced to do so against their will. In the United States, for example, the replacement of gold-backed money in 1933 required the use of legal force (criminal penalties of $10,000, ten years in prison, or both) to compel U.S. citizens to accept irredeemable Federal Reserve Notes in place of gold certificates.
3. Rent Seeking – Fiat currency schemes extract economic rents by forcing commerce to take place in the fiat currency system. Since human beings trade with one another to survive, the ability to freely exchange value for value is a natural right having the same moral foundation as the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In a marketplace based on voluntary arrangements, there is no middleman extracting an economic rent in exchange for permission to participate in commerce.
4. Immorality – Fiat currency schemes are immoral because the primary thing that makes them acceptable is coercion. Forcing people to accept artificial money that has no objective value against their will and self interest is an immoral act. Additionally, fiat currency schemes allow those who control the currency to redistribute wealth by altering the availability, quantity and distribution of the currency, which is little more than legalized theft.
5. Central Planning – Since fiat currencies are based on coercive, rather than voluntary market relationships, a central authority is required that has the power to eliminate competing currencies, i.e., to establish a monopoly. Central economic planning is not only anti-democratic and the antithesis of a free market, but also inevitably fails. Human society is not blessed with the omniscient and infallible individuals required to make financial and economic decisions in place of the decisions of millions of individuals, households, entrepreneurs and businesses. The record of history, e.g., the USSR, is absolutely clear. Central planning of an economy produces a never ending stream of unintended consequences that lead to never ending interventions and that ultimately destroy economic activity.
6. Price Instability – Fiat currencies, because they require relatively insignificant physical economic inputs, have no direct relationship to the survival requirements of human life. Since it is decided by central planners, the quantity of currency in a fiat currency scheme is always and inevitably incorrect. This causes price instability and artificially stimulates or depresses economic activity as a function of how much currency is produced and of how it is distributed. As a practical matter, price stability can never be achieved in a fiat currency scheme.
7. Economic Volatility – Since fiat currencies are loosely coupled to physical economic activity in the objective world, they tend to become increasingly de-coupled and eventually “un-tethered” over time. An economy is the aggregate of millions of independent, individual human actors and there is no way that those responsible for a fiat currency can guess the correct quantity, although they can recognize incorrect quantities after the fact by their consequences, e.g., credit booms, recessions, large-scale price bubbles and economic collapses, such as the Great Depression, which began only sixteen years after the U.S. Federal Reserve was established. Of course, economies can be volatile for many reasons. The effect of fiat currencies, however, is to greatly magnify economic volatility.
8. Currency Debasement – Voltaire famously wrote that “Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value—zero.” Fiat currencies issued by governments or central banks represent intangible, subjective concepts of value like “full faith and credit” but the currency itself has no lasting value. Specifically, fiat currencies have a built-in tendency to decline in purchasing power over time as more currency is produced, particularly in fractional reserve and debt-based fiat currency schemes. In debt-based fiat currency schemes, the currency must be constantly inflated or a deflationary vicious circle (a collapse of debt) will set in. Those responsible for the currency predictably produce more than is necessary to maintain stable prices or to sustain stable economic activity, e.g., to diminish the risk of deflation, for political promises and favors, to wage war, etc. Price instability and economic volatility are the result. Currency debasement eventually undermines the basic economic structure of society. In The Economic Consequences of the Peace (1919), John Maynard Keynes wrote:
“Lenin was certainly right. There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose.”
9. Wealth Redistribution – Arbitrarily increasing the quantity of currency in an economy distorts the distribution of money and, therefore, redistributes purchasing power, effectively stealing wealth from the majority, e.g., savers and wage workers, to serve the interests of a privileged minority. Redistribution of wealth, as opposed to production of wealth, causes a net loss of wealth to society. Government deficit spending, although it may be motivated by good intentions, changes the quantity of currency and results in currency debasement. Thus, government deficit spending operates as a dishonest, hidden tax on savers and wage workers. In his well known 1966 essay, Gold and Economic Freedom, former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, wrote:
“Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists’ antagonism toward the gold standard.”
10. Concentration of Wealth – Over time, fiat currency schemes cause wealth and property to accrue to those who enjoy the extraordinary privilege of creating the currency, thus increasing the concentration of wealth in society. Extreme concentration of wealth is economically and ultimately politically destabilizing. An individual with a one million dollar income, for example, will not buy as many consumer products, cars or appliances as ten households with incomes of one hundred thousand dollars. In his remarks at a symposium sponsored by the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City in Jackson Hole, Wyoming (August 28, 1998), then Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan pointed out that:
“Ultimately, we are interested in the question of relative standards of living and economic well-being. Thus, we need also to examine trends in the distribution of wealth, which, more fundamentally than earnings or income, represents a measure of the ability of households to consume…”
11. Moral Hazard – Baron Acton observed in 1887 that “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Since fiat currencies are created by monetary monopolies ex nihilo, e.g., through loan contracts, they provide a legal means of obtaining something for virtually nothing. As a result, those responsible for fiat currencies enjoy almost unlimited influence over economic and, therefore, political life. Sadly, human beings can never be good stewards of a currency system that provides one group in society with the means to obtain something for nothing. In fact, societies dominated by immoral fiat currency schemes eventually develop a something-for-nothing culture; a culture of entitlement in which, rather than producing wealth, everyone endeavors to live at the expense of everyone else.
12. Corruption and Cronyism – As a consequence of moral hazard, fiat currencies tend to encourage cronyism and corruption and ultimately produce a culture of corruption. The Roman poet Juvenal wrote “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?” (“Who will guard the guards themselves?”). History is replete with the horrors of absolute power and with monetary abuses resulting in economic collapse. Just as democide has been a leading cause of death in the last one hundred years, fiat currencies have been a leading cause of poverty. Fiat currency schemes redistribute and concentrate wealth, resulting in a tiny and exceedingly wealthy minority, but they do not produce wealth. Francisco d’Anconia, one of the central characters in the novel Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand, explains the following in his famous “money speech”:
“…Money is a tool of exchange, which can’t exist unless there are goods produced and men able to produce them. Money is the material shape of the principle that men who wish to deal with one another must deal by trade and give value for value. Money is not the tool of the moochers, who claim your product by tears, or the looters who take it from you by force. Money is made possible only by the men who produce… Not an ocean of tears nor all the guns in the world can transform those pieces of paper in your wallet into bread you need to survive tomorrow… Whenever destroyers appear among men, they start by destroying money, for money is men’s protection and the base of a moral existence. Destroyers seize gold and leave its owners a counterfeit pile of paper. This kills all objective standards and delivers men into the arbitrary power of an arbitrary setter of values… Paper is a mortgage on wealth that does not exist, backed by a gun aimed at those who are expected to produce it. Paper is a check drawn by legal looters upon an account which is not theirs: upon the virtue of the victims…”
13. Confidence Failure – Since the value of fiat currencies is essentially subjective, maintaining the perception of “value” in the face of economic decline and despite rising prices can be challenging. Fiat currencies are ultimately dependent on confidence and trust in those responsible for the currency. When fiat currencies are abused, confidence fails and they revert to their intrinsic value (zero). Thus, monetary policy in a fiat currency scheme focuses directly on maintaining confidence. Behavioral economics, for example, has become a primary tool of monetary and economic policy implementation. As a consequence, economic reporting by governments and central banks, and by the news media, does not reflect an objective viewpoint. Management of perception has the effect of influencing the subjective mental states of those who use a particular fiat currency so as to maintain the perception of “value”. However, in the best case, perception management is one-sided “spin”, and, in the worst case, it is propaganda that is contrary to fact and that simply prevents ordinary people from recognizing the steps they need to take in order to protect their financial interests against currency debasement and other risks associated with fiat currencies. Nonetheless, cognitive dissonance (a psychological tension between conflicting cognitions) can result in the sudden collapse of fiat currencies when economic conditions deteriorate sufficiently or when prices rise too quickly, i.e., the spell of value subjectivism is broken.
14. Counterparty Risk – The “value” of fiat currencies requires trust in counterparties, but trust, like confidence, is an ephemeral, subjective mental state. In the objective world, agreements between governments and central banks and those who rely on their fiat currency schemes can be arbitrarily modified or broken. In fact, they are implicitly broken whenever a currency is debased. The promises of deposed governments and failed banks become instantly worthless.
15. Transaction Settlement – A transaction in commodity money is a direct exchange of value for value. When a fiat currency transaction is performed, one party holds fiat currency and the other is the recipient of goods or services, but, like a retroactive breach of contract, the value of the fiat currency can be changed and may even become zero. Since there is always a residual third party to the transaction, i.e., a government or central bank, transactions remain unsettled.
Fiat currency schemes are philosophically misguided, fundamentally immoral and ultimately unstable. Fiat currencies are premised on value subjectivism and erroneously conflate money and value. They represent a mere medium of exchange and rely on unstable subjective mental states such as confidence and trust. As a result, they are ultimately fragile and prone to fail suddenly when those using them wake from the dream of value subjectivism.
Fiat currencies are immoral because they are forced on people against their will and contrary to their self interest and because they are a mechanism for legalized theft through currency debasement. Monetary monopolies extract economic rents by holding hostage the rights of individuals to freely exchange value for value. Central economic planning, redistribution of wealth and concentration of wealth undermine economic activity and encourage a culture of entitlement. Since fiat currency schemes are the source of exorbitant power, they engender extreme moral hazard, produce cronyism and corruption and foster a culture of corruption.
Fiat currencies are subject to the decisions of central planners and are invariably debased producing price instability and increasing economic volatility. Governments and central banks that promulgate fiat currency schemes remain as perpetual counterparties to transactions posing a constant and unlimited risk. Resulting transactions are not fully settled because the value of the currency can be arbitrarily altered after the fact.
History has shown that fiat currencies are always debased and that confidence in them eventually fails causing vast economic disruptions, losses of wealth, social and political chaos and even loss of life. The inevitable disasters caused by fiat currency schemes are usually followed by a return to commodity money but, once stability is achieved, a new fiat currency scheme is put in place repeating an unnecessary and destructive cycle that benefits few and harms many. Ironically, while commodity money is denigrated by those who benefit from fiat currency schemes, former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan noted as recently as 1999 that “Gold still represents the ultimate form of payment in the world. Fiat money in extremis is accepted by nobody. Gold is always accepted.”
Defenders of fiat currency schemes claim that they promote stable prices and moderate economic volatility. In fact, the opposite is true. Fiat currencies not only destabilize economies but undermine the moral basis of society. Without exception, in every historical case when a currency has been de-coupled from the objective world, i.e., from commodity money, the result has been disaster. Fiat currency schemes guarantee unending monetary and resulting economic, social and political chaos marked by brief periods of calm between inevitable abuses, bubbles and collapses.
About Ron Hera
Founder at Hera Research, LLC
Primary Tel: 360.339.8541
Other Tel: 206.905.8680
7205 Martin Way East Suite 72 Olympia WA 98516
ron @ heraresearch.com
Two great Movie – documentaries on the Criminal Banker Issue and our stolen money
OH CANADA OUR BOUGHT AND SOLD OUT LAND
Oh Canada presents how nations allow private banks to create their money and put the public in debt to these banks instead of creating their money themselves without any debt. Although it’s main focus is Canada, nations around the world use the same system.
BANKING THE AMERICAN DREAM
Please support the video creators by buying the high quality video from their website or by making a donation http://theamericandreamfilm.com/ Greek subtitles now available. The AMERICAN DREAM is a 30 minute animated film that shows you how you’ve been scammed by the most basic elements of our government system. All of us Americans strive for the American Dream, and this film shows you why your dream is getting farther and farther away. Do you know how your money is created? Or how banking works? Why did housing prices skyrocket and then plunge? Do you really know what the Federal Reserve System is and how it affects you every single day? THE AMERICAN DREAM takes an entertaining but hard hitting look at how the problems we have today are nothing new, and why leaders throughout our history have warned us and fought against the current type of financial system we have in America today. You will be challenged to investigate some very entrenched and powerful institutions in this nation, and hopefully encouraged to help get our nation back on track. Buy the high quality video from the website, http://theamericandreamfilm.com/ The video creators understand that how the monetary system works can be very confusing to some and have done a brilliant job in explaining how the whole system is set up to keep you forever in debt. This is not what the original founding fathers of America had in mind. Also, this is not just an American problem. It’s the same scam in nearly all countries around the world
Fractional-Reserve Banking is a financial system in which deposit-taking financial institutions likebanks, are required to keep as a reserve only a small fraction of all the money deposited with them. When an individual or business deposits their money with a commercial bank, they lend the bank their money and the bank pays them interest on the loan. The money that has been deposited with the bank is used by the bank to originate loans for its customers who need financing. The deposit account owners who have lent their money to the bank, can withdraw their money at any time, but in reality at any given time only a small fraction of the money are being withdrawn simultaneously. The fact that not all depositors will demand their money at once has great implications, and is the main reason fractional-reserve banking is possible.
Most people have no idea how fractional-reserve banking works, but if the they understood its nature the fractional reserve banking will be exposed for what it is – a grand money-robbing scam imposed on the unsuspecting society. Lets see how fractional-reserve banking works.
How does Fractional-Reserve Banking Work?
Let’s see how fractional-reserve banking works. A customer of Bank #1 deposits $100 in his chequing account. The bank keeps the required reserve of 10% ($10) and lends the rest $90 to another bank customer. The second customer spends the $90 and this money ultimately ends in another chequing account at Bank #2. The Bank #2 keeps 10% ($9) of the deposit as a reserve and lends $81 to one of its customers. If this process continues 5 times in total we’ll have the following result.
The initial deposit of $100 magically ballooned to $468.5, creating $368.5 out of thin air through loans. Sounds like a Ponzi scheme? I’ll leave it to you to decide. As you can see your money is not actually in the bank, after you deposit it there. The $368.5 is money created by commercial banks, and they enter the economy and expand the money supply.
Why is Fractional-Reserve Banking Possible?
The fractional reserve banking is possible, because at any given time just a very small percentage of all deposited money is withdrawn. Furthermore the withdrawals are offset by new deposits. Most people keep their money in the bank most of the time (thinking that their money is secure there), which makes it easier for the banks to repay back money deposited with it on demand.
What happens if the depositors of a particular bank lose faith in the ability of the bank to repay their deposits? If this happens the depositors will try to withdraw their money from the bank at the same time, but of course the bank will not able to repay them, because it actually keeps only fraction of the deposited money as reserves. Welcome to the wonderful world of fractional-reserve banking! This unpleasant situation is referred to as a bank run, and may cause the bank to fail unless the central bank act as a lender of last resort and bail out the bank.
The Wall Street Ponzi Scheme called Fractional Reserve Banking
Borrowing from Peter to Pay Paul
by Ellen Brown
Global Research, January 3, 2009
Cartoon in the New Yorker: A gun-toting man with large dark glasses, large hat pulled down, stands in front of a bank teller, who is reading a demand note. It says, “Give me all the money in my account.”
Bernie Madoff showed us how it was done: you induce many investors to invest their money, promising steady above-market returns; and you deliver – at least on paper. When your clients check their accounts, they see that their investments have indeed increased by the promised amount. Anyone who opts to pull out of the game is paid promptly and in full. You can afford to pay because most players stay in, and new players are constantly coming in to replace those who drop out. The players who drop out are simply paid with the money coming in from new recruits. The scheme works until the market turns and many players want their money back at once. Then it’s game over: you have to admit that you don’t have the funds, and you are probably looking at jail time.
A Ponzi scheme is a form of pyramid scheme in which earlier investors are paid with the money of later investors rather than from real profits. The perpetuation of the scheme requires an ever-increasing flow of money from investors in order to keep it going. Charles Ponzi was an engaging Boston ex-convict who defrauded investors out of $6 million in the 1920s by promising them a 400 percent return on redeemed postal reply coupons. When he finally could not pay, the scam earned him ten years in jail; and Bernie Madoff is likely to wind up there as well.
Most people are not involved in illegal Ponzi schemes, but we do keep our money in accounts that are tallied on computer screens rather than in stacks of coins or paper bills. How do we know that when we demand our money from our bank or broker that the funds will be there? The fact that banks are subject to “runs” (recall Northern Rock, Indymac and Washington Mutual) suggests that all may not be as it seems on our online screens. Banks themselves are involved in a sort of Ponzi scheme, one that has been perpetuated for hundreds of years. What distinguishes the legal scheme known as “fractional reserve” lending from the illegal schemes of Bernie Madoff and his ilk is that the bankers’ scheme is protected by government charter and backstopped with government funds. At last count, the Federal Reserve and the U.S. Treasury had committed $8.5 trillion to bailing out the banks from their follies.1 By comparison, M2, the largest measure of the money supply now reported by the Federal Reserve, was just under $8 trillion in December 2008.2 The sheer size of the bailout efforts indicates that the banking scheme has reached its mathematical limits and needs to be superseded by something more sustainable.
Penetrating the Bankers’ Ponzi Scheme
What fractional reserve lending is and how it works is summed up in Wikipedia as follows:
“Fractional-reserve banking is the banking practice in which banks keep only a fraction of their deposits in reserve (as cash and other liquid assets) with the choice of lending out the remainder, while maintaining the simultaneous obligation to redeem all deposits immediately upon demand. This practice is universal in modern banking. . . .The nature of fractional-reserve banking is that there is only a fraction of cash reserves available at the bank needed to repay all of the demand deposits and banknotes issued. . . . When Fractional-reserve banking works, it works because:
“1. Over any typical period of time, redemption demands are largely or wholly offset by new deposits or issues of notes. The bank thus needs only to satisfy the excess amount of redemptions.
“2. Only a minority of people will actually choose to withdraw their demand deposits or present their notes for payment at any given time.
“3. People usually keep their funds in the bank for a prolonged period of time.
“4. There are usually enough cash reserves in the bank to handle net redemptions.
“If the net redemption demands are unusually large, the bank will run low on reserves and will be forced to raise new funds from additional borrowings (e.g. by borrowing from the money market or using lines of credit held with other banks), and/or sell assets, to avoid running out of reserves and defaulting on its obligations. If creditors are afraid that the bank is running out of cash, they have an incentive to redeem their deposits as soon as possible, triggering a bank run.”
Like in other Ponzi schemes, bank runs result because the bank does not actually have the funds necessary to meet all its obligations. Peter’s money has been lent to Paul, with the interest income going to the bank.
As Elgin Groseclose, Director of the Institute for International Monetary Research, wryly observed in 1934:
“A warehouseman, taking goods deposited with him and devoting them to his own profit, either by use or by loan to another, is guilty of a tort, a conversion of goods for which he is liable in civil, if not in criminal, law. By a casuistry which is now elevated into an economic principle, but which has no defenders outside the realm of banking, a warehouseman who deals in money is subject to a diviner law: the banker is free to use for his private interest and profit the money left in trust. . . . He may even go further. He may create fictitious deposits on his books, which shall rank equally and ratably with actual deposits in any division of assets in case of liquidation.”3
How did the perpetrators of this scheme come to acquire government protection for what might otherwise have landed them in jail? A short history of the evolution of modern-day banking may be instructive.
The Evolution of a Government-Sanctioned Ponzi Scheme
What came to be known as fractional reserve lending dates back to the seventeenth century, when trade was conducted primarily in gold and silver coins. How it evolved was described by the Chicago Federal Reserve in a revealing booklet called “Modern Money Mechanics” like this:
“It started with goldsmiths. As early bankers, they initially provided safekeeping services, making a profit from vault storage fees for gold and coins deposited with them. People would redeem their “deposit receipts” whenever they needed gold or coins to purchase something, and physically take the gold or coins to the seller who, in turn, would deposit them for safekeeping, often with the same banker. Everyone soon found that it was a lot easier simply to use the deposit receipts directly as a means of payment. These receipts, which became known as notes, were acceptable as money since whoever held them could go to the banker and exchange them for metallic money.
“Then, bankers discovered that they could make loans merely by giving their promises to pay, or bank notes, to borrowers. In this way, banks began to create money. More notes could be issued than the gold and coin on hand because only a portion of the notes outstanding would be presented for payment at any one time. Enough metallic money had to be kept on hand, of course, to redeem whatever volume of notes was presented for payment.
“Transaction deposits are the modern counterpart of bank notes. It was a small step from printing notes to making book entries crediting deposits of borrowers, which the borrowers in turn could ‘spend’ by writing checks, thereby ‘printing’ their own money.”
If a landlord had rented the same house to five people at one time and pocketed the money, he would quickly have been jailed for fraud. But the bankers had devised a system in which they traded, not things of value, but paper receipts for them. It was called “fractional reserve” lending because the gold held in reserve was a mere fraction of the banknotes it supported. The scheme worked as long as only a few people came for their gold at one time; but investors would periodically get suspicious and all demand their gold back at once. There would then be a run on the bank and it would have to close its doors. This cycle of booms and busts went on throughout the nineteenth century, culminating in a particularly bad bank panic in 1907. The public became convinced that the country needed a central banking system to stop future panics, overcoming strong congressional opposition to any bill allowing the nation’s money to be issued by a private central bank controlled by Wall Street. The Federal Reserve Act creating such a “bankers’ bank” was passed in 1913. Robert Owens, a co-author of the Act, later testified before Congress that the banking industry had conspired to create a series of financial panics in order to rouse the people to demand “reforms” that served the interests of the financiers.4
Despite this powerful official backstop, however, the greatest bank run in history occurred only twenty years later, in 1933. President Roosevelt then took the dollar off the gold standard domestically, and Federal Reserve officials resolved to prevent further bank runs after that by flooding the banking system with “liquidity” (money created as debt to banks) whenever the banking Ponzi scheme came up short.
“Too Big to Fail”: The Government Provides the Ultimate Backstop
When these steps too proved insufficient to keep the banking scheme going, the government itself stepped up to the plate, providing bailout money directly from the taxpayers. The concept that some banks were “too big to fail” came in at the end of the 1980s, when the Savings and Loans collapsed and Citibank lost 50 percent of its share price. Negotiations were conducted behind closed doors, and “too big to fail” became standard policy. Bank risk was effectively nationalized: banks were now protected by the government from loss regardless of risk-taking or bad management.
There are limits, however, to the amount of support even the government’s deep pocket can provide. In the past two decades, the bankers’ lending scheme has been kept going by an even more speculative scheme known as “derivatives.” This is a complex subject that has been explored in other articles, but the bottom line is that more dollars are now owed in the derivatives casino than exist on the planet. (See Ellen Brown, “It’s the Derivatives, Stupid!” and “Credit Default Swaps: Derivative Disaster Du Jour,”www.webofdebt.com/articles.)
Attempting to fill the derivatives black hole with taxpayer money must inevitably be at the expense of other essential programs, such as Social Security and Medicare. Interestingly, Social Security and Medicare themselves are in some sense Ponzi schemes, since earlier retirees collect their benefits from the contributions of later workers. These programs, too, may soon be facing bankruptcy, in this case because their mathematical models failed to account for a huge wave of Baby Boomers who would linger longer than previous generations and demand expensive drugs and care through their senior years, and because the fund money has have been drawn on by the government for other purposes. The question here is, should the government be backstopping private banks that have mismanaged their investment portfolios at the expense of workers contractually entitled to a decent retirement from a fund they have paid into all their working lives? The answer, of course, is no; but there may be a way that the government could do both. If it were to nationalize the banking system completely – if the government were to assume not just the banks’ losses but their profits, oversight and control – it might have the funds both to maintain Social Security and Medicare and to provide a sustainable credit mechanism for the whole economy.
Replacing Private with Public Credit
Readily available credit has made America “the land of opportunity” ever since the days of the American colonists. What has transformed this credit system into a Ponzi scheme that must continually be propped up with bailout money is that the credit power has been turned over to private parties who always require more money back than they create in the first place. Benjamin Franklin reportedly explained this defect in the eighteenth century. When the directors of the Bank of England asked what was responsible for the booming economy of the young colonies, Franklin explained that the colonial governments issued their own money, which they both lent and spent into the economy:
“In the Colonies, we issue our own paper money. It is called ‘Colonial Scrip.’ We issue it in proper proportion to make the goods pass easily from the producers to the consumers. In this manner, creating ourselves our own paper money, we control its purchasing power and we have no interest to pay to no one. You see, a legitimate government can both spend and lend money into circulation, while banks can only lend significant amounts of their promissory bank notes, for they can neither give away nor spend but a tiny fraction of the money the people need. Thus, when your bankers here in England place money in circulation, there is always a debt principal to be returned and usury to be paid. The result is that you have always too little credit in circulation to give the workers full employment. You do not have too many workers, you have too little money in circulation, and that which circulates, all bears the endless burden of unpayable debt and usury.”
In an article titled “A Monetary System for the New Millennium,” Canadian money reform advocate Roger Langrick explains his concept in contemporary terms. He begins by illustrating the mathematical impossibility inherent in a system of bank-created money lent at interest:
“[I]magine the first bank which prints and lends out $100. For its efforts it asks for the borrower to return $110 in one year; that is it asks for 10% interest. Unwittingly, or maybe wittingly, the bank has created a mathematically impossible situation. The only way in which the borrower can return 110 of the bank’s notes is if the bank prints, and lends, $10 more at 10% interest . . . . The result of creating 100 and demanding 110 in return, is that the collective borrowers of a nation are forever chasing a phantom which can never be caught; the mythical $10 that were never created. The debt in fact is unrepayable. Each time $100 is created for the nation, the nation’s overall indebtedness to the system is increased by $110. The only solution at present is increased borrowing to cover the principal plus the interest of what has been borrowed.”
The better solution, says Langrick, is to allow the government to issue enough new debt-free dollars to cover the interest charges not created by the banks as loans:
“Instead of taxes, government would be empowered to create money for its own expenses up to the balance of the debt shortfall. Thus, if the banking industry created $100 in a year, the government would create $10 which it would use for its own expenses. Abraham Lincoln used this successfully when he created $500 million of ‘greenbacks’ to fight the Civil War.”
National Credit from a Truly National Banking System
In Langrick’s example, a private banking industry pockets the interest, which must be replaced every year by a 10 percent issue of new Greenbacks; but there is another possibility. The loans could be advanced by the government itself. The interest would then return to the government and could be spent back into the economy in a circular flow, without the need to continually issue more money to cover the interest shortfall.
The fractional reserve Ponzi scheme is bankrupt, and the banks engaged in it, rather than being bailed out by its victims, need to be put into a bankruptcy reorganization under the FDIC. The FDIC then has the recognized option of wiping their books clean and taking the banks’ stock in return for getting them up and running again. This would make them truly “national” banks, which could dispense “the full faith and credit of the United States” as a public utility. A truly national banking system could revive the economy with the sort of money only governments can issue – debt-free legal tender. The money would be debt-free to the government, while for the private sector, it would be freely available for borrowing at a modest interest by qualified applicants. A government-owned bank would not need to rob from Peter to advance credit to Paul. “Credit” is just an accounting tool – an advance against future profits, or the “monetization” (turning into cash) of the borrower’s promise to repay. As British commentator Ron Morrison observed in a provocative 2004 article titled “Keynes Without Debt”:
“[Today] bank credit supplies virtually all our everyday means of exchange, and this brings into sharp focus the simple fact that modern money is no longer constrained by outmoded intrinsic values. It is pure fiat [enforced by law] and simply a glorified accounting system. . . . Modern monetary reform is about displacing the current economic paradigm of ‘what can be afforded’ with ‘what we have the capacity to undertake.’”5
The objection to government-issued money has always been that it would be inflationary, but today some “reflating” of the economy could be a good thing. Just in the last year, more than $7 trillion in purchasing power has disappeared from the money supply, including wealth destruction in real estate, stocks, mutual fund shares, life insurance and pension fund reserves.6 Money is evaporating because old loans are defaulting and new loans are not being made to replace them.
Fortunately, as Martin Wolf noted in the December 16 Financial Times, “Curing deflation is child’s play in a ‘fiat money’ – a man-made money – system.” The central banks just need to get money flowing into the economy again. Among other ways they could do this, says Wolf, is that “they might finance the government on any scale they think necessary.”7
Rather than throwing money at a failed private banking system, public credit could be redirected into infrastructure and other projects that would get the wheels of production turning again. The Ponzi scheme in which debt is just shuffled around, borrowing from one player to pay another without actually producing anything of real value, could be replaced by a system in which the national credit card became an engine for true productivity and growth. Increased “demand” (money) would come from earned wages and salaries that would increase “supply” (goods and services) rather than merely servicing a perpetually increasing debt. When supply keeps up with demand, the money supply can be increased without inflating prices. In this way the paradigm of “what we can afford” could indeed be superseded by “what we have the capacity to undertake.”
Ellen Brown developed her research skills as an attorney practicing civil litigation in Los Angeles. In Web of Debt, her latest book, she turns those skills to an analysis of the Federal Reserve and “the money trust.” She shows how this private cartel has usurped the power to create money from the people themselves, and how we the people can get it back. Her earlier books focused on the pharmaceutical cartel that gets its power from “the money trust.” Her eleven books include Forbidden Medicine, Nature’s Pharmacy (co-authored with Dr. Lynne Walker), and The Key to Ultimate Health (co-authored with Dr. Richard Hansen). Her websites are http://www.webofdebt.com andwww.ellenbrown.com.
1. Kathleen Pender, “Government Bailout Hits $8.5 Trillion,” San Francisco Chronicle (November 26, 2008).
2. “Federal Reserve Statistical Release H.6, Money Stock Measures,” http://www.federalreserve.gov (December 18, 2008).
3. Robert de Fremery, “Arguments Are Fallacious for World Central Bank,” The Commercial and Financial Chronicle (September 26, 1963), citing E. Groseclose, Money: The Human Conflict, pages 178-79.4. Robert Owen, The Federal Reserve Act (1919); “Who Was Philander Knox?”, http://www.worldnewsstand.net/history/PhilanderKnox.htm. (1999).
5. Ron Morrison, “Keynes Without Debt,” http://www.prosperityuk.com/prosperity/articles/keynes.html (April 2004).
6. Martin Weiss, “Biggest Sea Change of Our Lifetime,” Money and Markets (December 22, 2008).
7. Martin Wolf, “‘Helicopter Ben’ Confronts the Challenge of a Lifetime,” Financial Times (December 16, 2008).
Ellen Brown is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Ellen Brown
Fractional Reserve Banking
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Fractional-reserve banking is a form of banking where banks maintain reserves (of cash and coin or deposits at the central bank) that are only a fraction of the customer’sdeposits. Funds deposited into a bank are mostly lent out, and a bank keeps only a fraction (called the reserve ratio) of the quantity of deposits as reserves. Some of the funds lent out are subsequently deposited with another bank, increasing deposits at that second bank and allowing further lending. As most bank deposits are treated as money in their own right, fractional reserve banking increases the money supply, and banks are said to create money. Due to the prevalence of fractional reserve banking, the broad money supply of most countries is a multiple larger than the amount of base money created by the country’s central bank. That multiple (called the money multiplier) is determined by the reserve requirement or other financial ratio requirements imposed by financial regulators, and by the excess reserves kept by commercial banks.
Central banks generally mandate reserve requirements that require banks to keep a minimum fraction of their demand deposits as cash reserves. This both limits the amount ofmoney creation that occurs in the commercial banking system, and ensures that banks have enough ready cash to meet normal demand for withdrawals. Problems can arise, however, when depositors seek withdrawal of a large proportion of deposits at the same time; this can cause a bank run or, when problems are extreme and widespread, asystemic crisis. To mitigate this risk, the governments of most countries (usually acting through the central bank) regulate and oversee commercial banks, provide deposit insurance and act as lender of last resort to commercial banks.
Fractional-reserve banking is the most common form of banking and is practiced in almost all countries. Although Islamic banking prohibits the making of profit from interest on debt, a form of fractional-reserve banking is still evident in most Islamic countries.
Savers looking to keep their valuables in safekeeping depositories deposited gold coins and silver coins at goldsmiths, receiving in turn a note for their deposit (see Bank of Amsterdam). Once these notes became a trusted medium of exchange an early form of paper money was born, in the form of the goldsmiths’ notes.
As the notes were used directly in trade, the goldsmiths observed that people would not usually redeem all their notes at the same time, and they saw the opportunity to invest their coin reserves in interest-bearing loans and bills. This generated income for the goldsmiths but left them with more notes on issue than reserves with which to pay them. A process was started that altered the role of the goldsmiths from passive guardians of bullion, charging fees for safe storage, to interest-paying and interest-earning banks. Thus fractional-reserve banking was born.
However, if creditors (note holders of gold originally deposited) lost faith in the ability of a bank to redeem (pay) their notes, many would try to redeem their notes at the same time. If in response a bank could not raise enough funds by calling in loans or selling bills, it either went into insolvency or defaulted on its notes. Such a situation is called a bank run and caused the demise of many early banks.
Repeated bank failures and financial crises led to the creation of central banks – public institutions that have the authority to regulate commercial banks, impose reserve requirements, and act as lender-of-last-resort if a bank runs low on liquidity. The emergence of central banks mitigated the dangers associated with fractional reserve banking.
From about 1991 a consensus had emerged within developed economies about the optimum design of monetary policy. In essence central bankers gave up attempts to directly control the amount of money in the economy and instead moved to indirect means by targeting interest rates. This consensus is criticized by some economists.
Reason for existence
Fractional reserve banking allows people to invest their money, without losing the ability to use it on demand. Since most people do not need to use all their money all the time, banks lend out that money, to generate profit for themselves. Thus, banks can act as financial intermediaries — facilitating the investment of savers’ funds. Full reserve banking, on the other hand, does not allow any money in such demand deposits to be invested (since all of the money would be locked up in reserves) and less liquid investments (such as stocks, bonds and time deposits) lock up a lender’s money for a time, making it unavailable for the lender to use.
According to mainstream economic theory, regulated fractional-reserve banking also benefits the economy by providing regulators with powerful tools for manipulating the money supply and interest rates, which many see as essential to a healthy economy.
How it works
The nature of modern banking is such that the cash reserves at the bank available to repay demand deposits need only be a fraction of the demand deposits owed to depositors. In most legal systems, a demand deposit at a bank (e.g., a checking or savings account) is considered a loan to the bank (instead of a bailment) repayable on demand, that the bank can use to finance its investments in loans and interest bearing securities. Banks make a profit based on the difference between the interest they charge on the loans they make, and the interest they pay to their depositors (aggregately called the net interest margin (NIM)). Since a bank lends out most of the money deposited, keeping only a fraction of the total as reserves, it necessarily has less money than the account balances of its depositors.
The main reason customers deposit funds at a bank is to store savings in the form of a demand claim on the bank. Depositors still have a claim to full repayment of their funds on demand even though most of the funds have already been invested by the bank in interest bearing loans and securities. Holders of demand deposits can withdraw all of their deposits at any time. If all the depositors of a bank did so at the same time a bank run would occur, and the bank would likely collapse. Due to the practice of central banking, this is a rare event today, as central banks usually guarantee the deposits at commercial banks, and act as lender of last resort when there is a run on a bank. However, there have been some recent bank runs: the Northern Rock crisis of 2007 in the United Kingdom is an example. The collapse of Washington Mutual bank in September 2008, the largest bank failure in history, was preceded by a “silent run” on the bank, where depositors removed vast sums of money from the bank through electronic transfer. However, in these cases, the banks proved to have been insolvent at the time of the run. Thus, these bank runs merely precipitated failures that were inevitable in any case.
In the absence of crises that trigger bank runs, fractional-reserve banking usually functions smoothly because at any one time relatively few depositors will make cash withdrawals simultaneously compared to the total amount on deposit, and a cash reserve can be maintained as a buffer to deal with the normal cash demands from depositors seeking withdrawals. In addition, in a normal economic environment, cash is steadily being introduced into the economy by the central bank, and new funds are steadily being deposited into the commercial banks.
However, if a bank is experiencing a financial crisis, and net redemption demands are unusually large over a period of time, the bank will run low on cash reserves and will be forced to raise additional funds to avoid running out of reserves and defaulting on its obligations. A bank can raise funds from additional borrowings (e.g., by borrowing from the money market or using lines of credit held with other banks), or by selling assets, or by calling in short-term loans. If creditors are afraid that the bank is running out of cash or is insolvent, they have an incentive to redeem their deposits as soon as possible before other depositors access the remaining cash reserves before they do, triggering a cascading crisis that can result in a full-scale bank run.
As an example for a very simple idea of how the fractional reserve system can work if there is only one bank, for a Reserve Fraction of 10%, a bank can turn a $1000 deposit of “M0” money, into $18,997 of “M1” money. Ignoring interest & fees, which makes banks even more profitable, this is how a bank can copy 90% of “M0” money to make “M1” money, where in this example the money loaned out is simply re-deposited in the bank and loaned out again, and so on, that is how the $18,997 “M1” money comes from the $1000 of “M0” money. Banks do this by accumulating loans and deposits (effectively multiplying) the “M0” supply to make a larger “M1” supply. Banks can collect interest on the spread of the higher loan interest from the lower deposit interests. Return On Investment (ROI) for a bank is theoretically infinite considering the bank is using none of its own money, if one excludes the cost of setting up and maintaining the accounting system.
Main article: Money creation
Modern central banking allows banks to practice fractional reserve banking with inter-bank business transactions with a reduced risk of bankruptcy. The process of fractional-reserve banking expands the money supply of the economy but also increases the risk that a bank cannot meet its depositor withdrawals. Though not a mainstream economic belief, a number of central bankers, monetary economists, and text books, have said that banks create money by ‘extending credit’, where banks obligate themselves to borrowers, and then later manage whatever liabilities this creates for them, where if the central bank targets interest rates, it must supply base money on demand to meet the banks reserve requirements, after the banks have begun the lending process and that rather than deposits leading to loans, causality is reversed, and loans lead to deposits.
Central bank money: money created or adopted by the central bank regardless of its form –- precious metals, commodity certificates, banknotes, coins, electronic money loaned to commercial banks, or anything else the central bank chooses as its form of money
Commercial bank money: demand deposits in the commercial banking system; sometimes referred to as chequebook money
When a deposit of central bank money is made at a commercial bank, the central bank money is removed from circulation and added to the commercial banks’ reserves (it is no longer counted as part of M1 money supply). Simultaneously, an equal amount of new commercial bank money is created in the form of bank deposits. When a loan is made by the commercial bank (which keeps only a fraction of the central bank money as reserves), using the central bank money from the commercial bank’s reserves, the m1 money supply expands by the size of the loan. This process is called deposit multiplication.
Example of deposit multiplication
The table below displays the mainstream economics relending model of how loans are funded and how the money supply is affected. It also shows how central bank money is used to create commercial bank money from an initial deposit of $100 of central bank money. In the example, the initial deposit is lent out 10 times with a fractional-reserve rate of 20% to ultimately create $500 of commercial bank money. Each successive bank involved in this process creates new commercial bank money on a diminishing portion of the original deposit of central bank money. This is because banks only lend out a portion of the central bank money deposited, in order to fulfill reserve requirements and to ensure that they always have enough reserves on hand to meet normal transaction demands.
The relending model begins when an initial $100 deposit of central bank money is made into Bank A. Bank A takes 20 percent of it, or $20, and sets it aside as reserves, and then loans out the remaining 80 percent, or $80. At this point, the money supply actually totals $180, not $100, because the bank has loaned out $80 of the central bank money, kept $20 of central bank money in reserve (not part of the money supply), and substituted a newly created $100 IOU claim for the depositor that acts equivalently to and can be implicitly redeemed for central bank money (the depositor can transfer it to another account, write a check on it, demand his cash back, etc.). These claims by depositors on banks are termed demand deposits or commercial bank money and are simply recorded in a bank’s accounts as a liability (specifically, an IOU to the depositor). From a depositor’s perspective, commercial bank money is equivalent to central bank money – it is impossible to tell the two forms of money apart unless a bank run occurs (at which time everyone wants central bank money).
At this point in the relending model, Bank A now only has $20 of central bank money on its books. The loan recipient is holding $80 in central bank money, but he soon spends the $80. The receiver of that $80 then deposits it into Bank B. Bank B is now in the same situation as Bank A started with, except it has a deposit of $80 of central bank money instead of $100. Similar to Bank A, Bank B sets aside 20 percent of that $80, or $16, as reserves and lends out the remaining $64, increasing money supply by $64. As the process continues, more commercial bank money is created. To simplify the table, a different bank is used for each deposit. In the real world, the money a bank lends may end up in the same bank so that it then has more money to lend out.
The expansion of $100 of central bank money through fractional-reserve lending with a 20% reserve rate. $400 of commercial bank money is created virtually through loans.
Although no new money was physically created in addition to the initial $100 deposit, new commercial bank money is created through loans. The 2 boxes marked in red show the location of the original $100 deposit throughout the entire process. The total reserves plus the last deposit (or last loan, whichever is last) will always equal the original amount, which in this case is $100. As this process continues, more commercial bank money is created. The amounts in each step decrease towards a limit. If a graph is made showing the accumulation of deposits, one can see that the graph is curved and approaches a limit. This limit is the maximum amount of money that can be created with a given reserve rate. When the reserve rate is 20%, as in the example above, the maximum amount of total deposits that can be created is $500 and the maximum increase in the money supply is $400.
For an individual bank, the deposit is considered a liability whereas the loan it gives out and the reserves are considered assets. Deposits will always be equal to loans plus a bank’s reserves, since loans and reserves are created from deposits. This is the basis for a bank’s balance sheet.
Fractional reserve banking allows the money supply to expand or contract. Generally the expansion or contraction of the money supply is dictated by the balance between the rate of new loans being created and the rate of existing loans being repaid or defaulted on. The balance between these two rates can be influenced to some degree by actions of the central bank.
This table gives an outline of the makeup of money supplies worldwide. Most of the money in any given money supply consists of commercial bank money. The value of commercial bank money is based on the fact that it can be exchanged freely at a bank for central bank money.
The actual increase in the money supply through this process may be lower, as (at each step) banks may choose to hold reserves in excess of the statutory minimum, borrowers may let some funds sit idle, and some members of the public may choose to hold cash, and there also may be delays or frictions in the lending process. Government regulations may also be used to limit the money creation process by preventing banks from giving out loans even though the reserve requirements have been fulfilled.
Main article: Money multiplier
The expansion of $100 through fractional-reserve banking with varying reserve requirements. Each curve approaches a limit. This limit is the value that the money multiplier calculates.
The most common mechanism used to measure this increase in the money supply is typically called the money multiplier. It calculates the maximum amount of money that an initial deposit can be expanded to with a given reserve ratio.
The money multiplier, m, is the inverse of the reserve requirement, R:
For example, with the reserve ratio of 20 percent, this reserve ratio, R, can also be expressed as a fraction:
So then the money multiplier, m, will be calculated as:
This number is multiplied by the initial deposit to show the maximum amount of money it can be expanded to.
The money creation process is also affected by the currency drain ratio (the propensity of the public to hold banknotes rather than deposit them with a commercial bank), and the safety reserve ratio (excess reserves beyond the legal requirement that commercial banks voluntarily hold—usually a small amount). Data for “excess” reserves and vault cash are published regularly by the Federal Reserve in the United States. In practice, the actual money multiplier varies over time, and may be substantially lower than the theoretical maximum.
Confusingly there are many different “money multipliers”, some referring to ratios of rates of change of different money measures and others referring to ratios of absolute values of money measures.
The modern mainstream view of reserve requirements is that they are intended to prevent banks from:
generating too much money by making too many loans against the narrow money deposit base;
having a shortage of cash when large deposits are withdrawn (although the reserve is thought to be a legal minimum, it is understood that in a crisis or bank run, reserves may be made available on a temporary basis).
In practice, some central banks do not require reserves to be held, and in some countries that do, such as the USA and the EU they are not required to be held during the day when the banks are lending, and banks can borrow from other banks at near the central bank policy rate to ensure they have the necessary amount of required reserves by the close of business. Required reserves are therefore considered by some central bankers, monetary economists and textbooks to only play a very small role in limiting money creation in these countries. Most commentators agree however, that they help the banks have sufficient supplies of highly liquid assets, so that the system operates in an orderly fashion and maintains public confidence. The UK for example, which does not have required reserves, does have requirements that the banks keep a certain amount of cash, and in Australia while there are no reserve requirements, there are a variety of requirements to ensure the banks have a stabilising ratio of liquid assets, such as deposits held with local banks. Individual countries adhere to varying required reserve ratios which have changed over time.
In addition to reserve requirements, there are other required financial ratios that affect the amount of loans that a bank can fund. The capital requirement ratio is perhaps the most important of these other required ratios. When there are no mandatory reserve requirements, which are considered by some mainstream economists to restrict lending, the capital requirement ratio acts to prevent an infinite amount of bank lending.
See also: Endogenous money
Theories of endogenous money date to the 19th century, and were described by Joseph Schumpeter, and later the post-Keynesians. Endogenous money theory states that the supply of money is credit-driven and determined endogenously by the demand for bank loans, rather than exogenously by monetary authorities.
Charles Goodhart worked for many years to encourage a different approach to money supply analysis and said the base money multiplier model was “such an incomplete way of describing the process of the determination of the stock of money that it amounts to misinstruction” Ten years later he said: “Almost all those who have worked in a [central bank] believe that this view is totally mistaken; in particular, it ignores the implications of several of the crucial institutional features of a modern commercial banking system…”. Goodhart has characterized the money stock as a dependent endogenous variable. In 1994,Mervyn King said that the causation between money and demand is a contentious issue, because although textbooks assume that money is exogenous, in the United Kingdom money is endogenous, as the Bank of England provides base money on demand and broad money is created by the banking system.
Seth B. Carpenter and Selva Demiralp concluded the simple textbook base money multiplier is implausible in the United States.
Money supplies around the world
Components of US money supply (currency, M1, M2, and M3) since 1959. In January 2007, the amount of central bank money was $750.5 billion while the amount of commercial bank money (in the M2 supply) was $6.33 trillion. M1 is currency plus demand deposits; M2 is M1 plus time deposits, savings deposits, and some money-market funds; and M3 is M2 plus large time deposits and other forms of money. The M3 data ends in 2006 because the federal reserve ceased reporting it.
Components of the euro money supply 1998-2007
Fractional-reserve banking determines the relationship between the amount of central bank money (currency) in the official money supply statistics and the total money supply. Most of the money in these systems is commercial bank money. Fractional reserve banking involves the issuance and creation of commercial bank money, which increases the money supply through the deposit creation multiplier. The issue of money through the banking system is a mechanism of monetary transmission, which a central bank can influence indirectly by raising or lowering interest rates (although banking regulations may also be adjusted to influence the money supply, depending on the circumstances).
Main article: Central bank
Government controls and bank regulations related to fractional-reserve banking have generally been used to impose restrictive requirements on note issue and deposit taking on the one hand, and to provide relief from bankruptcy and creditor claims, and/or protect creditors with government funds, when banks defaulted on the other hand. Such measures have included:
Minimum required reserve ratios (RRRs)
Minimum capital ratios
Government bond deposit requirements for note issue
100% Marginal Reserve requirements for note issue, such as the Bank Charter Act 1844 (UK)
Sanction on bank defaults and protection from creditors for many months or even years, and
Central bank support for distressed banks, and government guarantee funds for notes and deposits, both to counteract bank runs and to protect bank creditors.
Liquidity and capital management for a bank
To avoid defaulting on its obligations, the bank must maintain a minimal reserve ratio that it fixes in accordance with, notably, regulations and its liabilities. In practice this means that the bank sets a reserve ratio target and responds when the actual ratio falls below the target. Such response can be, for instance:
Selling or redeeming other assets, or securitization of illiquid assets,
Restricting investment in new loans,
Borrowing funds (whether repayable on demand or at a fixed maturity),
Issuing additional capital instruments, or
Because different funding options have different costs, and differ in reliability, banks maintain a stock of low cost and reliable sources of liquidity such as:
Demand deposits with other banks
High quality marketable debt securities
Committed lines of credit with other banks
As with reserves, other sources of liquidity are managed with targets.
The ability of the bank to borrow money reliably and economically is crucial, which is why confidence in the bank’s creditworthiness is important to its liquidity. This means that the bank needs to maintain adequate capitalisation and to effectively control its exposures to risk in order to continue its operations. If creditors doubt the bank’s assets are worth more than its liabilities, all demand creditors have an incentive to demand payment immediately, a situation known as a run on the bank.
Contemporary bank management methods for liquidity are based on maturity analysis of all the bank’s assets and liabilities (off balance sheet exposures may also be included). Assets and liabilities are put into residual contractual maturity buckets such as ‘on demand’, ‘less than 1 month’, ‘2–3 months’ etc. These residual contractual maturities may be adjusted to account for expected counter party behaviour such as early loan repayments due to borrowers refinancing and expected renewals of term deposits to give forecast cash flows. This analysis highlights any large future net outflows of cash and enables the bank to respond before they occur. Scenario analysis may also be conducted, depicting scenarios including stress scenarios such as a bank-specific crisis.
Risk and prudential regulation
In a fractional-reserve banking system, in the event of a bank run, the demand depositors and note holders would attempt to withdraw more money than the bank has in reserves, causing the bank to suffer a liquidity crisis and, ultimately, to perhaps default. In the event of a default, the bank would need to liquidate assets and the creditors of the bank would suffer a loss if the proceeds were insufficient to pay its liabilities. Since public deposits are payable on demand, liquidation may require selling assets quickly and potentially in large enough quantities to affect the price of those assets. An otherwise solvent bank (whose assets are worth more than its liabilities) may be made insolvent by a bank run. This problem potentially exists for any corporation with debt or liabilities, but is more critical for banks as they rely upon public deposits (which may be redeemable upon demand).
Although an initial analysis of a bank run and default points to the bank’s inability to liquidate or sell assets (i.e. because the fraction of assets not held in the form of liquid reserves are held in less liquid investments such as loans), a more full analysis indicates that depositors will cause a bank run only when they have a genuine fear of loss of capital, and that banks with a strong risk adjusted capital ratio should be able to liquidate assets and obtain other sources of finance to avoid default. For this reason, fractional-reserve banks have every reason to maintain their liquidity, even at the cost of selling assets at heavy discounts and obtaining finance at high cost, during a bank run (to avoid a total loss for the contributors of the bank’s capital, the shareholders).
Many governments have enforced or established deposit insurance systems in order to protect depositors from the event of bank defaults and to help maintain public confidence in the fractional-reserve system.
Responses to the problem of financial risk described above include:
Proponents of prudential regulation, such as minimum capital ratios, minimum reserve ratios, central bank or other regulatory supervision, and compulsory note and deposit insurance, (see Controls on Fractional-Reserve Banking below);
Proponents of free banking, who believe that banking should be open to free entry and competition, and that the self-interest of debtors, creditors and shareholders should result in effective risk management; and,
Withdrawal restrictions: some bank accounts may place a limit on daily cash withdrawals and may require a notice period for very large withdrawals. Banking laws in some countries may allow restrictions to be placed on withdrawals under certain circumstances, although these restrictions may rarely, if ever, be used;
Opponents of fractional reserve banking who insist that notes and demand deposits be 100% reserved.
Example of a bank balance sheet and financial ratios
An example of fractional reserve banking, and the calculation of the reserve ratio is shown in the balance sheet below:
In this example the cash reserves held by the bank is $3010m ($201m currency + $2809m held at central bank) and the demand liabilities of the bank are $25482m, for a cash reserve ratio of 11.81%.
Other financial ratios
The key financial ratio used to analyze fractional-reserve banks is the cash reserve ratio, which is the ratio of cash reserves to demand deposits. However, other important financial ratios are also used to analyze the bank’s liquidity, financial strength, profitability etc.
For example the ANZ National Bank Limited balance sheet above gives the following financial ratios:
The cash reserve ratio is $3010m/$25482m, i.e. 11.81%.
The liquid assets reserve ratio is ($201m+$2809m+$1797m)/$25482m, i.e. 18.86%.
The equity capital ratio is $8703m/107787m, i.e. 8.07%.
The tangible equity ratio is ($8703m-$3297m)/107787m, i.e. 5.02%
The total capital ratio is ($8703m+$2062m)/$107787m, i.e. 9.99%.
It is very important how the term ‘reserves’ is defined for calculating the reserve ratio, as different definitions give different results. Other important financial ratios may require analysis of disclosures in other parts of the bank’s financial statements. In particular, for liquidity risk, disclosures are incorporated into a note to the financial statements that provides maturity analysis of the bank’s assets and liabilities and an explanation of how the bank manages its liquidity.
How the example bank manages its liquidity
See also: Duration gap
The ANZ National Bank Limited explains its methods as:
Liquidity risk is the risk that the Banking Group will encounter difficulties in meeting commitments associated with its financial liabilities, e.g. overnight deposits, current accounts, and maturing deposits; and future commitments e.g. loan draw-downs and guarantees. The Banking Group manages its exposure to liquidity risk by maintaining sufficient liquid funds to meet its commitments based on historical and forecast cash flow requirements.
The following maturity analysis of assets and liabilities has been prepared on the basis of the remaining period to contractual maturity as at the balance date. The majority of longer term loans and advances are housing loans, which are likely to be repaid earlier than their contractual terms. Deposits include substantial customer deposits that are repayable on demand. However, historical experience has shown such balances provide a stable source of long term funding for the Banking Group. When managing liquidity risks, the Banking Group adjusts this contractual profile for expected customer behaviour.
Main article: Criticism of fractional-reserve banking
Critics of fractional reserve banking have argued one or more of the following: that it is unstable, that it exacerbates business cycles, that it causes inflation, or that it leads to environmental degradation.
“The Federal Reserve Idea was doubtless right; if it had not been, it could not have been established. But it has been manipulated. It has not been a ‘federal’ reserve; it has been a private reserve. It has been operated in the interest of bankers and not of everyone in general. Capable of being used to carry the country gradually back to a natural flow of business and to a natural level of prices, it was used to bludgeon business at a critical time and to bludgeon it in such a way that money-lenders profited when producers suffered.
If that is the fact, there is no American banker but will say that the method was wrong; economically wrong, logically wrong, commercially wrong, if not criminally wrong.
Today the Federal Reserve boasts of its own reserve as if that were a sign of national economic health. With the country struggling to live, the Federal Reserve ought to be low, not high. The height which the reserve has reached is a measure of the depth of the country’s depression.
If the Federal Reserve would let out a part of that flood of money — a high financial authority suggests that less than 10 percent would do it — it would be like an infusion of blood into the nation’s veins.”
(Chapter 61, Volume 3, THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT, issue of 16 July 1921, “The International Jew”)
^ a b United States. Congress. House. Banking and Currency Committee. (1964). Money facts; 169 questions and answers on money- a supplement to A Primer on Money, with index, Subcommittee on Domestic Finance … 1964.. Washington D.C..
^ a b The Federal Reserve in Plain English – An easy-to-read guide to the structure and functions of the Federal Reserve System. See page 5 of the document for the purposes and functions:http://www.frbsf.org/publications/education/plainenglish/index.html
^ “Monetary Policy Regimes: a fragile consensus, Peter Howells and Iris Biefang-Frisancho Mariscal (2006)” (PDF). University of the West of England, Bristol.
^ Mankiw, N. Gregory (2002). “9”. Macroeconomics (5th ed.). Worth. pp. 238–255.
^ Committee on Finance and Industry 1931 (Macmillan Report) on bankers desire to complicate banking issues.”The economic experts have evolved a highly technical vocabulary of their own and in their zeal for precision are distrustful, if not derisive of any attempts to popularize their science.”
^ Page 57 of ‘The FED today’, a publication on an educational site affiliated with the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, designed to educate people on the history and purpose of the United States Federal Reserve system. The FED today Lesson 6
^ “Mervyn King, Finance: A Return from Risk”. Bank of England. ” Banks are dangerous institutions. They borrow short and lend long. They create liabilities which promise to be liquid and hold few liquid assets themselves. That though is hugely valuable for the rest of the economy. Household savings can be channelled to finance illiquid investment projects while providing access to liquidity for those savers who may need it…. If a large number of depositors want liquidity at the same time, banks are forced into early liquidation of assets – lowering their value …'”
^ “Disyatat, P. 2010 The bank lending channel revisited.”. Bank for International Settlements. “Page 2. the concept of the [mainstream economics] money multiplier is flawed and uninformative in terms of analyzing the dynamics of bank lending. Page 7 When a loan is granted, banks in the first instance create a new liability that is issued to the borrower. This can be in the form of deposits or a cheque drawn on the bank, which when redeemed, becomes deposits at another bank. A well functioning interbank market overcomes the asynchronous nature of loan and deposit creation across banks. Thus loans drive deposits rather than the other way around.”
^ “Paul Tucker, Money and credit: Banking and the Macroeconomy”. Bank of England. ” banks….in the short run…..lever up their balance sheets and expand credit at will….Subject only but crucially to confidence in their soundness, banks extend credit by simply increasing the borrowing customer’s current account…..This ‘money creation’ process is constrained by their need to manage the liquidity risk from the withdrawal of deposits and the drawdown of backup lines to which it exposes them.”
^ “Glen Stevens, the Australian Economy: Then and now”. Reserve Bank of Australia. ” money multiplier, as an introduction to the theory of fractional reserve banking. I suppose students have to learn that, and it is easy to teach, but most practitioners find it to be a pretty unsatisfactory description of how the monetary and credit system actually works. In large part, this is because it ignores the role of financial prices in the process.”
^ “White, W. Changing views on how best to conduct monetary policy: the last fifty years”. Bank for International Settlements. “Some decades ago, the academic literature….emphasised the importance of the reserves supplied by the central bank….., and the implications (via the money multiplier) for the growth of money and credit. Today, it is more broadly understood that no industrial country conducts policy in this way under normal circumstances….there has been a decisive shift towards the use of short-term interest rates as the policy instrument [in industrialised countries]. In this framework, cash reserves supplied to the banking system are whatever they have to be to ensure that the desired policy rate is in fact achieved.”
^ “Freedman, C. Reflections on Three Decades at the Bank of Canada”. Bank of Canada. “It used to be that most academic research treated money (or sometimes base) as the exogenous policy instrument under the control of the central bank. This was an irritant to those of us working in central banks, because the instrument of policy had always been the short-term interest rate, and because all monetary aggregates (beyond base) have always been and remain endogenous. In recent years, more and more academics, in specifying their models, have treated the short-term interest rate as the policy instrument, thereby increasing the usefulness of their analyses…”
^ http://college.holycross.edu/RePEc/eej/Archive/Volume18/V18N3P305_314.pdf Understanding the Remarkable Survival of Multiplier Models of Money Stock Determination. Eastern Economic Journal, 1992, vol. 18, issue 3, pages 305-314
^ “(Holmes, 1969 page 73 at the time Senior Vice President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York responsible for open market operations) I have not seen, cited in Bank and Credit the Scientific Journal of the National Bank of Poland”. ” In the real world, banks extend credit, creating deposits in the process, and look for reserves later. The question then becomes one of whether and how the Federal Reserve will accommodate the demand for reserves. In the very short run, the Federal Reserve has little or no choice about accommodating that demand… …'”
^ “Modern Money Mechanics. Page 37. Money Creation and Reserve Management” (PDF). Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. ” Page 7. Of course, they do not really pay out loans from the money they receive as deposits. If they did this, no additional money would be created. What they do when they make loans is to accept promissory notes in exchange for credits to the borrowers’ transaction accounts. Loans (assets) and deposits (liabilities) both rise by $9,000. Reserves are unchanged by the loan transactions. But the deposit credits constitute new additions to the total deposits of the banking system. Page 37. In the real world, a bank’s lending is not normally constrained by the amount of excess reserves it has at any given moment. Rather, loans are made, or not made, depending on the bank’s credit policies and its expectations about its ability to obtain the funds necessary to pay its customers’ checks and maintain required reserves in a timely fashion …'”
^ “The Transmission of Monetary Policy in Canada”. Bank of Canada. “Required reserves have traditionally been justified by a desire to influence the size of the money multiplier and by prudential concerns. However, central banks’ views about money supply determination have for a long time been that the money stock is demand determined”
^ Elements of Banking Made Simple, Hoyle and Whitehead (Oxford: Heinemann, 1989 edition). From preface “specifically designed to meet the requirements of the Institute of Bankers’ Banking Certificate and Foundation Course”. Page 22 “Consider a deposit….£1000 in banknotes….(a) We can lend out £700…. This is the simple view of bank lending. (b) It is….possible for us to have deposits of £3333.33. As we only have deposits….of £1000 we can lend out £2333.33, provided we can find borrowers. This is the more sophisticated view of bank lending.
^ a b c Bank for International Settlements – The Role of Central Bank Money in Payment Systems. See page 9, titled, “The coexistence of central and commercial bank monies: multiple issuers, one currency”:http://www.bis.org/publ/cpss55.pdf A quick quotation in reference to the 2 different types of money is listed on page 3. It is the first sentence of the document:
“Contemporary monetary systems are based on the mutually reinforcing roles of central bank money and commercial bank monies.”
^ a b European Central Bank – Domestic payments in Euroland: commercial and central bank money:http://www.ecb.int/press/key/date/2000/html/sp001109_2.en.html One quotation from the article referencing the two types of money:
“At the beginning of the 20th almost the totality of retail payments were made in central bank money. Over time, this monopoly came to be shared with commercial banks, when deposits and their transfer via cheques and giros became widely accepted. Banknotes and commercial bank money became fully interchangeable payment media that customers could use according to their needs. While transaction costs in commercial bank money were shrinking, cashless payment instruments became increasingly used, at the expense of banknotes”
^ Macmillan report 1931 account of how fractional banking works http://books.google.ca/books?hl=en&id=EkUTaZofJYEC&dq=British+Parliamentary+reports+on+international+finance&printsec=frontcover&source=web&ots=kHxssmPNow&sig=UyopnsiJSHwk152davCIyQAMVdw&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA34,M1
^ http://books.google.com/books?id=I-49pxHxMh8C&pg=PA303&dq=deposit+reserves&lr=&sig=hMQtESrWP6IBRYiiaZgKwIoDWVk#PPA295,M1William MacEachern, Macroeconomics: A Contemporary Introduction, p. 295
see pages 13 and 14 of the pdf version for information on government regulations and supervision over banks
^ http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h3/Current/ Federal Reserve Board, “AGGREGATE RESERVES OF DEPOSITORY INSTITUTIONS AND THE MONETARY BASE” (Updated weekly).
^ http://books.google.com/books?id=FdrbugYfKNwC&pg=PA169&lpg=PA169&dq=united+states+money+multiplier&source=web&ots=C_Hw1u82xe&sig=m7g0bMz167DijFsOCbn5f4aWAOU#PPA170,M1Bruce Champ & Scott Freeman, Modeling Monetary Economies, p. 170 (Figure 9.1).
^ “Goodhart C A E (1984( Monetary Policy in Theory and Practice p.188. I have not seen, cited in Monetary Policy Regimes: a fragile consensus. Peter Howells and Iris Biefang-Frisancho Mariscal” (PDF). University of the West of England, Bristol. ” The base-multiplier model of money supply determination (which lies behind the exogenously determined money stock of the LM curve) was condemned years ago as ‘such an incomplete way of describing the process of the determination of the stock of money that it amounts to misinstruction …'(Goodhart 1984. Page 188)”
^ “Goodhart C. (1994), What Should Central Banks Do? What Should Be Their Macroeconomic objectives and Operations?, The Economic Journal, 104, 1424–1436 I have not seen, cited in “Show me the money” – or how the institutional aspects of monetary policy implementation render money supply endogenous. Juliusz Jablecki”. Bank and Credit, the scientific journal of the national bank of Poland.
^ “Charles Goodhart, 2007.02.28, Whatever became of the monetary aggregates?”. Bank of England.
^ “King Mervyn, The transmission mechanism of monetary policy” (PDF). Bank of England.
^ “Paul Tucker, Managing the central bank’s balance sheet: Where monetary policy meets financial stability”. Bank of England. ” given this way of implementing monetary policy, money – both narrow and broad – is largely endogenous. The central bank simply supplies whatever amount of base money is demanded by the economy at the prevailing level of interest rates.”
^ “Razzak, W. Money in the Era of Inflation Targeting”. Reserve Bank of New Zealand. “In New Zealand….money supply is endogenous”
^ http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2010/201041/index.html Money, Reserves, and the Transmission of Monetary Policy: Does the Money Multiplier Exist? Conclusions
^ Reserve Bank of India – Report on Currency and Finance 2004-05 (See page 71 of the full report or just download the section Functional Evolution of Central Banking):http://www.rbi.org.in/scripts/AnnualPublications.aspx?head=Report%20on%20Currency%20and%20Finance&fromdate=03/17/06&todate=03/19/06
The monopoly power to issue currency is delegated to a central bank in full or sometimes in part. The practice regarding the currency issue is governed more by convention than by any particular theory. It is well known that the basic concept of currency evolved in order to facilitate exchange. The primitive currency note was in reality a promissory note to pay back to its bearer the original precious metals. With greater acceptability of these promissory notes, these began to move across the country and the banks that issued the promissory notes soon learnt that they could issue more receipts than the gold reserves held by them. This led to the evolution of the fractional reserve system. It also led to repeated bank failures and brought forth the need to have an independent authority to act as lender-of-the-last-resort. Even after the emergence of central banks, the concerned governments continued to decide asset backing for issue of coins and notes. The asset backing took various forms including gold coins, bullion, foreign exchange reserves and foreign securities. With the emergence of a fractional reserve system, this reserve backing (gold, currency assets, etc.) came down to a fraction of total currency put in circulation.
Crick, W.F. (1927), The genesis of bank deposits, Economica, vol 7, 1927, pp 191–202.
Friedman, Milton (1960), A Program for Monetary Stability, New York, Fordham University Press.
Meigs, A.J. (1962), Free reserves and the money supply, Chicago, University of Chicago, 1962.
Philips, C.A. (1921), Bank Credit, New York, Macmillan, chapters 1-4, 1921,
Thomson, P. (1956), Variations on a theme by Philips, American Economic Review vol 46, December 1956, pp. 965–970.
Modern Money Mechanics Federal Reserve educational material explaining how money is created.
Interactive Fractional Reserve Calculator Calculator that details deposit multiplication for any reserve requirement.
The Bankers Who call the TRUTH Criticism
Criticism of Fractional Reserve Banking
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Criticisms of fractional-reserve banking have been put forward from a variety of perspectives. Critics have included economists such as Irving Fisher, Frank Knight, and Milton Friedman. Within the economics profession today, most criticisms are from non-mainstream economic theories such as those of the Austrian School. There are also critics from outside the economics profession.
Critics of fractional reserve banking and the related fiat paper monetary system may use the term debt-based monetary system or credit-based monetary system to emphasize the role that credit plays in the current monetary system. These terms are not in general use, and economists generally refer instead to the money supply, broad money and the money multiplier when discussing the mechanism by which the commercial banking system expands the quantity of money in an economy. The study of monetary theory in the economics profession is referred to as monetary economics.
Critics of fractional reserve banking claim that since money creation requires loans from the banking system, people are required to go into debt in order for any new money to be created. They assert that this can debase the means of exchange. Critics find it problematic that banks “create money out of nothing.”
One criticism posits that since debt and the interest on the debt can only be paid in the same form of money, the total debt (principal plus interest) can never be paid in a debt-based monetary system unless more money is created through the same process. For example: if 100 credits are created and loaned into the economy at 10% per year, at the end of the year 110 credits will be needed to pay the loan and extinguish the debt. However, since the additional 10 credits does not yet exist, it too must be borrowed. This implies that debt must grow exponentially in order for the monetary system to remain solvent.[page needed] This was the argument of the Social Credit movement of the 1930s, who proposed to remove the job of money creation from banks and give it to governments.
Other criticisms relate to the potential fragility of bank liquidity in a fractional reserve banking environment, the financial risk of bank runs that depositors bear when depositing money with banks, and the impact that demand deposits have on the stock of money, and on inflation (that is, the implicit expansion of the money supply and its associated impact on prices and the exchange rate). An alternative to fractional reserve banking is full-reserve banking. With full-reserve banking, some monetary reformers, such as Stephen Zarlenga of the American Monetary Institute, support the concurrent issuance of debt-free fiat currency from the Treasury, while others such as Congressman Ron Paul and some economists from the Austrian school, call for a commodity currency as existed under the gold standard.
Some commentators, like debt-focused critics including Stephen Zarlenga, Lew Rockwell and Murray Rothbard, link together fractional-reserve banking, central banking, and government-enforced “paper” or fiat currency as negative features of modern monetary systems. They argue that fiat money and the practice of fractional reserve banking does not impose a natural limit on the growth of the money supply, and that this causes inherently unsustainable bubbles in asset and capital markets, which are vulnerable to speculation. These commentators often use the term “debt-based monetary system” to refer to an economic system where money is created primarily through fractional-reserve banking techniques, using the banking system.
Mark Anielski, and other political thinkers such as Michael Rowbotham, argue that this system of money supply has characteristics similar to a pyramid scheme, where the newly indebted are compelled to induce others into debt to pay off their own debts.
Exacerbation of the business cycle
Adherents of the Austrian School claim that fractional-reserve banking, by expanding the money supply, will lower the interest rates compared to a hypothetical full-reserve banking system, although this idea has been criticized within mainstream economics. Austrian economists argue that the presumed discrepancy will affect the role of the interest rate as the price of investment capital, guiding investment decisions.
Fractional reserve banking involves the creation of money by the commercial bank system, increasing the money supply. According to the quantity theory of money, this larger money supply leads to more money ‘chasing’ the same amount of goods, which leads to a higher price level. Austrian economists state that this expansion of the broad money supply (demand deposits and notes) caused by fractional reserve banking is a cause of price inflation.
Some conservationists and environmentalists believe that fractional reserve banking creates the necessity for indefinite economic growth which leads to environmental destruction and depletion of natural resources especially when coupled with population growth.