PERPETUAL PEACE through PLANETIZATION
 

THE OTHER CHOICE AND SYSTEM FOR THE PLANET
 

A Holistic Common Sense Structure for the Liberation of All without War Through the New Foundation for the New World Vision

Humans * Animals * Environment * A Unity in Diversity Honoring the Truth of The Oneness  of All Life through Compassion, Humanity , Equality, Prosperity and Respect

Contact | Home

3rd Millennium, 2100 AD

Skullduggery
 Human Starvation,
Genocide and Barbarism of the Civilized

These things must be chased out off Humanity's Existence

The People vs The Banks - First Anniversary
 
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, April 15, 2006.
 
Exactly a year ago today, on April 15, 2005, we filed the biggest class action suit in Canada - "The People vs The Banks." This class action created shock waves in heart of the world's banking business that deals in unlawfully created, non-tangible, non-existent digital money.
 
The class action involves millions of people in Canada. Despite the mainstream media's continued bias reporting, the news of the class action suit has traveled all over the world. The whole world is watching, waiting to see how the banks and the courts are going to stop John-Ruiz: Dempsey from proceeding with this major lawsuit.
 
The suit arises from the fact that banks as credit-lenders flourish only because of fraud and deception, breach of contract, deception, unjust enrichment, unlawful conversion and illegal creation of money.  The Plaintiff (as well as the other millions of people), the "borrower" is always the source of the principal amount of any alleged loan by virtue of his "promise" to pay (the "promissory note"), from which a negotiable instrument is generated, i.e. "money," pursuant to commonly accepted banking practice which the credit-lender then converts into another form (bank draft, cashier's check) in accordance with their lending policies which is then reissued in the form of a "loan." This "loan" is nothing more than accounting entries on the bank's ledgers, because the financial institutions like the defendant banks, loans nothing of substance, and are forbidden by banking regulations from loaning the bank's cash or assets.
 
Money simply does not exist. What we call money, the Canadian bank note they call "legal tender" is not money. It has no intrinsic value. It costs two cents to make a five dollar bill as well as it is for a hundred dollar bill. It is money by decree; it is money only because the government says it is money. Worse, in this case, the "money" in question in this lawsuit is the privately created, digital, computer generated money surreptitiously created by the banks and "loaned" to their unsuspecting borrowers with criminal interest at no cost to themselves.
 
As far as the representative Plaintiff, John-Ruiz: Dempsey is concerned, the People of Canada do not owe the banks any debt or money. It was the other way around. John says: "How can we owe them anything when we never received anything of any value [substance] from these banks?" The money which was assumed to have been credited into the borrower's account was derived from "thin air" - God's money, or money that never belonged to the banks at all. The banks have no legal right to use God's money and pass them on to the unsuspecting borrowers and call it a loan and then start charging usury. This is nothing but pure skullduggery.
 
"Only God can create something of value out of nothing.no action will lie to recover on a claim based upon, or in any manner depending upon, a fraudulent, illegal, or immoral transaction to which Plaintiff [the bank] was a party." Per Justice Mahoney in First National Bank of Montgomery v. Jerome Daly, 12/07/1968.
 
In First National Bank above, (more popularly known as the Credit River decision) further stated: "The [bank's] act of creating credit is not authorized by the Constitution and laws of the United States, is unconstitutional and void, and is not lawful consideration in the eyes of the law to support anything or upon which any lawful right can be built." - Justice Martin V. Mahoney.
 
The above Minnesota trial court's decision holding the federal reserve act unconstitutional and void;  holding the National Banking Act unconstitutional and void; declaring a mortgage acquired by the First National Bank of Montgomery, Minnesota in the regular course of its business, along with the foreclosure and the sheriff's sale to be void. This decision, which is legally sound, has the effect of declaring all private mortgages on real and personal property, and all U.S. and state bonds held by the Federal Reserve, national and state banks to be null and void. This amounts to an emancipation of the nation from personal, national and state debt purportedly owed to this banking system.  Every American (as well as Canadian) owes it to himself, his country, and to the people of the world for that matter to study this decision very carefully and to understand it, for upon it hangs the question of freedom or slavery.
 
The above statement by Justice Mahoney also holds true in Canada because there is no law in Canada, whether federal or provincial that remotely suggest that it is lawful for any bank to create money out of thin air and then use this created money as valuable consideration whereby they could now loan this created money as principal and then charge their unsuspecting victims interest for the rest of their lives!  This is legalized slavery.
 
An earlier decision by the Supreme Court of Canada which dealt with the same issue of lack of consideration per Henry J.: ".I know of no law to oblige me to pay it. When I deliver and execute a note, I am presumed to have received a consideration for it, and I am therefore bound to pay the legal holder or endorsee, but it would be contrary to every equitable, and I may say legal, principle to make me pay in the other case, where I received no value, or did no act from which such may be presumed." Scott v. R. (1878), 2 S.C.R. 349.
 
The People have a strong case. The only problem is money, and the banks have lots of it. The banks have been known to spend $100,000.00 or more trying to collect a $5,000.00 claim. The banks simply cannot afford to have any precedents. They can afford to pay their highly paid lawyers and perhaps even bribe the judges in order to achieve their evil goals.
 
Just recently, the banks and The People were compelled to appear before Madam Justice Garson, the assigned case management judge who heard the banks' lawyers argue that the statement of claim should be struck in whole or in part. The banks argue that the People's claim has no merit based on their flimsy arguments that the pleadings are either vexatious, frivolous, scandalous and abuse of process. However they all failed to show why the claims are vexatious, frivolous, scandalous and abuse of process.
 
John and his team, submitted the truth, that the court has no jurisdiction to hear or decide the case simply because the judge herself is in direct conflict of interest. Prior to Judge Garson becoming a judge of the Supreme Court of British Columbia, she worked for one of the defendant banks, TD Canada Trust. John filed a motion to have Garson recused. This motion was intended to be heard by the Chief Justice himself.  Notwithstanding, Garson took it upon herself to decide on the motion to recuse without any notice of hearing being filed which violates the maxim: "nemo judex in sua causa" which means that one cannot be the judge of his/her own cause. Garson saw nothing wrong with that.
 
During the last hearing on April 6, 2006, John personally served Garson a Writ of Summons and Statement of Claim.  John and others filed this lawsuit against Garson in her personal capacity for interfering with John's personal right of unlimited contract with his principals. The suit also named another judge, Justice James Williams who, without proving any jurisdiction or proof of claim or evidence against John decided to grant an injunction against him from representing other people in court because he is not a member of the BAR or law society. With this writ filed against Garson as a defendant, this judge is now in clear conflict without any excuse.
 
At the hearing on April 6, John and the others told Garson they will not accept any decision or order made or done while she is in direct conflict of interest and without proper jurisdiction. However, knowing how she made her previous decisions that have no foundation in law or fact, it will not come as a surprise if this judge puts her blindfold and ignore the law in order to give the banks a great favour. The whole world will have the opportunity to see whether or not the courts deserve the kind of respect they think we owed them. Nedless to say, the ball is in
their court.
 
Whatever happens however, this is only the beginning. The greatest battle, "The People vs. The Banks" has only begun. This battle will continue until the tables of the money changers have been overturned once more. If God be for us, who can be against us? May God Bless Us All.
 
Please contact us by email at: thepeoplevsthebanks@yahoo.com or
thepeoplevsthebanks@hotmail.com.
 
Visit our websites at: http://www.freewebs.com/classaction/ or
www.theclassactionsuit.com

It is the game of “World Control”. It is a serious game and the stakes are the highest imaginable, because we stand to lose our Rights to “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness”. In the 18^th century, when the American Colonies were suffering at the hands of a despotic King, they knew what they were entitled to under English Common Law which has, as it’s foundation, the Charters of Liberty such as Magna Carta 1215, Petition of Right 1627, Habeas Corpus 1640 and the Bill of Rights 1688, and that “the glory of English law” (as Sir William Blackstone wrote) has always been Trial by Jury.  For megalomaniacs to take over the world, they must first dispose of these icons which have indelibly confirmed the Order and the Rule of Law according to the Christian perspective.  If we are going to defeat the Forces of Evil, we need to understand and hold to the Levels of Jurisdiction.

THE RULE OF LAW

“The supremacy of law. A feature attributed to the UK constitution by Professor Dicey (Law of the Constitution, 1885). It embodied three concepts: the absolute predominance of regular law, so that the government has no arbitrary authority over the citizen; the equal subjection of all (including officials) to the ordinary law administered by the ordinary courts; and the fact that the citizen’s personal freedoms are formulated and protected by the ordinary law rather than by abstract constitutional declarations.”

(Oxford Reference, A Dictionary of Law, Oxford University Press)

WHO IS THE LAW?

The Latin word, “iuris”, is translated into English as meaning “law, right, justice; law court; jurisdiction, authority”. In the movie, “The Verdict”, the actor, Paul Newman, stands in front of the Jury and says to them, “You are the law.”. A Jury is made up of 12 men and women who are the equals of the men and women who are the plaintiffs and defendants in a court action, and have been brought together to judge the laws and the facts presented to them.

IT’S ALL A QUESTION OF SOVEREIGNTY

Sovereignty is the ultimate authority to make and impose laws.
 

WHO HAS SOVEREIGNTY OVER WHOM AND WHAT?

That is to say, WHO rules? In a THEOCRACY, GOD rules. In a DEMOCRACY, People rule. In a BUREACRACY, officials rule. And, it’s all a matter of seniority or, in other words, superiority in standing.

AT Level One: GOD over Man:-

GOD created Man. GOD is superior to Man, ie: to a natural person.

AT Level Two: Man over Parliament:-

Man created Parliament. Man is superior to Parliament, ie: to an artificial person

AT Level Three: Parliament over Corporations:-

Parliament creates Corporations. Parliament is superior to Corporations, ie: to artificial persons

AT Level Four: Corporations over nothing:-

Corporations create nothing. Corporations are superior to nothing and inferior to everything.

In brief, and using the symbol, “>”, to denote “is superior to”, we have:-

GOD > Man > Parliament > Corporations.

*******************************

Definitions:-

(i)         natural = product of nature; not man-made or artificial.

(ii)         artificial = made by human skill or labour; not natural.

(iii)        Natural Law = law based on the natural tendency of human beings to exercise right reason in dealing with others. Natural law precedes and is regarded as the basis of common law.

                                    *******************************

Comments:-

(i)         Even Judges recognize the application of SUPERIORITY, eg: in the functioning of the Court System Superior Courts have the jurisdiction/ power to overrule Inferior Courts.

(ii)         Parliaments create the Courts and Judges, which leaves:-  Man > Judges.

(iii)        A Man cannot sit in judgment of another Man, but GOD has made provision for a congregation, ie: a Jury, to do so.

(iv)        A Man, being a natural person, cannot be a Corporation, ie: an artificial person.  Therefore, Judges can never be “> Man” and to allow Judges to judge a Man, because that would be incompatible with the sequence of SUPERIORITY.

(v)         “Hominum caus jus constitum est” - a legal maxim translates to “Law is established for the benefit of man”. This is the prime objective of the Law.

(vi)        Another legal maxim says, “Nemo admittendis est inhabilitare seipsum” which translates to “No one is allowed to incapacitate himself”. Therefore, a Man (ie: a natural person) cannot be an artificial person, which would incapacitate him and deny him of his Right, as a Freeman, to Trial by Jury.

(vii)       Still more legal maxims say such things as, “When laws imposed by the State fail, we must act by the Law of Nature”, “The Law punishes falsehood”, “The more common the evil, the worse”,  “The greatest enemies to Peace are force and wrong”,.....and, of course, “Rights never die”.

(viii)       Magna Carta put it correctly by saying “No Freeman shall be.... unless by the legal judgment of his own equals indeed the law of the land.”

(ix)        So, when a Man goes into a court and the Magistrate or Judge tries to make out that he has jurisdiction over you, you tell him, “You are at Level Three in the ‘pecking order’. I am at Level Two.  I have jurisdiction over you – not you over me. I have the inalienable Right to Trial by Jury - and, if I don’t want to avail myself of a Jury, I’ll give my consent to that effect. Until then, do not exceed your jurisdiction.”

                                    ************************************

THE LEVELS OF JURISDICTION/SOVEREIGNTY ARE:-

1.         GOD or THEOCRACY where GOD rules.

2.         MAN or DEMOCRACY where People rule.

3.         PARLIAMENT or BUREAUCRACY where Officials rule.

4.         CORPORATIONS where these entities rule nothing.

                                    ************************************

THE NEW WORLD ORDER:-

So that the World may be ruled by Officials, it is necessary to eliminate Levels 1 and 2 in the psyche of Man, with orchestrated, insidious and determined programs of propaganda and prohibition. The “evil counsellors, judges and ministers”, described in the Bill of Rights 1688, are once again systematically undermining and eliminating the laws and the liberties of the People.

The Media and the Schools are playing their parts in these programs of disinformation and mischief to mislead us and our children by devaluing morals and crushing our ability to be free and sovereign human beings.

In the USA, many have been duped into surrendering Sovereignty to their elected representatives under the illusion of having a “Republic”, ie: they have been drawn into believing that Acts of Parliament overrule their own Common Law. In Courts, “evil counsellors and judges” reinforce this deception by proclaiming categorically that,  “Statute Law overrules Common Law” .... in other words that, “Level 3 Law overrules Level 2 Law”.

Our Courts are where we must fight to protect and preserve our Rights. The “evil counsellors and judges” have no intention of honouring their Oaths of Office, which is to “well and truly serve” the Queen (ordained by Coronation) and to “do right to all manner of people”, but are totally embroiling in the Drive for a New World Order. It is their role to eliminate Level 1 and Level 2 Sovereignty and have themselves, as Level 3 persons, with power over us. By relegating People to Level 4 impotence, by invoking their Level 3 Admiralty/Commercial Law in our Courts, the legal piranhas wreak their destruction.

We must never forget that GOD has given us this Level 2 Jurisdiction....this gift of Service.  If we deny this gift, or say that this gift is not important, we are actually insulting and disobeying GOD.

If we are going to love GOD and love our neighbours as ourselves, we have no choice but to fight the Forces of Evil because “the only way for evil to triumph is that good men do nothing” (Edmund Burke 1729 – 1797).

                                          - Written by John Wilson, http://www.rightsandwrong.com.au