Bank of Canada Lawsuit & Ben F Update Dec 22/11

Folks the lightworkers in the prosperity programs have known this information shared by David below since before 911. Nesara is based on Gold and silver backed currencies! Tami

David Wilcox Illuminati Lies Exposed About Gold 6 min 47 seconds

http://youtu.be/UV5CIAltc9M

COURT CHALLENGE--Bank of Canada and Minister of Finance, Defendants

PRESS RELEASE          TORONTO, ON., CANADA- 19/12/2011

TWO CANADIANS AND A CANADIAN ECONOMIC THINK TANK CONFRONT THE GLOBAL FINANCIAL POWERS IN THE CANADIAN FEDERAL COURT.

THE CANADIANS PLEAD FOR DECLARATIONS THAT WOULD RESTORE THE USE OF THE BANK OF CANADA FOR THE BENEFIT OF CANADIANS AND REMOVE IT FROM THE CONTROL OF INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE ENTITIES WHOSE INTERESTS AND DIRECTIVES ARE PLACED ABOVE THE INTEREST OF CANADIANS AND THE PRIMACY OF THE CONSTITUTION OF CANADA

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.

A press conference will be held on Wednesday, December 21st, 2011 at 10:00 a.m. to answer any questions the media may have of the Plaintiffs at: 637 College Street, Suite 203, Toronto, Ontario.

A copy of the filed statement of claim is attached. -30-

ROCCO GALATI LAW FIRM

PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION

Rocco Galati, B.A., LL.B., LL.M.

637 College Street

Suite 203

Toronto ON M6G 1B5

TEL:    416-536-7811

FAX:    416-536-6801

" Oh why, oh why, does the wind never blow backwards?"---Woody Guthrie

CLAIM

The Plaintiffs claim:

declarations that:

the Minister of Finance, and Government of Canada is required to request, and that the Bank of Canada is statutorily required, when necessary, to make interest-free loans, on the terms set out under s.18 (i) and (j) of the Bank of Canada Act, RSC, 1985, c. B-2 (the “Act”) for the purposes of “human capital” expenditures and/or municipal/provincial/federal “human capital” and/or infrastructure expenditures;

that the “Government of Canada”, the Minister of Finance, and Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, with the Bank of Canada,

A/ have abdicated their statutory and constitutional duties with respect to ss. 18(i) and (j) of the Bank of Canada Act which subsections read:

18. The Bank may

(i) make loans or advances for periods not exceeding six months to the Government of Canada or the government of a province on taking security in readily marketable securities issued or guaranteed by Canada or any province;

(j) make loans to the Government of Canada or the government of any province, but such loans outstanding at any one time shall not, in the case of the Government of Canada, exceed one-third of the estimated revenue of the Government of Canada for its fiscal year, and shall not, in the case of a provincial government, exceed one-fourth of that government's estimated revenue for its fiscal year, and such loans shall be repaid before the end of the first quarter after the end of the fiscal year of the government that has contracted the loan;

B/ and further that the refusal to request and make (interest free) loans under s. 18(i) and (j) of the Bank of Canada Act has resulted in negative and destructive impact on Canadians by the disintegration of Canada’s economy, its financial institutions, increase in public debt, decrease in social services, as well as a widening gap between rich and poor with an continuing disappearance of the middle class;

that s. 18(m) of the Bank of Canada Act, and its administration and operation, is unconstitutional and of no force and effect, in Parliament and the government, including the Defendant Minister of Finance, abdicating their duty to govern, and insofar, as monetary, currency and financial policies, per se, are concerned, and in turn as they effect socio-economic governance, have abdicated their constitutional duty(ies)and handed them over to those international, private entities, whose interests, and directives, are placed above the interests of Canadians, and the primacy of the Constitution of Canada, not only with respect to its specific provisions, but also with respect to the underlying constitutional imperatives, and which provision reads:

(m) open accounts in a central bank in any other country or in the Bank for International Settlements, accept deposits from central banks in other countries, the Bank for International Settlements, the International Monetary Fund, the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and any other official international financial organization, act as agent or mandatary, or depository or correspondent for any of those banks or organizations, and pay interest on any of those deposits;

that the maintaining of minutes of meetings by the Governor of the Bank of Canada, with other central bank “governors” from other states and federation(s), as secret and not open to parliamentary and public view and scrutiny, constitutes:

ultra vires action by the Governor of the Bank of Canada contrary to inter alia, s. 24 of the Act;

unconstitutional conduct by the Governor of the Bank of Canada;

that the Parliament of Canada, in:

allowing the Governor of the Bank of Canada to hold secret the nature and content of his meetings with other central bank(ers); and

in not exercising the authority and duty contained in 18(i) and (j) of the Act; and

enacting s. 18(m) of the Bank of Canada Act;

has unconstitutionally abdicated its duty and function as mandated by ss. 91 (1a), (3), (14), (15), (16), (18), (19) and (20) of the Constitution Act, 1867, as well as s. 36 of the Constitution Act, 1982;

that the Minister of Finance is required to list expenditures(s) on “human capital”, including infrastructural capital expenditures relating to “human capital”, as an “asset” and not a “liability” with respect to budgetary accounting;

that the Minister of Finance is required to list, in his budgetary accounting, all revenues collected prior to the return of “tax credits” to individuals, and moreover, corporate taxpayers, with tax credits subtracted from the total revenue due, before subtracting total expenditures from total revenue, and arriving at either a budgetary “surplus” or “deficit” as required, inter alia, by s. 91(5) of the Constitution Act, 1867;

that the defendants’ (officials) are wittingly and/or unwittingly, in varying degrees, knowledge, and intent, engaged in a conspiracy, along with the BIS, FSB, an IMF, to render impotent the Bank of Canada Act, as well as Canadian sovereignty over financial, monetary, and socio-economic policy, and in fact by-pass the sovereign rule of Canada, through its Parliament, by means of banking and financial systems, which conspiracy and elements of such tortious conduct are set out, in inter alia, Hunt v. Carey Canada Inc. [1990] 2 S.C.R. 959 namely:

that the Defendants’ (officials), including and together with the BIS, engage(d) in an agreement for the use of lawful and unlawful means, and conduct, the predominant purpose of which is to cause injury to the Plaintiffs, and all other Canadians;

that the Defendants’ (officials), including and together with the BIS, engage(d), in an agreement, to use unlawful means and conduct, whose predominant purpose and conduct directed at the Plaintiffs, and all other Canadians, is to cause injury to the Plaintiffs and all other Canadians, or the Defendants’ officials should know, in the circumstances, that injury to the Plaintiffs, and all other Canadians, is likely to, and does result;

that the privative clause in s. 30.1 of the Bank of Canada Act,

A/ does not apply to the seeking of “judicial review”, by way of action or otherwise, of declaratory relief with respect to any statutory or constitutional ultra vires action and/or section of the Act, by way of declaratory relief, or any other prerogative remedy, available to hear and determine the statutory and/or constitutional limits or actions under the Act, in accordance with, inter alia, in Supreme Court of Canada’s pronouncement in Dunsmuir v. New Brunswick [2008] 1 SCR 190, nor does it apply to seeking damages for ultra vires or unconstitutional damages:and

B/ if s.30.1 of the Bank of Canada Act is interpreted to so apply as a privative clause, then it is unconstitutional and of no force and effect for breaching the Plaintiffs’ constitutional right to judicial review, as well as breaching the underlying constitutional imperatives of Rule of Law, Constitutionalism, and Federalism;

damages in the amount of:

$10, 000.00 per plaintiff; and

should the within action be certified as a class action proceeding, $1.00 (one dollar) for every Canadian citizen/resident, to be calculated based on the last population figure published in the last census, in accordance with s. 91(5) of the Constitution Act, 1867;

which damages are on account of:

the constitutional breaches pleaded in the statement of claim herein; and

the conspiracy pleaded in the statement of claim herein;

such further declaratory and/or consequential injunctive and/or prerogative order and/or relief as counsel may advise and this Honourable Court grant;

costs of this action and such further or other relief this Court deems just.

THE PARTIES

(a) the Plaintiff, Committee for Monetary and Economic Reform (hereinafter “COMER”) historically to date is an international economic “think-tank”, based in Toronto, and was established in 1970, dedicating itself to the monetary and economic reform policies of Canada and conducts research, analysis, and publication(s) on these issues. For the past 23 years it has published a monthly publication entitled COMER with articles and analysis from various authors including some of its own committee members. Its committee members have consisted of economists, academics, and published authors expert in their respective fields;

the Plaintiff, William Krehm, is and has been a member of COMER, since its inception, and has devoted much of his life to the study, research, analysis and writing on economic, monetary, and social reform, and is a published author on economic and monetary reform, included various articles, papers, as well as books as recent as 2010;

the Plaintiff, Ann Emmett, is a member of COMER, and has devoted much of her life to the study, research, analysis and writing on economic, monetary, and social reform, and is a published author on economic and monetary reform, included various articles, and papers, as recent as 2010;

the Defendant, Her Majesty the Queen, is statutorily and constitutionally liable for the acts and omissions of her officials pursuant to s. 17 of the Federal Courts Act as well as s. 24(1) and 52 of the Constitution Act, 1982;

the Defendant, the Minister of Finance, is statutorily and ultimately, with the consent of Governor-in-Council, responsible for overseeing both the Bank of Canada, as well as the Governor of the Bank of Canada, pursuant s.14 of the Bank of Canada Act, and the Minister of Finance is also, constitutionally, responsible for setting out the budgetary process, and expenditures for each session of Parliament, upon the appropriation request, through the taxing power, of Her Majesty the Queen, as set out in Her Parliamentary throne speech delivered by the Governor General for that purpose;

the Defendant, the Minister of National Revenue, is statutorily responsible for administering the Income Tax Act, and other Federal taxing statutes related to the collection of revenue through, inter alia, the taxing power, under s. 91(3) of the Constitution Act, 1867;

the Defendant, the Attorney General of Canada, is, constitutionally, the Chief Legal Officer, responsible for and defending the integrity of all legislation, as well as responding to declaratory relief with respect to legislation, including with respect to its constitutionality and required to be named as a Defendant in any action for declaratory relief. Shared by conniefogal@telus.net

Watch these 2 Videos also.

Since 1974 our National Debt has progressively sky-rocketed. That’s the same year when someone(?) SECRETLY agreed to allow PRIVATE (foreign) banks to become Canada’s ‘Prime Lender’.

70% of all of our taxes now go towards paying off the totally & completely UNNECESSARY (jew) ‘USURY’ on these loans.

Debt1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NI3dL7t20aI&list=PLA1D834D54DF15074&index=6&feature=plpp_video

Debt 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C83IUS2yFDE&list=PLA1D834D54DF15074&index=7&feature=plpp_video

Please give this link http://sovcom.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/KREHM-Statement-of-Claim-11-10-111.pdf to people who want to download the SoC in full as a pdf.

THE CRIME OF THE CANADIAN BANKING SYSTEM:
Bill Abram (4 Parts – 30:30 min.’s Total)

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

The Crime of the Canadian Banking System 1/4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jghiU55O5eY&feature=related

The Crime of the Canadian Banking System 2/4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyHpaHo71mQ&feature=related

The Crime of the Canadian Banking System 3/4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ixeDP5LEEQ&feature=related

The Crime of the Canadian Banking System 4/4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLtretltL3I&feature=related

Subject: Constitutional Lawyer Rocco Galati: Restore The Use Of The Bank Of
Canada Lawsuit Press Conference