The Austerity Program and Quantitative Easing. What Happened and Why.

The Austerity and Quantitative Easing Programs

What Happened and Why

August 7, 2015

The Baby Boomers

The White House Library Group

The After Dinner Conversation

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

An Example of British Columbia’s Presentation of Case Program.

Smith V. Ross et al. Court action file numbers

B906427-B906468-S5205

The Transfer of Wealth to the BRICS Group of Countries

The Iraq War

The Collapse of the United States Housing Market and Banking System

You are taking us down the Wrong Road

Democratic governments are not elected to grant civil-rights, nor are they elected to grant freedom. Democratic governments are elected to protect civil-rights and to protect freedom.

President Dwight D. Eisenhower once said,

“The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present- and is gravely to be regarded. Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific technological elite.” (1)

The prospect of domination that President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned us about has arrived at the doorstep of civilization. Governments floundering around upon points of law as they flock to absolve themselves of their responsibilities to the general public are not the only reason for this perfect storm’s arrival. Mind you, alterations within their judiciaries have had a lot to do with its arrival on the doorstep of civilization.

Governments of the G8 group of countries and others like them have granted civil-rights including a right to be free to their populations. It is part of their developing framework for their New World Order. As they continue to grant civil-rights to common people, they are slowly absolving themselves of the responsibility to provide the guaranteed and individual aspects of service and protection to their populations. To justify their new direction, the special interest group has been creating chaos amongst the populace from behind the scenes. This special interest group has forgotten that their master’s station in life is one of privilege - not ownership. The collapse of our civil societies began in the early 1970s - but first, some points of historical significance.

The Baby Boomers

Armed forces from The United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, France, Germany and Japan exchanged uniforms for civilian clothes at the end of World War II and became the labor-force for each of their countries’ new market economies. Those economies expanded as the next generation of workers became the largest work force in modern history.

Today, that work force is at the end of its service life. The baby-boomers are retiring. In the United States, Roughly 10,000 Baby Boomers will turn 65 today, and about 10,000 more will cross that same threshold every day and for the next 19 years. (2) That is approximately eighteen million, two hundred and fifty thousand people in the last five years. The United States is already in financial trouble.

Baby-boomers in the other aforementioned countries have been draining their government coffers at about the same percentage rate relative to their populations and for about the same amount of time. (3) Those countries are also in financial trouble.

According to work-force projections and forecasts for dependent population percentages in the United States:

The nation's elderly population--people ages 65 and older—will grow to 81 million in 2050, up from 37 million in 2005. … The dependency ratio - the number of working age, compared with the young and elderly - will rise sharply, mainly because of growth in the elderly population. There were 59 children and elderly people per 100 adults of working age in 2005. That ratio will rise to 72 dependents per 100 adults of working age in 2050. … The working-age population, now 63% of the total, will decline to 58%. (2) Great Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, and Japan have forecast similar workforce projections and population percentages. (3)

The White House Library Group

In 1972 George Schultz became the United States Secretary of the Treasury. He and his successor William E. Simon noticed signs of insolvency within social-security programs. Try as they may, they could not find an economic forecast model to predict a better future for the programs.

It became apparent that social security faced a funding shortfall, both in the short-term and in the long-term. The short term problem was caused by the bad economy, and the long-term problem by the demographics associated with the baby boom. (4)

President Nixon in May 1973 called together US, French, British and German finance ministers to meet informally in the White House Library while he, French President Georges Pompidou, Prime Minister Edward Heath, and German Chancellor Willy Brandt met in the Oval office. As reported in the June 23-29, 1995 edition of The European, a German participant said, “We agreed there was a need for someone to be in control on an international scale. We hardly knew each other prior to the meeting. But mutual appreciation and sympathy developed as we talked, laying the ground for successful cooperation.” Hence the idea of a group of world leaders meeting to ‘monitor’ the world’s currencies was born.’’ (5)

In April 1973 the finance ministers of the US, Britain, France and Germany quietly met for a discussion in the White House Library, and so began a series of very informal and private sessions usually held without papers or retinues of officials. With deliberate blandness and opacity its members dubbed this institution the ‘Library Group. (6)

The following year they invited a financial official from Japan to join them. They became known as the group of five finance ministers. They met annually for fourteen years. Its last meeting was in Paris in 1987. (7)

According to James Baker, an attorney practicing in the district of Chilliwack British Columbia, Canada, over several years the group of five finance ministers determined two things. First, within fifty years of the twenty-first century, their countries’ retirement programs were going to become insolvent. Second, the program insolvencies were going to cause each of their market economies to collapse.

“One issue discussed by the library group concerned problems that had caused the enactment of two amendments to social security in 1972.” … “By their 1975 report the Trustees said the Trust Funds would be exhausted by 1979.” (8)

The Library Group of finance ministers wanted the crisis resolved before someone else discovered the problem and accused their governments of having caused it. Terrified of the possible consequences, including the possibility of an outright rebellion, they notified their government leaders. Their government leaders decided not to inform the general public of the developing crisis.

“Without the informal meetings of G-5 finance ministers there would have been no subsequent meetings of G-5 leaders. In 1975, French President Valéry Giscard d’Estaing invited six heads of government to an economic summit in Château de Rambouillet.” (9) ‘’Italy joined the G-5 group during the summit and the group became known as the G-6. The group expanded again in 1976 when Canada joined the G-6.’’ (9)

The developing retirement crisis united members of the G-6 group, but they still could not find a solution, so in 1976 they invited Canada’s Prime Minister, Pierre Trudeau, to form the G-7 group. He infused the group with ideas of a Charter of Rights. He believed that by placing the guaranteed and individual aspects of service and protection inside the judiciary and by calling them collective rights government would have less of a legal obligation to serve and protect the public and a greater degree of control over them and their public purse. Like dying men in the sea of humanity, the G-7’s leadership glommed onto Pierre Trudeau’s idea of a Charter of Rights as if it were a lifeboat on the Titanic. They then forgot that within a democracy, “government cannot grant freedom to the people because freedom belongs to the people by birthright. Government exists not to give the people liberty, but to protect their liberty.” (10)

The political elite of Europe and others like them heard of the G-7 group’s concerns, and in 1981 they told the membership. You must take control of your populations, transfer the wealth of your nations to new markets overseas, manage down your economies and begin again. The membership of the G-7 group answered. Because our citizens have civil-rights including the right to be protected, we cannot do that. The political elite and others like them said, if you do not take control of your populations, transfer the wealth of your nations to new markets overseas, manage down your economies and begin again, the entire system will collapse into chaos.

The G-7 group of leaders decided to establish the New World Order on variations of a free and open society. These new societies would have their civil rights and freedoms placed inside their judiciaries. They would be managed by elected governments. The management approach to governing would allow governments to have more control over their populations; more control over the public purse, and less of an obligation to protect either. The management approach would also allow governments a greater opportunity to transfer their countries wealth including portions of the public’s purse to new markets overseas. To accomplish their management agenda, the G-7 group of leaders decided to allow their governments to establish closer ties with their judiciaries.

In 1998 members of the G-7 group invited Russia to join them and form the G-8 group. However, it is unclear how much information the other members of the G-8 group shared about the development of the retirement crisis or the creation of the G-5 group. Furthermore, the Russian delegation did not fully participate in the financial and economic development talks. They did participate during the talks on financial terrorism. Russia was never allowed to fully participate in the G8 program.

The After-Dinner Conversation

I became aware of the Baby Boomer’s retirement crisis and the New World Order program on February 14, 1982, although I did not understand the significance of its creation at the time.

Two other people and I had just finished a Valentine’s Day dinner at the home of a mutual friend when James Baker and a colleague arrived for a visit. James Baker had just received a nomination for a Queen’s Counsel appointment. He explained that he had not been expecting the nomination as nominees were usually notified just before they received their appointments. That year’s Queens Counsel appointments had been awarded the previous week. He would not be receiving his appointment until the following year-if at all. He said, “I think they want to take a closer look at me, you know, see what more I have to offer them.”

James Baker then began to talk about the court case which had won him the nomination. Our hostess said she did not want to listen to his shop talk. Grabbing her boyfriend’s arm, she steered him towards the hallway, and they disappeared. My girlfriend then asked me to leave with her, but I wanted to hear what our guests had to say, so I asked her to leave without me. I was left standing in the kitchen with James Baker and his colleague whom, for the purposes of this document, I shall call Arthur.

James Baker (hereinafter referred to as James) turned to Arthur and said, I bet you can’t guess what I did to win the case that won me the nomination.

Arthur: Oh, I don’t know. I’m sure it was something special knowing you.

James: Well, I’ll tell you.

He then turned to me and asked, “Would you step back a bit for a minute; there’s a good chap. I wish to speak to my friend about a legal matter.” I stepped back and leaned forward.

James turned to his left and placing his left arm around Arthur’s right shoulder, he pulled Arthur with him and stepped towards the counter-top. Bending slightly at the waist, James leaned over the countertop and made a scribbling motion with his right hand while saying,

James: I typed up a bill-of-sale for a client. Then I attached a copy of his dead relative’s signature to the underside of the glass-topped table I keep in my office. You know the one; I keep it over in the corner by the stairs. I then attached a copy of the bill-of-sale to the top of the table. I used a powerful light to shine the signature up through the bill-of-sale. I walked around to the other side of the table where I could see the signature upside down and backwards. I had heard from a friend that if you trace over a signature upside down and backwards it makes it more difficult for the forgery to be discovered. I practiced the technique several times until I was satisfied. I used the dryer in the office to tumble dry a photocopy of the freshly signed document so as to age it.

Over the Christmas holidays, I travelled in to New Westminster where I paid a clerk in the Supreme Court Registry to stamp and place the document inside the court’s file. Ha! Ha! Ha! You should have seen the other side when the court found the bill-of-sale. They had no idea where it came from. They challenged the veracity of the document but couldn’t afford the examiner’s fee. I put on quite a show. You would have been proud of me. I even told the judge the document had no right being in the file as I had not been served.

The judge was just as surprised as everyone else. He even took the time to ask each of the litigants if they knew anything about the document being in the file, or if any of us had actually signed the document. When it came to my turn, I stood up tall and proud and placing my right hand over my heart I said, “Not I my Lord; I am an attorney of law. My job is to uphold the law – not to break it. The judge was quite impressed with my answer. He said, well said Mr. Baker. It was the first time I had ever crossed the line, and as I stood there tall and proud with my right hand over my heart, I could feel an icy cold sweat trickling down my back and from under my arms.”

Arthur’s reaction was explosive, like that of a scolded cat. In an automatic manner, he bent further at the waist, pulled away from James and spun to his right, as if he had been punched in the solar plexus. He then straightened up, and with tears in his eyes, he exclaimed.

Arthur: You can’t do that! That is illegal! That is fraud! You can go to jail for that! What have you done? Look at the position you have put me in! I’ll have to report you!

James: No you won’t. Besides, it won’t do you any good. They already know. It’s not illegal anymore, or it won’t be once the Charter comes on board. It’s up to the other side to catch me. I have even heard they’re going to use the case as a precedence for the new Charter. There is nothing to worry about. You watch. I am going to throw you more work than you have ever seen. Everything is different now.

Arthur: I know, but not like that. That’s fraud!

James: No it’s not! Don’t blame me! It’s not me! It’s that idiot Trudeau! He’s the one who has opened up the whole damn system. I’m telling you. Everything is changing now. It’s going to become a wide open system. In a few short years, everybody will be doing it, right across the country. Weren’t you at the law society meeting last week?

Arthur: No. I heard something about it, but I was too busy. I used the time to catch up on some paperwork. You know what it’s like.

James: You should have been there; I was. The place was packed. They had to delay the keynote address for almost twenty minutes while extra seating was brought into the auditorium. They had that new up-and-coming deputy Attorney General, Bryan Smith or Williams, I’m not really sure which one gave the key-note address, but you know the chap. I hear he likes his marijuana amongst other things, if you know what I mean. Ha! Ha! They say his nickname is Bud. I guess he’s everybody’s bud now. He gave an excellent speech. Although he couched his message in legal jargon, everyone understood exactly what his message meant; it was very clear. From now on, the common people will no longer be able to hide behind the rights of the individual. Their civil-rights are going to be placed inside the courts as collective rights. Then we’ll be able to manage them. You should have heard him. He even said the AG’s office will be taking control of the courts and the public purse. He received several standing ovations.

James then asked me what I thought about what he had just said. I said, “I don’t suppose it really matters as long as the courts are seeking the truth.” James broke into raucous laughter. Ha! Ha! Ha! Don’t worry about the truth young man. We’re going to look after the truth, and we’ll take good care of it.

Rubbing his hands together, James did a little skip across the kitchen floor as he continued in a gleeful voice.

James: There’s money to be made, a lot of it. This Charter is the largest make work program we’ve ever experienced. It’s a huge white elephant. Of course, in return we’ll have to look after the government’s money. You know, that’s the real problem. They’re losing too much money. They’re really worried. This democratic system has become far too expensive. If they can’t turn the tap off soon, the whole damn thing will go down the toilet. We’re the brightest and the best educated, so it only stands to reason we should take over. When the Charter returns, everyone will have collective rights which will be held inside the courtroom. Then we’ll see. The poor buggers, they all think it’s going to be business as usual, but it’s not. The morons, they’re all bloody morons. You know what they’re like. They’re like cattle in a pen. If we use the right prod, we can get them to go anywhere.

Following the meeting last week, a few of us were asked to volunteer for a special group that’s being put together over at the AG’s office. It’s all very hush, hush. We’re going to assist them in the development of strategies that will help them manage special cases before the Supreme Court. I’ve already been asked to join, and I’ve said yes. Would you like to join us? I could put in a good word for you.

Arthur: I don’t know. I’d have to think about it. How would a special case work?

James: Oh, I don’t know yet. We’re only at the beginning. The program hasn’t been put together. However, the rules of engagement will probably run something like this. A QC will be given a file and allowed to pick a team. Then he’ll be allowed to do whatever he likes to get the file through the courts - as long as he doesn’t get caught. Mind you, if an attorney were to ever be caught doing something wrong, the office would disown him. They would have no choice; they would have too, really. Then whatever he were caught doing wrong would never be allowed to be used against the public again. Mind you, there’s not much chance of that ever happening. By the time we get the program up and running, we’ll have our own people placed throughout the system. If you want to join us, you had better hurry. Our first meeting will be held in Victoria next month, or in the first week of April at the latest. They’ve got to hurry. The Charter will be arriving back from England in, what is it, twelve or sixteen weeks? I’m not really sure. Then we’ll have to begin in earnest. What do you say?

Arthur stepped away from James and said,

Arthur: Give me a couple of days to think about it. I’ll let you know.

James: All right. You should see the changes they’re considering. They’ve been exploring it for months. Nothing is off the table. We’re going to begin with the corporation and see what we can get to work there. Whatever works there will be carried over into the other portfolios. They’re really concerned about the big ticket items like Health, Education, and especially the Ministry of Social Services. It’s all costing too much, and nobody can prove that any of it really works, or there’s any real payback. Take education – that has really got to change. There’s far too much waste within the system. Besides, there are those who think an uneducated populace will be easier to manage than an educated one. The immigration doors are being flung wide open, to increase the tax base. Some of us believe the family has become too powerful at the ballot-box, so we’re going to create some new ideas for them as well. You know, divide and conquer, and all that. Of course, what we’d really like to do is have one of our own elected to a seat in government. Then we would really be able to manage the system. Mind you, that’s more of a long term project, fifteen to twenty years or more, I would imagine. We understand there will be some chaos, but we think we’ll have the resources to manage it, so it won’t matter. I’ve even heard they’ve been asked to look at some of the really big ticket items.

Arthur became inquisitive, raised an eyebrow and asked,

Arthur: Like what?

James: Well, it’s been decided to transfer the wealth of the West to the East around the turn of the century. They don’t know how they’re going to accomplish it, or to whom it will go. Mind you, they believe China and India are looking pretty good at the moment. Anyway, they’ve been discussing it over at the A.G’s office.

Arthur: But, who has agreed, and why?

James: Oh, you know; the usual suspects, Europe’s political elite and others like them. They’ve been discussing it over at the White House library for years, but they haven’t been able to find any other solution. They’ve agreed that by the year 2050 the retirement programs will have become insolvent, and when that happens their economies are going to fail. Too many of us will be retiring soon, and the government has already spent a lot of the retirement funds on social programs they could ill afford. Let’s face it; too many of us have been at the trough for far too long. It’s too bad really. They’ve known for years this day was coming, and now it’s time to pay the piper. If they don’t do something soon, they’re going to run out of money, and the whole damn thing will go down the toilet. They had no choice really. Of course, they can’t tell the public; otherwise, they’d have a rebellion on their hands. The political elite and others like them have agreed that we’ve had the money this century, so it should be somebody else’s turn next century. That’s not all, what they’re really concerned about is world population growth.

Arthur: What do you mean?

James: Well, they believe by the year two thousand and fifty, the world’s population will have increased to around nine billion, and they don’t think the planet will have enough resources to sustain that number of souls. They’re wondering if they’ll be able to find a different way of managing the problem, or if they’ll have to use the same old method. They’ve even calculated that the next war will cost as much as two-thirds of the planet’s population, but then they’d be able to begin again. They’re going to go all the way. Why, even as we speak, we have one of our own flying south to talk to the other side.

Arthur’s eyes widened in amazement as he took a step forward and asked. Do you mean the criminals?

James: Yes exactly. Our man, well I say our man, but he’s not actually one of us. He’s an attorney who is well known for playing both sides of the fence. It’s all very unofficial of course, and nothing is in writing. Anyway, he has instructions to enter into high level negotiations with some of the more leading and more responsible crime families down there. They want to determine whether or not there are any areas of commonality where government and organized crime could work together for the benefit of the common good. They want to create a more balanced society. Some of them believe that it’s been too one sided for far too long. Anyway, as it stands, the criminal element is much too chaotic. There are those in government who think we could manage it better than it is being managed now. I’m not sure exactly how they’d be able to do that. Perhaps they could run a shadow government. You know; democracy during the day, and the criminal part at night.

The crime families have wanted this for some time. They’re getting too much heat from the Americans, so they`re looking for a safe haven. I mean, let’s face it. Crime has always been with us. It has never been defeated, and it never will be. Besides, this whole democracy thing has never really worked properly either. What harm could we do? We’ve read more books than the rest of them, so it only stands to reason that we should be in charge. Besides, it’s about time we started giving the people what they really want. We’re serious. I’m telling you. If we don’t do something soon, we’re going to run out of money.

Arthur: But how will all this be implemented and when?

James: Well nobody knows that yet. We’re only at the beginning; nothing has been decided. I expect we’ll ask some of our friends in the Masons organization for suggestions. They’ve usually got some good ideas.

Arthur stepped forward, and with his right hand he grabbed James' right sleeve, then nodded towards me. James took a hard look at me and snickered.

James: What are you talking about? Hell he’s drunk. In the morning, he won’t even remember what I’ve said. Besides, you know how the office looks after things like that. Russia is not the only place where you can get a knock on the door in the middle of the night. You wait and see. With incremental steps over the next five years or so, we’re going to plant other people who think like us throughout the system. Just think of how much money we’re going to make. Can you imagine the kind of games we’ll be able to play with our trust accounts? You know what we can do with them already, don’t you?

As he said that, James tapped his nose with his right fore-finger and sniffed. He then said, “If you know what I mean.” The conversation ended, and the two of them disappeared into the night.

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

In 1981 the British Columbia Government wanted to better understand how the Charter of Rights and Freedoms would influence its way of governing. The government had two areas of concern: How the Charter document would influence the running of the province, and how the signing of the Charter would alter the government’s relationship with its judiciary.

The government asked their Attorneys General to organize a number of discussion groups and determine a range of options. Additionally the Attorneys General asked the discussion groups to look for areas of commonality where they and organized crime could work together for the benefit of a more balanced society. Finally, the Attorneys General asked the groups to suggest a range of ideas on how government could transfer public funds to new markets overseas. James Baker spoke about the groups during our 1982 Valentine’s Day conversation. He said discussion groups had been set up right across the country, throughout Europe and even with our friends down south.

Six years after Canada joined the G-6 group, and two months after my Valentine’s Day conversation with James Baker, Pierre Trudeau signed the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms on April 17, 1982. The years leading to the signing of the Charter the Canadian public were pre-occupied with emotional arguments surrounding the introduction of the metric system.

Previous to signing the Charter, the Canadian government’s legal obligation to supply services and protection on the basis of individual need had been safeguarded by the courts. The population paid their taxes for the services and the protection that each of them received on demand. In that sense the government and the population shared political power. After the signing ceremony, the government placed the guaranteed and individual aspects of the civil-rights of service and protection inside the judicial system where they became known as collective rights. Simultaneously, the Canadian government altered its system of governance from service to management which altered the principle of sharing power with the population.

Canadians no longer had a personal guarantee of access to either their civil-right of service based on need or their civil-right of protection; consequently, they lost much of their power and influence at the ballot box. Simultaneously, federal and provincial governments removed the protective policies and procedures surrounding services and protection from all levels of governance and secured the right to manage the public purse as they saw fit. Government even retained the right to decide which citizens could be protected by the courts and to what degree that protection would be administered.

The signatory parties to the Charter understood their side-bar agreement with their judicial branches would open up their judiciaries to abuse and would force members of the general public to face a number of disadvantages in the courts:

One disadvantage lay in the public’s need to hire an attorney and fight their Government and its Crown Corporations for services and protection that prior to the charter had been rightfully theirs.
Another disadvantage lay in the alliances established between individual Queen’s Counsel and members of organized crime.
Yet another disadvantage lay with the government’s access to the public’s purse for the creation of its truth.
However, the greatest disadvantage lay with the imbalance upon the scales of justice. Upon one scale sat the government; its Crown Corporations; its ties to organized crime; its access to the public’s purse for the creation of its truth, and its belief that truth, fact, merit, and law are not as important as its presentation of case program.
Upon the other scale sat Canadian citizens and their children.

The scales of justice tipped even more in favor of government when individual Queen’s Counsel members within the Attorney General’s Office used their alliances with organized crime to assist in the creation of the government’s truth for high value cases in the Supreme Court. The government then began to manage the uneducated, dependent citizens, and their children through the courts.

It was the dawn of a new era. But, with everybody focusing on the new politically correct presentation of case management program, the yardsticks of truth, fact, merit, and law faded into the background as the largest white elephant, money making work program for the legal profession took hold. The Attorney General’s Presentation of Case Management Program ran between 1982 and 2009. Mr. Justice Wally Opel placed it on the back burner before leaving his Attorney General’s position.

Prior to the Charter, courts had protected the guaranteed and individual aspects of service and protection using the yardsticks of truth, fact, merit, and law. After the signing ceremony, governments and their judicial branches agreed that truth, fact, merit, and law would have to, on occasion, take a back seat to the new presentation of case management program. The end result has been the creation of a judicial system where truth, fact, merit and law can be determined by the level of a person’s education or by the size of a person’s bank account.

Politicians and bureaucrats have forgotten that democracy functions best when citizens have the guaranteed and individual aspects of their services and protection guaranteed in law. The guarantee provides the power of the democratic vote. It places the obligation on government to protect and serve its citizens on the basis of individual need. In addition, bureaucrats and politicians forgot that strength in a civil society lies in government’s ability to serve and protect its weakest citizen-just as strength in a metal chain is found in its weakest link.

An Example of British Columbia’s Presentation of Case Management Program: Smith v. Ross et al. Vancouver Registry file numbers B906427-B906468- Chilliwack Registry file number S5205.

On July 15, 1990, Gloria Anna Smith, a Canadian CITIZEN, attempted to rescue her seven month old baby Jason Michael Smith from her Cherokee Jeep as it sank in eighty two feet of water in Cultus Lake, British Columbia. Jason died at the scene. Gloria died ten days later. Her courageous act epitomized the very essence of a mother’s courage.

Ignoring her courageous act, James Baker QC, whom I had met originally on February 14, 1982, arranged for Mr. Fred Vinzenci, an auto-mechanic at O’Conner Chrysler, to exchange the brake-pads on the accident vehicle for brake-pads that were both ‘broken and worn to the point of falling off.‘ Mr. Vincenzi then condemned the accident vehicle. James Baker QC and his ‘Presentation of Case Management Team’ then falsely accused Gloria’s husband Barry Michael Smith of buying the accident vehicle while knowing that it was a scrap car. James Baker then said that Barry Michael Smith gave the scrap car to his wife as a birthday present. James Baker then said that Gloria and her son later died in the alleged scrap car due in part to its condition. James Baker QC then identified Gloria Anna Smith’s twenty-seven month old son, Joshua John Smith, as the person who committed the act that caused the death of his mother and brother.

James Baker QC committed these heinous acts to protect the ICBC insurance policy that had belonged to Dennis Ross. Dennis Ross had deliberately caused the accident vehicle to enter the water at Cultus Lake. He wrote a statement of confession to that effect. Cst. Moskaluk’s and Cst. Bruce Dougles Wright’s note-book entries concurred with Dennis Ross’s confession statement. Neither the confession statement nor the RCMP notebook entries have ever been entered into court.

James Baker QC coordinated Vancouver Supreme Court file numbers B906427 and B906468 and Chilliwack Supreme Court action file number S5205. The three separate files dealing with one subject matter travelled through the Supreme Court of British Columbia from December 1990, until sometime after 2004. They and their journey through the Supreme Court of British Columbia are one example of the Attorney General’s Presentation of Case Management Program.

The Transfer of Wealth to the BRICS Group

Following the proclamation of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights in the year 2000 and as soon as the G7 Group of governments had gained control over their public’s purse they authorized the transfer of wealth, including public funds, from Canada, the United States, England, France, Germany, and Japan to the BRICS group, Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. The transfer of funds has contributed to a need for austerity and to a need for the quantitative easing programs.

Incidences of misuse of public funds are too numerous to mention in their entirety; however, here are two that stand out in their audacity. In Canada between 1995 and 2005, two billion dollars disappeared from the Canadian public purse during the Gun Registration campaign and the Human Resources campaign. The money become part of the financing for the BRICS group.

At the beginning of the United States second war in Iraq, which was itself a misuse of future public funds, twelve Hercules aircraft each flew a cargo of one billion dollars from the United States to Baghdad, Iraq. There the majority of the money vanished. It either found its way into the coffers of Al-Qaida in Iraq, so they could finance their side of the war, or it ended up with the BRICS group of countries. The BRICS group used their new found wealth to either strengthen or jump-start their market economies. Some of the money from the United States Quantitative Easing Program found its way into the pockets of the ten percent who shipped it off shore to the BRICS group. Other than Russia and China, the BRICS countries have young populations. They equal an evolving and more profitable work-force - not a retiring one.

The transfer of funds could not have taken place had government leaders still believed in their obligation to protect the civil-rights of service and protection. Transferring money and other resources would have been illegal, but people now lived in free and open societies without the legal right of protection, so governments believed they were free to do as they pleased - so they did.

The Iraq War

As a transfer of money and wealth was taking place, government leaders within the G-8 group authorized the development of programs to sabotage their economies from within. The United States’ second war in Iraq was one such program. The United States government created the following information to justify their going to war:

* Iraq had purchased weapons-grade yellow-cake-uranium from Niger, Africa. The information was fabricated.

* Chemical weapons-grade rocket cylinders had been discovered and photographed in Iraq. This information was also fabricated.

* Iraq had an ongoing nuclear weapons program. This information was also fabricated.

As well, key members of the United States Government promoted the idea that war in Iraq would spread democracy overseas. Demonstrating their collusion and connivance, other members of the G-8 group went along with the fabricated information - in particular Great Britain’s Tony Blair.

By disbanding the Iraqi army and removing Saddam Hussein, Shia Iraq's, most bitter enemy, the United States army caused a power vacuum in Iraq and in the rest of the Middle East. In Iraq, the demise of his iron-fisted dictatorship blew the lid off suppressed sectarian conflict and opened the door to regional extremists. (11)

The leadership of the United States and their Generals understood the Sunni, Shia relationship, and they understood the consequences of opening up a conflict in the region. They lied at the beginning of the war to hide their true intention. They wanted to develop a regional conflict in the Middle East. I know that to be true because that is what they have accomplished. The concept of spreading democracy overseas was, and still is, ludicrous. The second war in Iraq had two objectives:

* To seriously damage the United States economy.

* To create a regional war in the Middle-East.

The people of Iraq and the people of the United States have continued to suffer the consequences of the Bush doctrine. According to Linda Bilmes, a lecturer in public finance at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government:

I think that if you go back to 2001, when the President took office, you can remember there was a surplus, a budget surplus of about $150 billion and the congressional budget office at the time was projecting that that surplus would continue over the next several years. And since then, things have unraveled in every possible dimension that you can measure and certainly across every metric that economists measure. The budget debt has disappeared. Our national debt has gone from about $5.5 trillion to between $10 and $15 trillion, depending on how much of the bailout you count. Inflation is higher. Unemployment is higher. Four million manufacturing jobs have been lost. Five million people have lost their health insurance. And the more you look into it, the more you see the very severe economic consequences that have been the result of errors and poor judgment during the past eight years. (12)

The Collapse of the United States’ Housing Market and Banking System

President Jimmy Carter signed the first authorization to remove the protective checks and balances from the banking system. In 1980 he signed:

The Depository Institutions Deregulations and Monetary Control Act raising deposit insurance limit from $40,000 to $100,000, and phasing out ceilings on the interest rates that banks could offer their depositors. The higher insurance may have inspired excessive market confidence in banks (this is known as the moral hazard problem). The abolition of interest-rate limits may have increased competitive pressures. (13)

President Ronald Reagan continued authorizing the removal of the protective checks and balances from the banking system when he signed the Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act [on October 15, 1982].

This Act removed statutory restrictions on Real Estate lending, and relaxed limits on how much could be loaned to any one borrower. The Garne-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act established boundaries to include ninja mortgage applications which contributed to the collapse of the United States housing market. (4)

Vice President George H. W. Bush was assigned by Reagan to chair two special task forces, on deregulation and international drug smuggling. The deregulation task force reviewed hundreds of rules, making specific recommendations on which ones to amend or revise, in order to curb the size of the federal government. (14)

During Reagan's presidency, a program was initiated within the US Intelligence community to ensure America's economic strength. The program, Project Socrates developed and demonstrated the means required for the US to generate and lead the next evolutionary leap in technology acquisition and utilization for a competitive advantage-automated innovation. … To ensure that the US acquired the maximum benefit from automated innovation, Reagan, during his second term, had an executive order drafted to create a new Federal agency to implement the Project Socrates results on a nationwide basis. However, Reagan's term came to end before the executive order could be coordinated and signed, and the incoming Bush administration, labeling Project Socrates as industrial policy, had it terminated. (15)

George Herbert Walker Bush did not want Project Socrates to succeed because he had been working on a different agenda during his Vice-Presidency under President Reagan. Project Socrates became a ‘Bait and Switch’ moment in American politics.

The international drug smuggling component of Vice President, George Herbert Walker Bush’s task force included a discovery quest for a more balanced society.

According to James Baker, on, or about February 14, 1982, an attorney known to play both sides of the fence flew from Vancouver International Airport to South America. He carried instructions from British Columbia’s government [unwritten of course] to enter into negotiations with some of the leading and more responsible crime families down there. The government wanted to know if there were any areas of commonality where they and organized crime could work together for the benefit of a more balanced society. Other western style governments sent representatives to the same series of meetings. The present day problems with the drug cartels in Mexico, the United States and in Europe are a direct result of those initial meetings in February 1982. They are the consequence of the quest for a more balanced society. The social experiment has been ongoing throughout the last thirty-three years.

President Bill Clinton continued to authorize the removal of the protective checks and balances from the banking system. In November 1992 he signed, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act, which abolished a New Deal era rule that had kept insurance companies, commercial banks, and investment banks all separate. (16)

The presidential authorizations led to the creation of the environment that stimulated the positive false, bait and switch ninja mortgage program. That combined with President George W. Bush’s war in Iraq and the $1.35 trillion dollar tax rebate that made no sense - unless you were one of the ten percent shipping money overseas to the BRICS group of countries - caused ninja mortgages and credit default swops from the housing crisis to reverberate around the world like steel balls in a pinball game. The banking system had rules and regulations to protect people’s money and wealth. Removing them had a consequence that must have been foreseen.

The market economies of Great Britain, Canada, Japan, and the European Union, have also been sabotaged. The political elite who gave their permissions and allowed these tragedies to develop caused alterations to the foundation of our democratic systems. By removing the people’s guarantee of a civil-right of service based on need and by removing the people’s guarantee of a right to be protected, governments thwarted the power of the democratic vote.

Had our political leadership followed the rules of a democratic civil society and continued to serve and protect the public, the world would have worked for the common good, and we would have found a better solution to the retirement crises. The political leadership, however, did not serve or protect the public, and they still cannot serve or protect the public because they established the G group program upon a foundation of lies and deceit.

Today, the most important thing in the new management system is how one presents a case, so everyone is linking arms and presenting their case while focusing on the creation of their new world order. The trouble is our democratic governments were never elected to create the new world order. They were elected to serve and protect the public. Had they wanted to manage something, they should have gotten into agriculture – Cattle are managed - People are served.

You Are Taking Us down the Wrong Road

Every person is a spiritual being having a human experience. Every person is living at a different stage of development on a journey towards completeness; consequently, each person experiences the world in a different way. How a person interprets life’s experience, leads to the development of perception which manifests itself in one of two ways. People either perceive the world to be a neutral place where they live in harmonious variations of doing unto others as they would have others do unto them, or they perceive the world to be a cruel, violent, and corrupt place where they live in dysfunctional variations of doing unto others before others get the chance to do unto them.

In a civilized world founded upon the rule of law, citizens are conditioned to trust governments to do what they are elected to do - provide services and protection for taxes. Trust between citizens and governments accounts for much of democracy’s historical success. Democratic governments that serve their populations provide a style of leadership that promotes trust. Trust is an important part of living in a civilized society. Trust allows us to form attachments and to live with one another.

In the Spiritual Renewal Bible, in the Gospel according to St John, chapter 3 verse 34: 34 So now I am giving you a new commandment: Love each other. Just as I have loved you, you should love each other. (17) I am certain the Koran has a similar message throughout its pages.

We create a blueprint for our adult behavior in early childhood. Children who develop a healthy sense of self-esteem usually develop a healthy sense of self-worth. A healthy sense of self-esteem and a healthy sense of self-worth provide a better opportunity to develop trust based relationship skills and a better opportunity to achieve a sense of belonging within the community of humankind. Healthy children most often become healthy adults, and a healthy adult’s contribution to his or her community is usually a beneficial one. Democracies thrive on beneficial contributions.

Children who do not develop a healthy sense of self-esteem cannot develop a healthy sense of self-worth; consequently, they are less able to develop trust based relationship skills. Without these two building blocks to our humanity children are less able to achieve a sense of belonging within the community of humankind. Unhealthy children are prone to becoming unhealthy adults. Their contribution to the community of humankind is usually not a beneficial one. Instead, unhealthy children often become dysfunctional, anti-social, often angry, and sometimes violent adults who use questionable means as justification to achieve their desired ends. Furthermore, their priorities can shift without consideration of consequences. Their numbers are growing, and democracies do not thrive upon their contributions.

History will show that our children have been let down by both the collapse of the service oriented democratic system and by its replacement, the predatory, chaotic, politically correct, management system. Governments have seriously interfered with the next generation’s development of trust for government. Bureaucrats and politicians have not only abandoned what the baby-boomers created. They have abandoned all those who are yet to come.

Trust is being replaced with seeds of chaos, and chaos is justifying our governments’ growing management agenda. Populations within the G-8 group of countries are learning that the world is a cruel, violent, and corrupt place, and they should, therefore, do unto others before others get the chance to do unto them. The leadership the G-8 group are people managing for profit.

The financial mess we are in will end when the baby boomers stop retiring in 2029, but the decline in services to common people will continue to grow. Common people will continue to vote, and they and the politicians will continue to call it democracy. However, the power of the democratic vote, for which so many died during World War II, a guarantee of a civil right of service based on need and a civil right of protection for taxes--that is over.

To transfer the wealth of their nations to new markets overseas, governments of the G-8 program replaced the democratic system based on service with a management system based on political correctness. They have replaced their obligation to provide services including the service of protection with rights and freedoms they had no right to give. When freedom is served, it is free. When freedom is managed, it becomes a manipulated illusion that people call freedom, but it is never free, and it always leads to chaos.

Chaos is being created by the government’s formation of special interest groups as a foundation to democracy. Our leadership has failed to realize that when you create special interest groups you create their opposition, for we live in a world that strives for balance. Whereas the creation of the special interest group may have satisfied the government’s need to establish its management agenda, it has done little for the rights of common people. The government’s creation has brought with it the creation of chaos, and when chaos festers and grows it leads to war.

Democratic governments are now serving and protecting banks and large corporations. They are convincing us of their service while they are creating and managing their New World Order. It suits the end game to this unfolding nightmare. They intend to cull the population by taking us all through another war.

Tony Hewitt.

References

1. Eisenhower, Dwight D. Military-Industrial Complex Speech. [Online] [Cited: April 23, 2015.] http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~hst306/documents/indust.html.

2. Pew Research Centre. Baby Boomers Retire. Washington DC : Pew Research Centre, http://www.pewresearch.org/daily-number/baby-boomers-retire, 2010.

3. The Economist. Pocket World In Figures. London : Profile Books Ltd, 2012.

4. Reagan, R. Remarks on Signing the Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982. The American Presidency Project, Online by Peters, J. and Woolley, J.T. [Online] October 15, 1982. [Cited: March 11, 2015.] http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=41872.

5. Veon, J. Who Are The G7 Finance Ministers? NewsWithViews.com. [Online] The Women's International Media Group, Inc., February 29, 2004. [Cited: March 11, 2015.] http://www.newswithviews.com/Veon/joan11.htm.

6. Margaret Thatcher Foundation. The G7 Summits: Declassified Records Published for the First Time. Cambridge : Margaret Thatcher Foundation, http://www.margaretthatcher.org/archive/g7.asp, 2015.

7. Kapala, M.M. Security Policy of the G7/G8 (1975-2007): A Comprehensive and a Human Security Approach. Wien : Universitat Wien, http;//othes.univie.ac.at/19067/1/2012-01-12_0408465.pdf, 2012.

8. Social Security Administration. Historical Background and Development of Social Security, The 1972-1977 Amendments. Washington DC : United States Government Social Security, Official Social Security Website, http://www.ssa.gov/history/briefhistory3.html, 2000.

9. Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia. Group Of Five, History. [Online] February 14, 2015. [Cited: March 11, 2015.] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_of_Five.

10. Steyn, Mark. Piddingworth. http://www.piddingworth.com/trudeau_charter.html. [Online] [Cited: April 23, 2015.] http://www.piddingworth.com/trudeau-charter.html.

11. Arraf, J. Sunni and Shia Divided in Iraq, the Land of Cain and Abel. GlobalPost – International News. [Online] March 18, 2013. [Cited: March 11, 2015.] March 18, 2013. http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/middle-east/iraq/13....

12. Democracy Now. Linda Bilmes: The 10 Trillion Dollar Hangover: Paying the Price for Eight Years of Bush. A Daily Independent Global News Hour with Amy Goodman & Juan González. [Online] December 22, 2008. [Cited: March 11, 2015.] December 22, 2008. http://www.democracynow.org//2008/12/22/linda_bilmes_the_10_trillio....

13. Robinson, K.J. Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetory Control Act of 1980. 100 YEARS Federal Reserve System. [Online] March 1980. [Cited: March 11, 2015.] Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas. http://www.federalreservehistory.org/Events/DetailView/43.

14. Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia. George H.W. Bush. [Online] March 10, 2015. [Cited: March 11, 2015.] First term (1981–1985). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_H._W._Bush#Second_term_.281985.....

15. —. Ronald Reagan. [Online] March 6, 2015. [Cited: March 11, 2015.] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Reagan.

16. —. Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. [Online] February 28, 2015. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm%E2%80%93Leach%E2%80%93Bliley-Act .

17. Wycliffe Bible Translators. Spiritual Renewal Bible. Wheaton : Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., 1998.

18. Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia. Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992. [Online] June 24, 2012. [Cited: March 11, 2015.] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal-Housing-Enterprises-Financial-....