How Everyone In Canada Is Going To Find Out

Share this blog with everyone in your email address book!

Something like this:

Subject: Important! I need your help

Body: Please join me in sharing the information in a blog called: Freedom From Debt Crucial Getting Started Now Information For All Canadians


Your Name

Executor II


If you read over the email Executor, it brings us back to why we did what we did last year. Grocery Store Bandits.

We are sons and heirs of God so there must be an estate and sons and heirs of such an estate, in my view, to not be confused with all others, must do true love.

Doing so keeps the assets of the God estate, the world, in the estate administered by the executor, government, for the benefit of the heir rather than as most do now, claim a portion as their own.

By claiming a portion of the God estate as ones own, creating a new mini estate but still of the one estate; one assumes full responsibility. He has assumed the role of the executor/trustee.

You cannot separate from the family or not give freely to the family and expect a free ride at the expense of the family. If you give freely to the family then it is very likely the family will give freely to you and God has promised you that.

There is but one way in my estimation to Read the rest of this entry

Ultimately, the Bank is owned by the people of Canada.

Hi all;

A special type of Crown corporation

The Bank was founded in 1934 as a privately owned corporation. In 1938, it became a Crown corporation belonging to the federal government. Since that time, the Minister of Finance has held the entire share capital issued by the Bank. Ultimately, the Bank is owned by the people of Canada.

The Bank of Canada Is Owned By The People of Canada

The Bank of Canada Is Owned By The People of Canada

The cause of the continued control of the money supply by the private banking interests is people looking our for their private interests. What we have outside of us is a reflection of what is in us. As members of the public we are one but with private interests we are divided. In other-words, we should see that all what is public, or not private interests, is us, the one, and that what is private is separate from the one. Everyone one of us who has his her own private interests is saying, Read the rest of this entry

Government cannot pay.

Hi all

Based on an email i received this morning I feel compelled to share the following.

So long as we draw or attempt to draw on the government the government will draw on us, e.g. through taxation.

Canada has not the means to cover liabilities, taxation is evidence of that since taxes pays the interest to the holders of government bonds. In other words, Canada cannot make the interest payments because Canada has no money, is insolvent/bankrupt. Whatever money it does get it gets through taxation and other revenue generating methods, all in the form of taxes, therefore; for a bankrupt to service a debt or take on the liabilities people think it should take on, the bankrupt has no place to turn but the people. Why so? Because a bankrupt cannot pay and we are the source of credit as evidence by personal income tax collections. There is no other source.

In short, a reason for income taxes is Read the rest of this entry

Education On Debt-currency and Interest

Hi Folks,

The Minister of Finance’s request for suggestions to improve Canada ’s financial system, has generated much dialogue on and off the Internet.  By the way, the e-mail address for submission of suggestions on how to improve the financial system is, finlegis(Replace this parenthesis with the @ sign)

Some of this dialogue has come to my attention and there appears to be some confusion as to what is meant by debt-currency and how interest impacts and is related to, debt-currency.

It appears that everyone is aware of the fact that Canada , and most other countries on earth (with the possible exception of Iran and possible China ), suffers under a debt-currency monetary system.

The term debt-currency, the type of money we have in Canada , means that the money supply is borrowed, thus creating a debt or legal obligation to repay the money under certain terms and conditions as outlined in the contractual obligation executed by the lender and borrower.

That is precisely and the ONLY reason why the money is referred to as debt money or debt-currency.  Interest has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that our currency is referred to as debt-currency or why it must be paid back to the lender.

The interesting thing to note though, is that money can either be debt-currency or debt-free-currency, and the difference and the impact on the people who use the money is huge.

In the case of debt-currency 100% of the money supply, as in Canada , is borrowed into circulation, either by government, corporations or individual men and women.  This money comes with a legal obligation to repay it.

Therefore, immediately upon spending the borrowed money (debt-currency), the borrower has to commence an ongoing series of activities designed to reacquire the money, or that of others, with which to meet the obligation to repay the so-called loan, which is in fact, the licensed activity by the banks of actually issuing credit.  The thing to remember here, is that the credit the banks issue, is your credit.

Now there is an alternative to this debt-currency system and that is, obviously, debt-free-currency.

Why would anyone want debt-free-currency?  Well, because money is supposed to be a tool.  We are told that money is simply a medium of exchange, which enables the people to freely exchange their goods and services.

Well, the use of the term “freely” exchange their goods and services is a misnomer because, since the people have to borrow the money to do so, then neither the money, nor the activity is free.

The other reason we are convinced to use money is that it is a store of value.  Well, it is not, it is simply painted up pieces of paper and as in anything else that is paper or written on paper, it exists only on paper and in the minds of men.

Money has no real value, and it should not have, because it is supposed to be a tool for the people;  A means of exchanging their goods and services.

All wealth is created by the labour of mankind when attached to the natural resources surrounding them.  Money creates absolutely nothing.

Money is supposed to be a medium of exchanging that wealth, but it begs the question, why do we have to borrow it, why is it not provided to us freely, by the government for example.

Surprisingly, the federal government has indeed been given that power and authority by subsections 91((14), (15) and (20) (plus others) of the Constitution Act, 1982, but the government has given that power to the privately owned banks, which explains why we have to borrow our money thus making it debt-currency.

This places a terrible burden on the people and at the same time reaps much profit for the bankers.

When the money is paid back (returned) to the banks it may well be cancelled, I am not certain what actually happens to it, but much of it is never returned to the banks in satisfaction of the debt, because much of it is used to pay interest to the banks for the use of our own credit.

Remember, that the banks do not create money per se, the banks actually issue credit – the people’s credit.  They are licensed to do so and they are the only ones who can create money in our country at the present time.  I actually believe that the government cannot exercise its constitutional powers to create money since they have forfeited that power in favour of the banks.

However, that is not important in understanding the difference between debt-currency and debt-free-currency and what part interest plays in our monetary system.

The difference between debt-currency and debt-free-currency then, is simply that in the former instance, money is borrowed with the obligation of repaying it, while in the latter case, it is simply provided free of any obligation to the people, other than to spend it and if it is not spent, then it should be returned to source.

Under such a system of debt-free-money the only real purpose of money is to be spent and when it is not being spent it is not to be stored up in bank accounts and such, it should be returned to source for cancellation.  If and when we need more, we simply go to the bank and get some, after all it is issued based on our gilt-edged credit!

Why should the latter (debt-free-currency) be a benefit to the people and the former (debt-currency) be a burden?  Well, if you cannot see why, then I am unable to explain it better than I already have so I will not attempt a further explanation.

I will, however, explain what the impact of interest is on we the people and why it creates a mathematical impossibility which in itself, is illegal – the law cannot create an obligation to do the impossible!

The first question to ask, is “where does the interest come from”.

We all know that when we borrow money from the banks, the banks oblige us to pay them interest on that money (remember, banks issue credit, your credit, but it spends just like money so it is referred to as money).

But where does that interest come from?

Now, think about this before you read on and see if you can see why this present monetary system in Canada creates a mathematical impossibility for the people.  The interest must come from the money (debt-currency) that is borrowed from the banks!

Now think!!

Therefore, as we use some of our borrowed money to pay the interest, it immediately, even after the very first interest payment, leaves us with a shortage of cash with which to repay our debt obligations related to the borrowed money.

For example if the country has $1,000,000,000.00 in circulation, 100% of which has to be borrowed from the banks, the only source of money in the country, after the first interest payment, and let’s say interest is only .0000002% (an unrealistic proposition since interest is always 1% or much more), the first interest payment will be only $2.00.

Even with such a relatively small amount of interest, we now have the mathematical impossibility of repaying the entire debt and the banks can do whatever it is that their contract with us permits them to do, usually seizing some, or all, of our material wealth.

There you have it, the difference between debt-currency and debt-free-currency, the impact of interest and the impact of both on the people of this nation, since both make up the present monetary system in Canada, as well as most major countries on this planet.

This may be the reason that the Minister of Finance, James Flarherty has asked for suggestions to improve the financial system of this nation.

Maybe that it is why we should all give him our suggestions.

I would hope that your suggestion would be more realistic when birthed from the knowledge contained in this treatise.

I would like to conclude by quoting some of the members of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Banking and Commerce contained in the minutes of their March and May meetings of 1939.  Graham Towers was the Governor of the Bank of Canada at that time.

“It is absurd to say that our country can issue $30,000,000 in bonds and not $30,000,000 in currency. Both are promises to pay; but one promise fattens the usurer and the other helps the people”, and;

“It is the people who constitute the basis of government credit. Why then cannot the people have the benefit of their own gilt-edged credit by receiving non-interest bearing currency, instead of the bankers  receiving the benefit of the people’s credit in interest bearing bonds?”, and

“Income taxes pay the interest to the bondholders”.

The following involves some intense grilling of Mr. Towers (also taken from the aforementioned minutes):

Q. But there is no question about it that banks create the medium of exchange?

Mr. Towers: That is right. That is what they are for... That is the Banking business, just in the same way that a steel plant makes steel. (p. 287)

The manufacturing process consists of making a pen-and-ink or typewriter entry on a card in a book. That is all. (pp. 76 and 238)

Each and every time a bank makes a loan (or purchases securities), new bank credit is created — new deposits — brand new money. (pp. 113 and 238)

Broadly speaking, all new money comes out of a Bank in the form of loans.

As loans are debts, then under the present system all money is debt. (p. 459)

Q. When $1,000,000 worth of bonds is presented (by the government) to the bank, a million dollars of new money or the equivalent is created?

Mr. Towers: Yes.

Q. Is it a fact that a million dollars of new money is created?

Mr. Towers: That is right.

Q. Now, the same thing holds true when the municipality or the province goes to the bank?

Mr. Towers: Or an individual borrower.

Q. Or when a private person goes to a bank?

Mr. Towers: Yes.

Love & Peace of I,

Authored by: Wally

Income Taxes Pay The Interest To The Bondholders

From the House of Commons Standing Committee on Banking and Commerce;

“Income taxes pay the interest to the bondholders”.
The government puts up interest bearing bonds out of which money is created and we pay the interest in the form of taxes.
The taxes are a direct draw on our energy and is what I mean by our credit. In other words, it is the tax payments that make the bonds good.
The taxes are a direct draw in that, you give 100% energy measured as gross pay and go home with after tax loss of energy in terms of net pay.

Now I have no problem that the government puts up bonds, but to hold me liable for its choice to put up interest bearing bonds (promises to pay) than issue interest free currency (promises to pay), that I take issue with.
That my friends is the crux of the matter. The government has no means to pay the interest and so what business did it have putting up interest bearing bonds in the first instance, let alone hold us liable when it had another option? That being interest free currency.
So as much as it may be claimed that we receive a benefit when we receive money (income), or the government did us a favour, or the people wanted to be paid for their work and is why we are liable for the interest payment, taxes; the fact that the government could issue interest free currency in the stead of debt money, must mute the claim.
In other words, if the government had of issued interest free currency the people would not be subject to taxation, but since it has not and authorizes the issue of debt money in the stead, it is not justification in my view that people be subject to income taxes.
However, taxes are not the subject of this message or purpose of this blog site; freedom from debt via interest free currency is.
I love you

Suggestion To The Government of Canada

Dear Member of Parliament,

As you may or may not know, the government of Canada is taking suggestions on how to improve the financial system. Enclosed is our suggestion that has been forwarded to the email address where the suggestions are to be sent; finlegis(Replace this parenthesis with the @ sign) We urge you to study it carefully since the suggestion is based in part on comments made by the House of Commons Standing Committee on Banking and Commerce, 1939.

Dear Honourable Minister of Finance,

The following is a suggestion in response to an article in the Toronto Sun newspapers regarding the governments request for suggestions to improve the banking/financial system. The attachment contains the suggestion in French and English. In addition to the suggestion offered herein is this from the Standing Committee on Banking and Commerce; March 24, 1939 at page 394;

“Will you tell me why the government with power to create money should give that power away to a private monopoly and then borrow that which parliament can create itself back at interest to the point of national bankruptcy, because, if we cannot finance the things that are necessary it means that this nation cannot meet its current obligations”. “Why should a government with the power to create money borrow that money at interest?” Mr Towers, “Now, if parliament wants to change the form of operating the banking system, then certainly that is within the power of parliament”.

We think that the facts and evidence speak for themselves as to why the ship Canada and the people are floundering in debt and will continue to flounder until the ship sinks taking us all with her, unless the rules are changed. It is not our desire to pursue a class action suit but neither is it our desire to see the good ship Canada and the people suffer needlessly.

If you wish to discuss this further my contact particulars follow.

Thank you

(Insert your contact details here)

TO: Minister of Finance Canada (By mail and e-mail)

COPIED TO: All Members of Parliament (By e-mail only)

September 23, 2010

Dear Sir:

Re: Pending Class Action lawsuit for breach of duty, et al

The People v. the federal government/Crown

We are in the process of investigating and determining the propriety of launching a class-action lawsuit as captioned. However, we noticed an article in the Toronto Sun wherein the government is soliciting suggestions on how to improve the financial system and thought it prudent to make a suggestion and submit it to, finlegis(Replace this parenthesis with the @ sign)">finlegis(Replace this parenthesis with the @ sign)

We begin this letter with the following quotes from members of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Banking and Commerce, meeting in 1939;

“It is absurd to say that our country can issue $30,000,000 in bonds and not $30,000,000 in currency. Both are promises to pay; but one promise fattens the usurer and the other helps the people”, and;

“It is the people who constitute the basis of government credit. Why then cannot the people have the benefit of their own gilt-edged credit by receiving non-interest bearing currency, instead of the bankers receiving
the benefit of the people’s credit in interest bearing bonds?”

“Income taxes pay the interest to the bondholders”.

Surely you are well aware that the interest payment obligation attached to the creation of money does not exist and of the inevitable consequences of having to pay back more money than was created.

We men and women did not come to this world to labour under a monetary system that fattens usurers at our expense, or be held as debtors, or to support absurdities, or to do nothing as our brothers and sisters and country suffer hopelessness because of a monetary system that, as it is, benefits and fattens the usurer (moneychanger/banker).

The people are the real producers of all wealth in the country and who constitute the basis of all government credit, so why should, do, we not benefit from our own gilt-edged credit by receiving non-interest bearing currency? We hereby give notice that we claim our credit and right to the benefit of it.

Does the government not have a responsibility to the people, those who empower it and who constitute the basis of government credit, first and foremost? The Prime Minister must think so when he stated in an article on the Foreign Affairs website, “The first duty of government is to protect its citizens.”

What is the government going to do about this? Is it the policy of the government, the elected, to allow this absurdity to continue – bleeding the people and business to death (debt) in order to fatten the usurer (bondholders), or is the government going to protect and help the people?

If we do not hear from you within 10 days we shall proceed with our planned class-action lawsuit.


(Insert your contact details here)

Cher député.

Comme vous le savez probablement, le gouvernement du Canada a demandé et reçoit des suggestions actuellement pour améliorer le système financier. Veuillez trouver ci-après la suggestion d’amélioration que nous avons fait parvenir à l’adresse courriel indiquée dans sa demande, soit finlegis(Replace this parenthesis with the @ sign)">finlegis(Replace this parenthesis with the @ sign)

Nous vous enjoignons de l’étudier attentivement car elle a été conçue, entre autres, à partir de quelques commentaires exprimés par le Comité permanent sur les banques et le commerce de la Chambre des communes, 1939.

Honorable Ministre des finances.

Veuillez trouver ci-joint notre suggestion en réponse à votre demande parue dans les journaux de septembre 2010 de vous faire parvenir des propositions pour améliorer le système bancaire/financier. Notre document vous propose notre suggestion en anglais et en français.

De plus, voici ce que proposait le Comité permanent sur les banques et le commerce en 1939, p.394.

“Pourquoi donc un gouvernement qui a le pouvoir de créer de l’argent emprunterait-il cet argent avec intérêts?”

M. Towers: “Maintenant, si le parlement veut changer la façon d’opérer le système bancaire, alors c’est certainement à l’intérieur de ses prérogatives de le faire.”.

À moins que les règles ne changent, que le bateau « Canada » et que le peuple soit empêtré dans les dettes et qu’il continuera de l’être jusqu’au naufrage nous emportant tous avec lui, nous apparaît évident. Les faits parlent d’eux mêmes. Nous ne voulons pas vraiment intenter une poursuite de type « class action ». Nous ne voulons pas non plus que le bateau « Canada » et le bon peuple continuent de souffrir inutilement.

Si vous voulez en discuter plus en profondeur, veuillez me contacter selon ces coordonnées.


(Insert your contact details here)

À : Ministre des Finances du Canada
Copie conforme à: Tous les membres du Parlement

23 septembre 2010


OBJET: Action collective en cours pour « manquement au devoir ».
Le peuple v. Le Gouvernement fédéral/ La Couronne.

Nous étions en train de nous renseigner pour déterminer s’il était opportun et approprié de lancer une action collective tel qu’énoncé en objet lorsque, par hasard, nous avons remarqué, dans le Toronto Sun, un article dans lequel le gouvernement sollicitait des suggestions sur la façon d’améliorer le système financier. Actuellement, il nous semble plus approprié et opportun de vous faire parvenir notre suggestion en vous la soumettant sur le site proposé finlegis(Replace this parenthesis with the @ sign)

Nous commençons ce communiqué en citant quelques propos émis par des membres du Comité permanent sur les banques et le commerce de la Chambre des communes dans sa réunion de 1939.

Première citation:

“Il est absurde de dire que notre pays peut/ veut émettre $30,000,000 en obligations (bonds) plutôt que $30,000,000 en monnaie. Les deux constituent une promesse de paiement. La première toutefois engraisse les usuriers/banquiers alors que l’autre contribue à aider les gens/le peuple.”

Deuxième citation:

“Ce sont les gens/le peuple qui constituent la source de crédit du gouvernement. Pourquoi les gens ne pourraient-ils donc pas bénéficier de leur propre crédit en recevant une monnaie libre d’intérêts plutôt que d’en faire bénéficier les usuriers/banquiers par des obligations portant intérêts?”

Troisième citation:

“Les impôts paient les intérêts aux détenteurs d’obligations.”

Certes, vous êtes bien conscients que l’obligation de payer des intérêts inhérente à la création de monnaie n’existe pas. Elle entraîne même l’inévitable conséquence d’avoir à rembourser plus d’argent qu’il en est créé.

Nous, hommes et femmes, ne sommes pas venus en ce monde pour travailler sous un système monétaire qui engraisse, à nos frais et dépens, les banquiers/usuriers ou pour soutenir des absurdités ou pour rester à ne rien faire face au spectacle désolant de voir nos frères, nos sœurs et tout le pays sombrer dans le désespoir à cause d’un système monétaire qui, dans sa formule actuelle, engraisse les banquiers/ usuriers/ monnayeurs.

Le peuple est le véritable générateur de toutes les richesses dans le pays. Il constitue ainsi la source de tout le crédit monétaire dont dispose le gouvernement. Pourquoi alors ne pourrions-nous pas bénéficier de ce crédit dont nous sommes réellement la source et recevoir une monnaie libre d’intérêts?

La responsabilité première du gouvernement n’est-elle pas, d’abord et avant tout, envers le peuple, envers ceux qui lui donnent son pouvoir et qui constituent la source du crédit monétaire? Le Premier Ministre n’exprimait-il pas cette réalité lorsqu’il a déclaré dans un article paru sur le site Web des Affaires Étrangères, que « Le premier devoir du gouvernement est de protéger ses citoyens ».

Nous vous posons alors ces questions: Qu’est ce que le gouvernement entend faire à ce sujet? Sera-ce la politique des élus du gouvernement de permettre la continuité de cette absurdité – saigner le peuple et les commerces à blanc, les entraînant ainsi dans la mort (dette – death) afin d’engraisser les usuriers/ banquiers (obligataires/détenteurs de bonds)? Le gouvernement va-t-il plutôt accomplir son devoir et protéger/ aider le peuple?

Si nous ne recevons pas de réponse à ce communiqué dans les 10 jours, nous procéderons alors à la mise en œuvre de l’action collective que nous avons préparée.


(Insert your contact details here)

SEO Powered by Platinum SEO from Techblissonline