Amid Media Blackout, Canada Lawsuit Challenges Banker Rule

[GoinAllTheWay]

A landmark Canadian federal appellate-court ruling could conceivably lead to the cancellation of Canada’s debt-based money system, and its repercussions are expected to be felt by central banks around the world.

http://www.ukcolumn.org/article/amid...es-banker-rule

Saw this on a feed in FB. I don't fully understand the article but it sounds pretty interesting.

Is this for real? Thoughts?

[FLAMESRULE]

Great find GATW!! I certainly hope this gains traction and definitely think it would be in our national interests.

[temple5]

Interesting topic, alot of foil hat dudes spring up when you search for this. Its too bad there are no court document numbers to look up, rather googling the issues gets alot of strange looking "off the grid" types.

This seems to have been brought up at a Green Party policy meeting where it was defeated - comments from GPC on why it was defeated is below.

http://www.greenparty.ca/en/conventi...otions/g12-p13

The GPC Shadow Cabinet believes that this is not a fiscally responsible policy. The Bank of Canada already lends at no interest to the government but when it determines that such lending would be inflationary, it requires the government to borrow on private markets. This resolution would undermine the ability of the Bank of Canada to carry out its mandate to control inflation. This approach to government borrowing is essentially the same as was used in Argentina, leading to chronic hyper inflation at great social cost.

This resolution is at odds with full cost accounting principles by suggesting that no cost borrowing is a viable financial solution with no attendant consequences. The GPC Shadow Cabinet believes there is no such ‘free lunch’ and that the only viable way to achieve a reduction in national debt and interest burden is by ensuring that total revenues exceed total expenditures.

[Northendzone]

could the governmet really issue an order to the media to not cover something that is happening in a public courtroom?

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

could the governmet really issue an order to the media to not cover something that is happening in a public courtroom?

I think the argument is that media have a disincentive to cover this issue.

That said, I don't know much about this issue at all.

[Thor]

Iceland nationalized its national bank, there is already talk of trying to privatize it again, I'm screaming at the top of my lungs along with a few political parties here trying to stop this from happening again.

[Azure]

Private banks aren't the problem. The fact that the US banks own assets worth 60% of the US GDP is the problem.

They need to be broken up. Smaller local and community banks need more help so they can thrive as well.

[Thor]

Private central banks are a problem, its a license for endless profit at the expense of a nation. Its maddening.

[To Be Quite Honest]

Originally Posted by Azure

Private banks aren't the problem. The fact that the US banks own assets worth 60% of the US GDP is the problem.

They need to be broken up. Smaller local and community banks need more help so they can thrive as well.

The interest the people pay is perpetual with private banks. That is a problem.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Thor

Private central banks are a problem, its a license for endless profit at the expense of a nation. Its maddening.

Well that is different from what I said.

JP Morgan and Chase being allowed to merge is what I think is a huge problem. Should never have happened.

[temple5]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

could the governmet really issue an order to the media to not cover something that is happening in a public courtroom?

Its probably more of a I scratch your back you scratch mine kind of thing if it were to occur.

A logical reason why this isnt being covered is that the most recent court action only means the lawsuit can continue (however I assume there are more appeals left). So right now all you have is couple of odd tinfoil hat looking dudes suing the government and in the latest appeal the courts have said the lawsuit can continue. What from that would the "mainstream media" report.

I have no idea but my guess would be the government gets sued probably more than 100+ times a year. Is there a massive conspiracy to cover those up as well? If this case happens to actually win then Im sure it will be covered. If they dont win then why cover it?

Borrowing from yourself at any interest rate is printing money and there havent been alot of money printing success stories out there for the "mainstream media" to draw positive parallels to relate the lawsuit to the average viewer IMO

[Bobblehead]

I've seen this debunked a couple of times.

Just look at the first full paragraph:

A landmark Canadian federal appellate-court ruling could conceivably lead to the cancellation of Canada’s debt-based money system, and its repercussions are expected to be felt by central banks around the world.

This is Freeman on the Land/Truther/Birther type of stuff.

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by Thor

Private central banks are a problem, its a license for endless profit at the expense of a nation. Its maddening.

I would agree in so much as any private business should be able to declare bankruptcy and the positives and negatives that come along with that.

I am still unsure of how the Icelandic system was setup. It would appear that many in England were heavily invested in Icelandic banks and believe the government "owes" them their money.

Someone correct me if I am wrong but my understanding in Canada is that it is possible that any of the private banks if so need be could declare bankruptcy and CDIC is there to protect a portions of the populations money if that were to happen.

[Resolute 14]

Yeah, a quick look at the headlines of this UK Column site indicates that it is very likely a conspiracy theory minded publication. Also, the reason why the media doesn't seem to care at this point is the fact that the ruling was only that the people who filed the suit are allowed to proceed to trial. In other words, nothing has happened yet.

That being said, I would love to read the actual suit, because it is rather strange to think that they could successfully sue over the fact that the government changed a law over 40 years ago, particularly since I don't think debt-free loans is constitutionally protected.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Yeah, a quick look at the headlines of this UK Column site indicates that it is very likely a conspiracy theory minded publication. Also, the reason why the media doesn't seem to care at this point is the fact that the ruling was only that the people who filed the suit are allowed to proceed to trial. In other words, nothing has happened yet.

That being said, I would love to read the actual suit, because it is rather strange to think that they could successfully sue over the fact that the government changed a law over 40 years ago, particularly since I don't think debt-free loans is constitutionally protected.

Here is the original ruling:
https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/fct/doc...&resultIndex=1

Dismissed without the ability to amend.

Of course that was appealed:
https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/fca/doc...&resultIndex=2

And yeah, that was shot down too.

Until it actually gets to a full hearing, which it doesn't sound like it will, this is nothing but a conspiracy theory.

[Resolute 14]

Ok, wait. If I am reading this right, the first link is the Crown explaining all the reasons "COMER" is crazy and asking the claim be struck, which the court granted. The second is COMER's appeal, which was denied? (I'm a bit confused about it being characterized as a "cross-appeal"). If that is the case, then did the British conspiracy site not completely misrepresent the court ruling?

Edit: It seems the court reconsidered and gave leave to file an amended complaint, and it was the Crown's appeal of that that was denied. That being said, I have a hard time believing they could amend the complaint in such a way that the original "this is why you suck" rebuttal would not apply.

Oh, and LOL @ the plaintiffs asking for $10,000 for themselves, each, and $1 for every Canadian!

[Harry Lime]

So, one of the greatest crimes in human history, privatization of central banks, is finally brought to trial, and the Crown demolishes the 'wacked out complaining nut jobs', in order to maintain the status quo, which isn't in our national interest.

Might I recommend that the Crown be prosecuted for high treason?

This isn't some half baked scheme that only a conspiracy nut would come up with, or believe would work. This was the baserock of our financial system from 1938 til 1974.

[Resolute 14]

Arguing that government should be prosecuted for high treason because it does something you don't like is very much the kind of thing conspiracy nuts are known for, and which serves only to utterly discredit you and everything you say.

Now, the argument about how our financial system once worked and whether it is superior to the present day is fair. But even if one agrees that the pre-1974 system was better (I'm no economist, so can't say), that does not mean that this suit either had merit or was not brought forward by a bunch of crazies.

[Harry Lime]

When I said 'high treason' I really meant that we should chide them gently using small handwritten notes on folded paper, slightly scented with cinnamon.

What will really happen is that this issue will go away, when apathy rolls over the Canadian people in a mighty wave. I can try to nudge them awake through the use of hyperbole, but alas, I believe that the only way anyone would take notice, or the government consider the welfare of it's people, is if the hyperbole became fact.

Now, if you will excuse me, hybrid alien/ducks are giving me new orders through my fern.

[Bobblehead]

Well, the privatization was deemed to be a public policy issue and not a legal issue.

So you can either come up with another legal argument to convince a judge, or you attack the issue from a political angle and attempt to elect someone sympathetic to your views.

Attempting to frame the issue as "the impending collapse of the banking system and that the media is knowingly avoiding/the government is suppressing" is really not going to promote any credibility going forward.

However, "A Duck Named Fern" would be a cool band name.