2008 November 28
from
Ayemmo Website
By 1961, Keynes predictions of a world
monetary crisis began to become a reality.
This problem was brought about by the lack of
sufficient currency (especially US Dollars) in world circulation to support
the rapidly expanding international commerce. The World needed US Dollars
beyond the capacity of the good faith and credit of the United States
Taxpayer in order to facilitate trade.
It was not possible to break the Bretton Woods
treaty due to the possible damage of the stable core of the world’s economy
as this had the potential of leading to another major war. To compound the
problem, the majority of dollars in circulation were in private banks,
multinational corporations, private businesses and individual bank accounts.
In 1963 the gold that had been entrusted to the care of President Soekarno
was recalled by the Nations to underpin the issuance of further US Dollars
in order to further facilitate international trade. Under this Agreement,
Soekarno (as the International Trustee Holder of the Gold) began the process
of repositioning the gold that had earlier been entrusted to the care of the
Indonesian People, back into the banking system to create a fractional
backing for the US Dollar.
Initially this was managed under the arbitration
of the Tripartite Gold Commission in The Hague as per the decisions
of the International Community through their Government representatives at
the Innsbruck/Schweitzer Conference and its later revisions.
Under the agreement signed between President
Soekarno and President John Kennedy, was that control of these
assets would cede automatically to US upon the fall from power of President
Soekarno.
This occurred in 1967. The potential of this
agreement led to
Executive Order 11110 issued July 1963,
which would have provided the Department of the Treasury the power to issue
United States Dollars. Within two weeks after signing the Green Hilton
Agreement which would have then enabled consolidation of EO 11110.
Kennedy was assassinated a few days after his
signing of the Green Hilton Agreement. With the death of Kennedy, the
authority granted to the Treasury was never taken up.
Soekarno was awarded a 2.5% interest in the assets by the International
Community in return for his services. He willed all the documents of
guarantee and obligation to his Teacher ***** ***** ******** and his heir,
** **** *** ********.
To this day, these agreements stand to be honored (which was accommodated in
full under the “RESPECTING THE RIGHTS TREATY - BANGKOK - 2003). The assets
were placed into the International Collateral Combined Accounts that form
the Global Debt Facility.
While an apparently innocuous document to read, in it’s proper and full
interpretation, The Green Hilton Agreement is one of the most profound
agreements made between Presidents of any two countries within the twentieth
century, and most probably, in the history of the world, particularly so as
this agreement was made between a President of the United States and the
Trustee of the hidden, but combined wealth of the world.
These assets are not the property of the United
States, but centralized assets under the authority of a centralized system,
to be used as independently deemed to be for the better benefit of the
World.
Original Message —–
From: PZ
To: <bellringer@fourwinds10.com>
Sent: Friday, March 07, 2008 3:56 AM
Subject: Wanta Fraud and Whistleblower
*Regarding: Wanta Fraud and Mr. Whistleblower*
http://www.fourwinds10.com/siterun_static/general/contact_us.php
FROM: Mr. Whistleblower
TO: bellringer@fourwinds10.com
SENT: Tuesday, Mardch 04, 2008 11:56 p.m.
SUBJECT: Wanta Fraud
Regardless if one agrees with the account given by Mr. Whistleblower,
there is one sentence which fails to connect to the other parts of the
story.
He writes:
“At the same time, and there are two
prominent points here, successive US Governments from 1963,
following the execution of the *Green Hilton Treaty by President
Kennedy and President Soekarno* (Note: Kennedy was assassinated 10
days after the signing of this Treaty), refused to recognize the
Combined International Accounts and the Green Hilton Treaty.”
As I have seen the Green Hilton Treaty (full
title: Agreement Green Hilton Memorial Building Geneve and Certificate
of Geneve, signed by 3 persons, witnessed by 9 persons) some years back,
I am wondering what the connection between
the Wanta case and the Green Hilton
Treaty might be? Can you forward my question to Mr. Whistleblower and
act as a go-between for his replay?
Thanks and best regards
PZ
(Response)
—– Original Message —–
From: Whistleblower
To: Bellringer
Sent: Friday, March 07, 2008 9:31 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: Wanta Fraud and Whistleblower
Dear Mr Bellringer,
In response to the question from PZ.
Dear PZ:
Thank you for your question via fourwinds10.com.
Our response on same follows:
The comments in question do not relate
directly to the other content. They are meant to clearly indicate
that the US, by not recognizing the Green Hilton Treaty, actually
deny that the assets held by President Soekarno are part of the
Combined International Collateral Accounts of the Global Debt
Facility, thus implying that they still belong to the original
Owners (hereditary or otherwise).
The fact is that assets held by Soekarno
were not owned by Indonesia, its’ numerous Sultanates, or otherwise, but
by several other countries, Royal Families, etc. which were deposited in
Indonesia commencing 1921, which is the very same period as assets were
deposited in The Philippines.
It was the Japanese who were charged by the World’s Nations to undertake
the excavation of tunnels, mines, bunkers, etc, and deposit assets
within same as and when then were shipped to Indonesia.
It is common knowledge that over the years the US has deliberately
broadcast over the Airwaves, that they are the real owners and that
anyone locating or finding any assets should report same to the US
Embassy immediately. This was a ploy by the US to locate assets and
ultimately steal them. Not recognizing the Green Hilton Treaty, which
was relevant to Indonesia and President Soekarno, allowed the US to lay
claim to the assets and thus steal / plunder them for their own purpose.
Additionally, the US, by its denials and non-recognition of the Green
Hilton Treaty, opened the doors for descendants of President Soekarno,
plus many others who were appointed as Secondary Holders,
Administrators, Sub-secondary Holders / Custodians etc by President
Soekarno (Note: we hold a full list of these people, which is embodied
within President Soekarno’s records, Volume 4), to lay claim to the
assets held in Indonesia.
The very same situation arises with The Philippines and other countries.
In Russia alone, during the Yeltsin era, President Clinton claimed that
the Gold deposited in Russia was actually owned by the US. Thousands of
MT of Gold were moved out of Russia by train into Switzerland and
Germany, under orders of President Yeltsin.
This movement was monitored and President Yeltsin was held to order on
this. His condition to step down from the Presidency of the Russian
Federation, entailed a Full International Immunity from prosecution for
his criminal acts of Theft of Assets from the Collateral Accounts in
conjunction with others (These acts are beginning to come back and bite
the other persons involved quite viciously).
Coming back to the point of issue. The statement was made as an example
to indicate the tactics used by the US to steal, illegally use, plunder,
etc the assets of the Combined International Collateral Accounts. The
example was considered to be the best possible example as it linked to a
situation in the US which is still questionable today. Other examples
could not be used as much as this, and corrective actions against such
illegal use, abuse, theft etc, are all “Classified”.
In respect of your statement claiming you have seen the Green Hilton
Treaty. We do not dispute your claim on this, but advise as to caution.
The reason being is that there are at least Three (3) known forgeries of
this Treaty in existence. There may be more. All differ from each other
and all of them do lead to confusion with those who make claims of
having read the Treaty.
It is not known who composed any of the forgeries, although guesses are
abound.
The “Real” Treaty states, that an agreement has been reached, and shall
be referred to as a “Treaty” between Sovereign Nations, by the President
of the United States and the President of Indonesia, that Assets of the
Combined International Collateral Accounts pursuant to Treaties …….
(numerous Treaties referred to) ……. and held under Custodianship within
Indonesia, shall be transferred to ……… (Name of location in the USA) ………
and utilized by the USA to fractionally back the International Currency
of the US Dollar. Note, the content of the treaty actually states
several further issues, but the above is the main issue.
In return for President Soekarno’s cooperation in this matter,
conjointly with the Owner / Sole Arbiter, Indonesia were given financial
Hereditary rights equal to 2.5% of the value of the assets, to be used
within Indonesia to assist in the development of the country.
Those rights and with full reference to the Green Hilton Treaty were
confirmed within the “Recognizing the Rights” Treaty, Bangkok, Thailand,
dated 2003.
You will also find reference to all of this within various Schweitzer /
Innsbruck Conventions.
Needless to say, the assets have yet to be used for the benefit of
Indonesia. Some have been moved illegally, some stolen / plundered, but
basically the two aforementioned Treaties remain ineffective and
unrecognized by the US, whom, through the Federal Reserve prevent
movement, allotment, allocation, or otherwise of same for use not only
for Indonesia, but for every other country in the World and the People.
Many Indonesians, as with Filipinos, travel the World holding various
Gold and Platinum Bullion Certificates, claiming they are the owners of
the Bullion, only to be arrested and incarcerated. This will continue
until the Truth comes out.
There is no direct connection to the Wanta case, as may or may not have
been implied. The statement was used as an example to indicate to others
what mechanisms are used by the US and others to illegal use, steal,
plunder, etc, assets of the Combined International Collateral Accounts.
We apologize if this lead to a misunderstanding, as we did not purposely
or intentionally design this statement to be misleading.
There are many factors connected to the Combined International
Collateral Accounts, illegal activities, theft, plunder, etc that are
all inter-related in one way or another whereby to isolate one issue
away from all the others is not easy. To understand the enormity of the
situation one has to understand the whole picture and appreciate the
relativity of one part to other parts.
We do not purposely or intentionally restrict illegal activities to the
US, although the US is responsible for a substantial majority of the
problems involved. Other Countries, Central Banks, Rogue elements of
Intelligence Agencies, Commercial Banks, individuals, have also been
active in the area of Theft, Plunder, Illegal use.
We hope that this has satisfactory explained the statement we have made,
and we thank you for your interest in same. Please feel free to seek
further answers should you find the need to do so.
Kindest regards.
Whistleblower.
Additional information at "QUESTIONS
TO MR. WHISTLEBLOWER (Updated April 29, 2009)".
Strange Discussion on Wikipedia About...
"Green Hilton Agreement"
July 18, 2006
from
CassiopaeaForum Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Executor-usa
Your continued donations keep Wikipedia
running!
User talk:Executor-usa
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
I'm sorry but I had to block you and the other editor you were warring
with for violating the Three-revert rule. I have made the block for 11
hours for both parties to accept that this will have be talked out, not
warred out. --Alf melmac 23:25, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
ALF, I have accurate and verified information that OITC is real and not
a fraud. It has been subject to a disinformation campaign throughout the
internet. Since this site purports to provide encyclopedia information,
it should not be used as a disinformation site. If you have proper
security clearances and authorizations, and follow protocols for level
3-5 security rules you can get a verification.
I communicate with top level government
officials and so do others posting against this disinformation campaign.
Your other poster has no real information, only disinformation and the
spreading of false stories by authors who never had access or proper
information.
In the meantime, guidance for disputes over accuracy is laid out at
Wikipedia:Accuracy dispute and the process for resolving disputes is
laid out at Wikipedia:Resolving disputes. --Alf melmac 23:38, 25 April
2006 (UTC)
I thank the pair of you for being understanding and replying so
postively. I hope the matter can be resolved amicably. --Alf melmac
23:48, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
This is an unusual situation. It involves classified institutions
protected by the US Congress under security rules 3-5. If you have such
security clearence, the Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee has the
full jacket. It requires formal authorization. This is not a dispute
that can be settled by the uninformed and unauthorized. Allowing the
authorship and reprinting of intentional misinformation in this case is
improper.
No amount of unauthorized research will turn up anything of substance,
only misinformation. The other party writing, can only find and post
misinformation. News stories etc do not provide truth. If you happen to
be a head of state or head of a central bank, providing that you follow
security protocols, you can get verification. Treaties between nations,
and classified protocols attached to them, are a fact of life that
impacts this discussion.
Classifying this as a fraud and implying that its officers are criminals
is improper. The courts have ruled that no web site may be exempt from
the rules of defamation. The author Waffelknocker is a police officer
who has investigated OITC and who knows that it is real and neither a
fraud nor otherwise criminal.
Your other author just repeats falsehoods
and stories written without access to real information. OITC is very
real. Classification protocols are intended to prevent unauthorized
access, and this frustrates many writers who think that they deserve
such information. He, however, knowingly ignores all countering
information, as such his own behavior is now quite possibly criminally
slanderous.
128.59.153.160 intentionally deleted sources supporting the information
provided by Waffelknocker. I believe that permitting this misinformation
campaign to persist is defamatory and I will recommend that litigation
is initiated.
Contents
[hide]
* 1 Hello, OITC Thailand
* 2 Blocked for legal threats
* 3 Hi, OITC Thailand
* 4 Who are you?
[edit]
Hello, OITC Thailand
Hey, you guys there in Thailand... Do you really think you are going to
scare us by saying that you are "police officers" and "have links with
international authorities"? You are nothing but a bunch of cheap
scammers, trying to make a buck out of the backs of poor people. You
failed miserably in the Rover case, in Fiji and now in Ecuador.
Mind you, now the info about your escapades
is all over the net. And we are monitoring you to check where else the
ugly head of your scam shows up. So keep going on, people, because now
there are some good citizens that will take the time and effort to
unmask you, no matter where you go or what language you use. Say hi to
Pablito and Keith (if you are Ray ;) Sayonara!
REPLY: Wrong people. The promise about litigation is real. No scams have
ever been done by OITC. See you in court.
REPLY 2: Like you took the Fiji Times / Fiji Sun / Fiji Village to
court? No kidding, they are still waiting to hear from your lawyer. They
are also looking forward to seeing "Dr." Scott coming back... But of
course, none of that will happen. Fatty Scott will never go back.
INTERPOL is checking on him as well as on Chchat :)
REPLY: INTERPOL HAS NO PROBLEM WITH OITC. SEE YOU IN COURT.
REPLY 3: Oh, really? Good that you console yourself that way :) Once
their agents come knocking at your door you will feel a bit surprised,
thought ;) About court, again, I most certainly will see you there...
while you and your helpers are tried for fraud :) Looking forward to it!
Reply to reply 3: The only charges will be defamation charges against
you and other defamatory writers. See you in court. It will be a
pleasure taking your house and assets:)
REPLY 4: As you were thinking in taking over the houses and assets of
the tribal in Fiji? Man, oh man, what sweets dreams were destroyed by a
few good journalists and the Fiji Government and Police :) Bet you were
already licking your lips thinking in all the good land you were going
to get for free. Too bad Commissioner Hughes is a no-nonsense officer ;)
About court, are you going to use there the same fake adress you put in
the letter you sent with your fake offer for Rover? ;) If so, at least
change again the number of the house, it is getting overused ;)
[edit]
Blocked for legal threats
Per Wikipedia's policy on legal threats, you are indefinitely blocked
from editing Wikipedia until your threat(s) of legal action against
editors is either withdrawn or concluded. When this happens, edit this
page (you may still do so), leave the text {{unblock}} at the top and
explain that you will no longer be threatening legal action against
editors. --Sam Blanning(talk) 22:28, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Then this will have to be resolved in court. Not a threat, but a
promise. This site and the writers have a legal obligation to not
publish malicious defamatory material. I request that this article be
deleted.
In the spirit of goodwill, I'm willing to nominate the article for
deletion on your behalf, and outside editors will discuss whether
Wikipedia should keep it. Would you like to provide a brief overview of
the reasons why the article should be deleted for the benefit of
editors? Please make it as succint as possible. --Sam Blanning(talk)
22:37, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
This is part of a worldwide disinformation campaign against OITC.
Waffelknocker is a police officer who has investigated OITC. He has
posted accurate information supported by fact. OITC is a classified UN
Chartered institution. The full jacket, security level 3-5, is held by
the Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. Verification
requires authorization. Chapter One on Redcat's Precious Metals Board
has published a letter from the General Counsel of the US Treasury in
support of OITC and its' Chairman. He has had the letter verified. The
writers of this article only publish falsehoods, misinformation, and
lies. They do so knowingly. They delete all writings contrary to their
own misinformation campaign. They do so even when their own writings are
left alone. Any lawsuit against these writers will have as witnesses the
US Attorney General, as well as other such positioned officials. This is
a fact based upon personal knowledge. Do not damage this site by
allowing it to be used for malicious defamers. No amount of discussion
on this site by the uninformed will bear any fruit. You cannot resolve
this conflict.
I've started a discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OITC fraud.
It will last at least five days before being closed. --Sam Blanning(talk)
23:17, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
A comment on the deletion discussion raised a question about UN
Chartered Control numbers. This might help you : Redcat's Boards
> Precious Metals Discussion Forum
> UN "Charter" definition
<< Prev Topic | Next Topic >>
Subject: UN "Charter" definition Posted By: Chapter10 - Registered User
Posted At: (3/29/06 1:40)
UN "Charter" definition:
As stated within several United Nations Official Publications, some of
which can be found on the UN Web site, others are the official legal
definitions as attributed by the United Nations and found within records
of the United Nations Library.
Definition:
The term "Charter" is used for particularly formal and solemn
instruments, such as the constituent treaty of an International
Organization. The term itself has an emotive content that goes back to
the Magna Carta of 1215. Well known recent examples are the Charter of
the United Nations of 1945 and the Charter of the Organization of
American States.
Upon ascertaining the above definition, the question was posed as to how
is a particular Charter for a particular "Constituent treaty of an
International Organization" (using the very words as provided from the
Web and given by the UN Official) could be located and thus viewed.
Reply, quote "Each Charter is allocated a Control Number, for
referencing and recording purposes. If you want to find a particular
Charter you will be required to quote the Control Number. Is there
anything else Sir. Is there a specific Charter you would like to know
about Sir."
The question was posed, quote "Are all
Charters under the United Nations subject to Public Access to
Information Acts". Reply, quote "No Sir, there are many such documents
that are classified, which are not available for Public Access." "How
many". Reply, quote "Many Sir. Is there a particular Charter you are
enquiring about". "No, no particular Charter. This is a general enquiry
for a paper I am writing. Thank you for your help." Reply, quote "Glad
to be of assistance Sir. If you need further information, please call
back. Goodbye".
The above is a transcript of a telephone conversation between a 22 year
old University Student in the U.K. studying Law, and an official at the
United Nations, Geneva. At the same time the student was on the Web with
the United Nations Web site open, clicking on various sections based
upon words or directions given by the UN official. The telephone call
was quite extensive. The above are the pertinent points of the
conversation held. General conversation to and from each person is not
relevant and not transcribed.
Also posted by the same party:" I can also state that this letter has
been verified as being issued by Russell L. Munk, International
Division, US Treasury, Washington DC, 20220, USA. A further letter has
now been delivered to the US Treasury, Senior Counsel US Treasury, Mr
Arnold I. Havens. This letter (following verification of the Munk
letter) details specific pertinent questions more elaborate that the
answers contained in Munk's letter. It will be posted when a response is
received.
I can state that Russell L. Munk has now been verified as the General
Counsel, International Department, US Treasury, Washington D.C. 20220,
USA, at the date of the letter. My comments in the previous posts are as
a result of thorough investigations undertaken by some very senior
friends working for a Police Authority. It would be highly unusual for
them to make a mistake, so I will admit to the possibility of an
accidental omission, from a possible brief loss of concentration, of the
word Assistant in respect of Mr Munk.
It is however irrelevant as to Mr Munk's
position, as the actual letter is confirmed, by the very same friends
who have been in communication with the US Treasury, as being issued and
signed by Russell Munk.
We have to look at the overall situation and protocol involved. If what
we are led to believe is fact, then it would be reasonable to assume
that any inquiry letter would have been addressed to the General Counsel
of the US Treasury. In which case, it is more than possible that the
said letter was passed to Russell Munk for a response, as he was of the
International Division of the US Treasury, but under the auspices of
General Counsel.
This being the case and the fact that the
inquiry was addressed to the General Counsel it would be highly
respectful and indeed protocol (remember what we are told that H.E.
R.C. Dam is a protected person,
with level 3 -5 security, confirmed by the US Senate) to ensure that the
response came from the General Counsel, irrespective of the signature
provided the signature was from a person who holds the authority,
position and responsibility to sign such letters, either as legally
representing the US Treasury, or under authority of the General Counsel.
I believe that the General Counsel and Deputy General Counsel are
political appointments, which in itself may have some bearing on the
issue, considering that the accusation has been made in the past about
the US Government and its Intelligence Agencies illegally using the
assets owned by R.C. Dam held under the Combined International
Collateral Accounts.
That would certainly account for a delegated
responsibility factor, as I am reasonably sure in saying that the
political appointments would surely hesitate from putting their
signatures to such a letter.
I don't think the actual letter or signatory can be "questionable" as
you put it, because of the verification process undertaken, initiated
and undertaken in conjunction with myself / police authority. What is
more to the point is the system of authority, delegation, position and
responsibility that is operational within the US Treasury, which I
believe only the US Treasury can inform us on this matter, as it is
internal operations (sometimes politically oriented) and not normally
known to the public.
Just for the record, I am unbiased on this whole issue, and I do not
post all precise detail, which is where people tend to "pick up" on
certain issues. Whether the OITC exists or not has yet to be proven. As
yet I have seen no proof that it doesn't exist, despite all the
anti-postings which lack substance. I have seen sufficient pro-OITC
postings, with good information, and have undertaken enormous research
using some of that information.
My opinion, as at this moment, is that the
possibility of the existence of the OITC is beginning to look more real
based upon the evidence I have at hand undertaken by myself, friends in
a police authority, and several others including lawyers, UN officials,
Members of the Queens Court, and Lords of the Realm, even conversations
with OITC people. You can't get much better, or much higher.
Whether I utilize one source or more at the
same time and on the same point, I get the same answers. I have yet to
substantiate any of the anti-OITC comments posted on this Board and in
the Press, but I do admit, I haven't really focused on past histories of
individuals involved, suppositions, conjecture or similar. All research
is based upon pertinent and relevant points that are the Start
Line...... Where the Finish Line is has yet to be seen.
I do not see much effort from other posters to obtain real information.
All I have seen is "Cut and Paste" stuff and simple general information
without much substance."
OITC does not have a web site, it is classified, it has no connection to
Nigeria or any Nigerians.
OITC does not lend money, it is an investor. It takes no fees, NO FEES
at ALL. PER SE it cannot be an advance fee scam, and it does not provide
credits as alleged. Waffelknocker provided proper sources. If you want a
letter from OITC's lawyer, one can be arranged.
Since I cannot comment directly to the discussion re deleting this
article, I hope that my additions to this talk reply are read and
incorporated into the discussion.
Also posted by Chapter 10 on 4/18/06:
To counteract your repetitive old post,
I will also refer partially to the same tactic by reposting the US
Treasury Letter and (something NEW) a retype of the US Treasury
Letter.
(US Treasury Letter)
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f43/ChariotofFire/c86d417a.jpg
(Retype of US Treasury Letter)
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f43/ChariotofFire/Retype-USTReasuryDocument.jpg
As the original Munk letter is partly
illegible I have retyped same so that it is legible.
I can state that Russell L. Munk has now been verified as the
General Counsel, International Department, US Treasury, Washington D.C.
20220, USA, at the date of the letter. Mr Munk, from what I am informed
is no longer with that department, having been moved to head the
department responsible for assisting Iraq is re-establishing their
Treasury and Central Bank. In fact it wasn't long ago that he was
actually in Iraq.
I can also state that this letter has been verified as being issued by
Russell L. Munk, International Division, US Treasury, Washington DC,
20220, USA.
A further letter has now been delivered to
the US Treasury, Senior Counsel US Treasury, Mr Arnold I. Havens. This
letter (following verification of the Munk letter) details specific
pertinent questions more elaborate that the answers contained in Munk's
letter. It will be posted when a response is received.
I can also state that a Police Authority (and not from some two bit
Banana Republic) has undertaken enquiries on both Ray C. Dam and
Keith Scott and have established that these persons are not
crooks, convicts, gangsters, criminals or similar.
Your comments are too long to be incorporated into the discussion, but
I've noted on the discussion that you've made further arguments. --Sam
Blanning(talk) 08:47, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
OITC invests, it does not take anyone's money or property. Since it does
not seek money it is per se not a scam of any financial type .It scams
no party. Either it delivers assets or funds or it does not. The
argument that it is a scam is illogical. Who is it harming? What is
presented by claimants is gossip, speculation and ignorance. No credible
evidence of criminal behavior has ever been presented.
It is interesting that when an institution
offers to do good and help people with concrete assets of independent
valuation and verification that parties smear it. Waffelknocker provided
information that valuable assets were delivered and verified by
reputable financial institutions. Quoting old news stories speculation
about OITC when actual assets have been delivered and verified
subsequent to the news stories is intentionally misleading. OITC has in
fact provided two addresses to the Fiji Government, according to its
lawyer. Waffelknocker has provided an address as well.
I address this to khaosworks. If you have the proper security clearance
and access, the President of China is quite knowledgeable about OITC.
How do I provide the administrators an 11 page history, and how do I
make sure that it cannot be edited by someone else. The file is a
modification locked word file, but I cannot upload it.
RESPONSE TO DISINFORMATION
OITC is not, and never asserted, that it is
part of the Federal Reserve. OITC is Chartered by the UN, it is legally
considered an independent, sovereign jurisdiction.
The Federal Reserve has accounts for
sovereign jurisdictions. No bank may respond to an inquiry about an
account holder without permission of the account holder.
HISTORY
Appointed January 20, 1995 by the Governments of the World to Act as
Sole Arbiter, Owner and Controller of The International Collateral
Combined Accounts of the Global Debt Facility.
The File of H.E. Dr. Ray C. Dam is Secured by U.S. Congress under
3rd Level to the 5th Level Rules, with Appointment and Protective
reaffirmed by the United States Senate. His Excellency Dr. Ray C. Dam is
an International Protected Person.
Elected by those qualified to elect under
the existing International Agreements in accordance with the Articles of
the Bank for International Settlements (January 20, 1930), on January
20, 1995, Dr. Dam was elected and appointed by the International
Community as the Sole Arbiter of all those assets that form the
Collateral of International Combined in conformance to that agreed and
assented to by the forefathers of that community of nations whose
Central Banks are connected to (or were at that time connected to) The
Bank for International Settlements.
These include such agreements as
The Tripartite Trilateral Trillenium Pact
(a Pact between the Kingdoms and Colonial Powers of the World,
London 1921) and subsequent international agreements and revisions
thereof including and not limited to,
-
The Bretton Woods Agreement (New
Hampshire 1944)
-
The B.I.S. Agreement with the Allies
(Bern 1948)
-
The Green Hilton Agreement (Geneva,
1963)
-
The Schweitzer Convention
(Innsbruck, 1968)
-
The Amendments to the Foreign Gold
Act (Washington, 1972)
That the rights and authorities of His
Excellency, Dr. Ray C. Dam are ABSOLUTE and UNLIMITED and entered in the
records of the United Nations and all major Financial Institutions and
Law Enforcement Agencies under International Control No. 10-60847 and
the registration with the Combined Banks Holding the assets of Account,
such record held within,
-
The Federal Reserve System
-
The Department of the Treasury of
the United States of America
-
The Swiss Federal Finance
Administration
-
The Swiss National Bank and certain
commercial banks
All such accounts of the International
Collateral Combined are under the Sole and Arbitrary right of control
that was ceded to His Excellency Dr. Ray C. Dam on January 20, 1995 by
the International Community and exercised through Consolidated Credit
Bank Limited (THIS IS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH A NIGERIAN SCAM THAT WAS RUN
OUT OF LONDON AND STOPPED).
Under these authorities, no decision of the
Federal Reserve or the Department of the Treasury of the United States
or Freddie Mac or of any Holder may usurp the institutional authority of
the Sole Arbiter and Owner.
The right of His Excellency, Dr. Ray C. Dam
is established under an Agreement between Nations with security codes
registered with the United Nations and all major government security and
law enforcement agencies.
More History
See "Brief
Historical Perspective"
- from 'The History of The Powers And Authorities - Of His Excellency
Dr. Ray C. Dam'
