Tuesday, January 02, 2007

Valiant Vacissitudes (12-19-06)

David was a very brave man and fought many a battles. What I love about the knowledge of him from the scriptures is his heart. You could always see his courage but he also had his fears. Though circumstance would justify his fear he would always talk with his soul to keep its eyes upon the promise. He would praise God in advance of the victory. He would act upon his spiritual sight and defy what his eyes saw in the natural. Every champion in faith would like to tell you once he has set his eyes upon the mark of the promise that is where they remained. I wish I could say that about this Dorean cause. I tell you this truth because many of you have a champion’s heart and are besieged by faith crushing circumstance. Vacissitudes are part of the journey. It is these vacillations that cause us to stay turned to His voice and to feed our spirit. How you finish is the key. Just keep a small grip upon the promise and God will do the rest. As the suffering mounts and evil seems endless our hearts faint. Yet will I praise Him! I preach to myself. If my eyes grow dim with doubt I praise to change my focus and see the big picture. He promises strength and a way of escape. Endurance will become a boasting piece for Christ in our lives. You will make it. Faith is the evidence of things not seen but they will be soon. Hang in there champs.

36 comments:

son of a prophet said...

mgoel,

i think that the wanta story is probably true.

its teh arrest of the treas sec that i thought may have been bogus.

regarding wanta and the DG, i think and have alwasy thought that it does have something to do with the setllements.

in fact there are also a number of HYIPs programs that are always saying that payout is just arount the corner, and i thnk they are also waiining for the wanta money.

i dont believe in kim clement beinga propehtess, but we already discussed that so i wont go into it agian. (even if she is right) she may have been just given info and who knows, nowadays could even be an intell agent lol!

i dont believe that there will be a trial in march; for one reason or another. you can call it....war, terroist atack, hurricane, tornado, earthquake,

for whatever reason, there will not be a trial i belveive. i also never believe that the banks/govt. admit to anything. when they are wrong, they just ignore enforcemetn of somethng.

for example, say that the govt. wanted to admit that income taxes were never autheorised by the govt.

they would then NEVER come out and say this, what they wuld do is just not prosecute those that dont pay, sort of a "defacto' method of doing it. as word spread, eventually no one would pay them. this is how it wold be done. same for the DG i bleive, some type of defacto admission by non performacne. perhaps they wuld just let everyone who could not pay they mtg. not be froeclosed upon or something like this.

son of a prophet said...

and for hab,

the latest on the hoosayne thing is that they hung a "double" of whosayin and that he is in syria.

could he be the ac who the bible say "sustain a mortal wound, but reappers (and is healed)

hanging by you neck is certanitly a "mortal wound"

son of a prophet said...

and what the deal with fmr pres fyords funeral??

i mean the 3 major netwoks and the various cable (controlled network news, etc.) are ALL carryng it.

what up wioth that?

waht they trying to tell us?

just a funral, now big deal.

for 5+ major notworks to carry it?

cmon, it no gorge wishington here. lol

i mean, really, who warches 3 hours of a funeral, i don care HWO IT IS???

guess the nitworks must fugure that ppl will wathc grass grwo and paint dry while they watdching they fingernils grow. lol

son of a prophet said...

"they would then NEVER come out and say this, what they wuld do is just not prosecute those that dont pay, sort of a "defacto' method of doing it..."



as example of this, look at all the laws still on the books agisnt...kissing in pubic, or sodomy or ......

they never bothered to take these law off books, they just dont enforce/proscute them any more.

will be same type of deal with mtgs too "i blieve"

i say that "i believe" becuse while not at a loss, i do not claim to be a profit.

Stillwaiting said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Stillwaiting said...

Wow, four post by SOP - Who the heck are you talking to or with? My gosh man get a grip.
This Blog is about the DG, Mortgage cancellation not the second coming nor a study in theology. I know as have attended that class and more.
Kurt - facts only. I am not your disciple I am unfortunately a client who is on the brink of losing his home.

son of a prophet said...

"Wow, four post by SOP - Who the heck are you talking to..."

hab, moogel, ?? and ???

by the way...where you just come from???

forget the DG, it all over. just need to hurry up and wait, is all.

nohting else to say about it.

son of a prophet said...

will you get you meney by 2011-12??

everyone who go on coast to caost with goerge noory say taht by 2011-12 it will be all over.

so hipe you get you house back by then, or it will too late.

also US dollar will be only good to wip you *ss with. cheper than byuing toilt paper....lolo

Tony Tuba said...

Can someone please send SOP a computer virus?

Stillwaiting said...

He needs a dictionary or a thesaurus or something that get help him spell and make some kind of sense. Does SOP know that this blog has spell check. That is half the battle for him.

on another note: I will send a blog either later today or early tomorrow about the other companies I know that are attempting to do the mortgage cancellation and have not only failed but no longer stay in touch with their client base. Like that was hard to figure out.

son of a prophet said...

Sherri H said...
Can someone please send SOP a computer virus?

my cputer already had the flue; dont need to get a virus already.

if you computer get sick, get some chaep antibioptics on the net.

jsut take 2 capulses 3x a day.

you computer will be jsut fine.....

son of a prophet said...

oh, by the way.....

HIPPY NEW YAER TO YOU TOO

cherry h

son of a prophet said...

is this has became a relgious blob, o what??

all they talk about is relgoin.

we need info in the GD montage discrimination porject, not mo relgious carp.

this is my last post.


NOT!

son of a prophet said...

i thing taht we all need to take a very long vaccine, and get sun rest.

everyone is tired to post.

tcob247 said...

No........

they are just tired of reading your crap

Peanut Gallery said...

Well ,well, well. After spending the last six months away from this blog, I see that absolutly nothing has changed. (big ol suprise there)

Kurt is ranting as to how God is totally on his side, and he has done nothing wrong.

Mogel is still defending the "Proven method" we all were led to believe had been tested a 1000 times.

SOP is still spewing the same old clap trap. SOP, what you don't know could fill an encyclopedia, give it a rest moron.

imbigo is still figuring ways to cook crow so it will be more paletable, to him no doubt.

And where oh where is Will to Fight? He must have lost the will and moved on to another scam.

tcob, and neo. Hey guys, you seem to be reasonable intelligent human beings. Why are you wasting your time with these loosers.

See you all in six months. I bet it will still be the same ol BS

mogel said...

I'll bet things will be different in 6 months.

habakkuk said...

Update on Paulson arrest:

PAULSON AND CHENEY SUBPOENAED BY TRIBUNAL
Saturday 30 December 2006 20:05
2nd January 2007: Henry M. Paulson appeared late at the National Cathedral service for the late President Ford, and took a seat behind Nancy Reagan and next to Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice. US and British sources inform us that Paulson was exfiltrated from Europe on a British plane.

We are expecting to receive spectacular REconfirmation of the arrest and indictment of the US Secretary of the Treasury shortly. In the meantime, those Americans who, deceived for years by their intelligence community, cannot accept that we publish only what has been carefully verified, and who believe that we are another intelligence disinformation site, will have to back off and face up to the realities of the situation. If correctly handled, the developments are going to be hugely beneficial for the United States and for the Rest of the World. If malevolently handled, there will be a hyperinflation in the United States, soup kitchens, and a global depression. Stay tuned...

habakkuk said...

More Comments on the Paulson Story (especially for you SOP):

UPDATE NOTE, 1st January 2007: We have had a very large number of emails from the United States, mainly, and the question repeatedly asked is: WHY IS THE 'MAINSTREAM MEDIA' not covering this? DON'T ASK US: ASK THE 'MAINSTREAM MEDIA'. We are not in a position to answer this question. The other question asked is: Can you verify this? Excuse us? How can any of this be published if it is not accurate at the time of posting? Do not confuse this site with your familiar run-of-the-mill US intelligence diversion and disinformation website. Instead of asking us such crude questions, may we suggest that people who, without a cause, suggest we are liars, are laying themselves open to risk, since such allegations can be addressed in the English Court, where the laws of libel are much more stringent than in the United States. Finally, ALL the relevant documents and back-up information are available in International Currency Review, Volume 31, Numbers 3 and 4 [December 2006], and also in International Currency Review, Volume 30, Numbers 2 and 3 [January 2005]. We are a UK commercial organisation and we will NOT provide free copies of these issues. We will accept and fulfil bona fide subscription/special issue orders. Criticism of what has been posted WITHOUT studying the FACTS published in International Currency Review is reckless and unwise. Neither is it to be recommended in this rapidly moving and unfolding crisis.


By Christopher Story FRSA, Editor and Publisher, International Currency Review, World Reports Limited, London and New York: www.worldreports.org.

son of a prophet said...

"No........

they are just tired of reading your crap"


thanx. tcrap. gald to know that you read it!

son of a prophet said...

hab,

the story story may or may not be true, but you lose ground with some of the stuff that is siad in tht article, like.....

"TCOB IS AN IDIOT"

can you verify this?

"YES, HE IS AN IDIOT BECASUE I SAID SO."

even if it is true, you lose ground with comments like they are going to "sue" bloggers who post tht the story story may be false.

i mean, cmon hab?

as bad as the mainstream media is, even THEY would not pay seroius attention to bloggers comments, doncha think?

even the DG is not treatening to sue this blog with some of the anti DG comments made here.

i guess i shuld sue tboc for the statements he made as libelous.

now, having said this, i am not saying that the story is flase either, just that the anti NWO site would/will pick it up.

plus, a reporter must remain unbiased as well. you cannot report a stroy and then say its bad news for the dollar if they dont get this guy, sopu kithcnes, etc.

even if that is the case, you still cant say it and keep you crediblilty.

son of a prophet said...

there are also a lot of questjons that i would ask.

if he was arrested and indicted, why is he back in the USA?

and why would britain fly him back?

do they paln on re arresting him while in the USA, and if so, would the USA hand him back over?

and the currency reviewo is right that most ppl in the usa would regard this as a "disinfo" story and rightgully so.

if its true, just report the facts and let that speak for itself; dont worry about what bloggers think.

jsut like the DG, dont worry trying to cinvince the bloggers here; only one thingk going to shut them up: SHOW ME THE MONEY!

until then, let them all talk as you cant silence them until then. dont worry about what they think.

same for the worldreport.org

just print what you know and dont worry, as you never going to convince every 100% anyway, even if it is TRUE. just TCOB. TAKE CARE OF BUSINESS AND BUSINESS WILL TAKE CARE OF YOU.

son of a prophet said...

and another hting, an "arrest" may not mean anyting as it a "prtoective arrest"

maybe he is in real danger, so the best place is behind bars where they can wahtch him and protect him if he really wont realese the money. so this too could be false flag "setup"

which would mean that the arresting countries are complicit in the process too.

son of a prophet said...

rember, the bible say too, that in the last days, they will say...

"come here, yeshua is here, go there, yeshua is there"

yeshua said, dont beleive any of it. when its really me, believe me, "YOU WILL KNOW IT AND HAVE NO DOUBT"

habakkuk said...

Great post Kurt.....Keep the faith!

Pauligirl said...

Another "vapour money" case loses. Thanks to Judge Roy Bean for posting it.

2006 Ohio 6744
Wells Fargo Bank, NA successor by merger to Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Theresa Ward aka Theresa S. Ward et al., Defendants-Appellants.
No. 06AP-745.
Court of Appeals of Ohio, Tenth District, Franklin County.
Rendered on December 19, 2006.

APPEAL from the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas, C.P.C. No. 05CVE09-9912.
Lerner, Sampson & Rothfuss, and Pamela S. Petas, for appellee.
Theresa Ward, pro se.

OPINION
BROWN, J.
{¶1} This is an appeal by defendant-appellant, Theresa Ward, from a judgment of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas denying appellant's motion to vacate.
{¶2} On September 9, 2005, plaintiff-appellee, Wells Fargo Bank, as successor to Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc., filed a complaint in foreclosure, alleging that appellant was in default on a promissory note secured by a mortgage on certain real property. The complaint alleged a balance due in the amount of $65,902.74, plus interest and costs. Appellee attached to the complaint a copy of the promissory note and the mortgage deed.
{¶3} On October 6, 2005, appellant filed a pro se motion to dismiss, also styled as an "Answer," asserting in part that appellee's "exhibit `A' was a mere copy that a note may exist," and that "[o]nly a certified copy of the original by an in camera inspection would prove that plaintiff is holder in due course." Appellant's motion/answer also requested that the trial court dismiss the action because "payment in full was rendered September 5, 2005."
{¶4} On November 10, 2005, appellee filed a response to the motion to dismiss, as well as a motion for summary judgment. Attached to appellee's motion for summary judgment was the affidavit of Joe Edlund, an "Attorney in Fact of EMC Mortgage Corporation as servicing agent for Wells Fargo Bank[.]" In the affidavit, Edlund averred that appellee was the holder of a note and mortgage, and that appellant was in default under the terms of those instruments. Attached to the motion for summary judgment were copies of a note and mortgage, as well as a payment history/schedule.
{¶5} On November 23, 2005, appellant filed a "Brief in opposition" to appellee's motion for summary judgment. In her brief, appellant set forth an "affidavit," averring that she was not in receipt of any documents verifying that appellee was the holder of a promissory note, or verifying that she was in default on such note. Appellant also averred that she was not in receipt "of any document that my payment in full has been dishonored or proof of claim from the Secretary of the Treasury." Attached to appellant's brief was a copy of a document titled "International Bill of Exchange (UNCITRAL Convention)."
{¶6} On December 15, 2005, appellee filed a response to appellant's brief. Appellee also requested that the trial court strike appellant's "affidavit" to her brief on the basis that it was not notarized.
{¶7} On January 5, 2006, the trial court filed an entry granting appellee's motion for summary judgment. On February 14, 2006, appellant filed a "Rule 52 Motion for findings of facts and conclusions of law." In the motion, appellant asserted that the judgment of foreclosure "is void on its face, and as has been repeatedly ruled by the Oklahoma Supreme Court, is worthless, conveying no right, title, or interest." On April 18, 2006, the trial court filed a decision and entry denying appellant's motion for findings of fact and conclusions of law.
{¶8} The subject property was subsequently sold at a sheriff's sale; on May 4, 2006, the trial court filed a journal entry confirming the sale. On May 11, 2006, appellant filed a "petition in the nature of a motion to vacate a void judgment."
{¶9} In the motion, appellant asserted that: (1) the trial court "interfered with Defendant's contract rights by issuing said judgment"; (2) that appellee "did not produce the in-camera inspection of the original wet ink promissory note"; and (3) that appellee "gave no facts or documents to prove they still hold, or ever did hold the original promiss[o]ry note." Appellee filed a response to appellant's motion on May 17, 2006, asserting that appellant had failed to show any meritorious defense of the foreclosure, nor any grounds for relief under Civ.R. 60(B). By entry filed July 11, 2006, the trial court denied appellant's "petition in the nature of a motion to vacate a void judgment."
{¶10} On appeal, appellant sets forth the following single assignment of error for this court's review:
The lower court erred by denying Appellant's Petition in the Nature of a Motion to Vacate a Void Judgment.
{¶11} In her pro se appellate brief, appellant acknowledges that she entered into a financing agreement with appellee, including a promissory note and mortgage. Appellant argues, however, that "[a]t no time in this mortgage transaction did the Appellant receive any real money that is legal tender in America from Appellee as contemplated by the loan agreement." Appellant contends that "without color of right, and in violation of the Constitution and Federal Acts, Appellee created money out of nothing, and for purposes of defrauding the Appellant, used the `created' money and fraudulently entered same into the Appellant's account as a `loan' charged to the Appellant equivalent to the promissory note received by the Appellant." Appellant further argues that appellee loaned "[n]o money or substance of any value" to her, rather, she asserts "merely bookkeeping and computer entries were `loaned.' "
{¶12} Appellant requests that this court "[i]ssue a declaration" that the loan and mortgage agreements are void for lack of consideration. Appellant further requests a declaration that appellee has no standing to bring this action, and that any alleged debts incurred by appellant be hereby discharged.
{¶13} In the instant case, the trial court denied appellant's "petition in the nature of a motion to vacate a void judgment" on the basis that she failed to state a meritorious defense to the foreclosure; additionally, the court found that appellant failed to show she was entitled to relief under one of the grounds set forth in Civ.R. 60(B)(1) through (5).
{¶14} In order to prevail on a motion for relief from judgment, pursuant to Civ.R. 60(B), a movant is required to demonstrate that: (1) the party has a meritorious defense to present if relief is granted; (2) the party is entitled to relief under one of the grounds stated in Civ.R. 60(B)(1) through (5); and (3) the motion is made within a reasonable time, and, where the grounds of relief are Civ.R. 60(B)(1), (2) or (3), not more than one year after the judgment was entered or taken. GTE Automatic Elec., Inc. v. ARC Industries (1976), 47 Ohio St.2d 146, paragraph two of the syllabus.
{¶15} The question whether relief should be granted is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court. Rose Chevrolet, Inc. v. Adams (1988), 36 Ohio St.3d 17, 20. Thus, an appellate court reviews a trial court's denial of a Civ.R. 60(B) motion under an abuse of discretion standard. Medina Supply Co., Inc. v. Dig It Foundations, Ltd. (Apr. 3, 2002), Summit App. No. 20685.
{¶16} Upon review, we find no abuse of discretion by the trial court in denying appellant's motion to vacate. At the outset, we agree with appellee's contention that appellant seeks to raise issues on appeal that she did not bring before the trial court. In general, "a party cannot raise issues for the first time on appeal that were not raised below." Home Savings & Loan Co. v. Captiva Hong Kong, Ltd., Mahoning App. No. 03 MA 167, 2004-Ohio-6375, at ¶32. We further note that appellant did not appeal from the trial court's grant of summary judgment, and "a motion for relief from judgment pursuant to Civ.R. 60(B) may not be used as a substitute for a timely appeal." Manigault v. Ford Motor Co. (1999), 134 Ohio App.3d 402, 412.
{¶17} Even assuming that the issues appellant now raises on appeal had been properly preserved for review, appellant would still be unable to demonstrate a meritorious defense or that she was entitled to relief under one of the grounds set forth in Civ.R. 60(B). As noted above, appellant contends that the agreements she entered into with appellee are void because she did not receive any "legal tender," and because nothing of value was loaned to her; rather, appellant maintains the transaction by appellee was based upon a mere bookkeeping entry.
{¶18} Courts in other jurisdictions have consistently rejected this "so-called `vapor money' theory." Frances Kenny Family Trust v. World Savings Bank, FSB (N.D.Cal. Jan. 19, 2005), No. C 04-03724 WHA, unreported. In Demmler v. Bank One, NA (S.D.Ohio Mar. 9, 2006), No. 2:05-CV-322, unreported, in which the defendants made a similar argument as appellant in the instant appeal, that court discussed this theory as follows:
* * * [T]he Court concludes that the complaint is utterly frivolous and lacks any legal foundation whatsoever. * * * Suffice it to say that all of Plaintiff's claims * * * stem from the same basic premise. Plaintiff alleges that the promissory note he executed is the equivalent of "money" that he gave to the bank. He contends that Bank One took his "money," i.e., the promissory note, deposited it into its own account without his permission, listed it as an "asset" on its ledger entries, and then essentially lent his own money back to him. He contends that Bank One did not actually have the funds available to lend to him, but instead "created" the money through its bookkeeping procedures. He further argues that because Bank One was never at risk, and provided no consideration, the promissory note is void ab initio, and Defendants' attempts to foreclose on the mortgage are therefore unlawful.
Plaintiff offers no authority for this patently ludicrous argument. Similar arguments have been rejected by federal courts across the country. See Frances Kenny Family Trust v. World Savings Bank, No. C04-03724 WHA, 2005 WL 106792 (N.D.Cal. Jan. 19, 2005) (sanctioning plaintiffs and rejecting their "vapor money" theory); Carrington v. Federal Nat'l Mortgage Ass'n, No. 05-cv-73429-DT, 2005 WL 3216226, at 3 (E.D.Mich. Nov. 29, 2005) (finding "fundamentally absurd and obviously frivolous" plaintiff's claim that the lender unlawfully "created money" through its ledger entries); United States v. Schiefen, 926 F.Supp. 877, 880-81 (D.S.D.1995) (rejecting arguments that there was insufficient consideration to secure the promissory note, and that lender had "created money" by means of a bookkeeping entry); * * * Rene v. Citibank, 32 F.Supp.2d 539, 544-45 (E.D.N.Y.1999) (rejecting claims that because lender did not have sufficient funds in its vault to make the loan, and merely "transferred some book entries," the lender had created illegal tender).
{¶19} In addition to rejecting arguments that creditors have created "vapor" money through bookkeeping entries, courts have further rejected the "legal tender" argument also raised by appellant in this case. See, e.g., Thiel v. First Federal Savings & Loan Assoc. of Marion (N.D.Ind. 1986), 646 F.Supp. 592, 596 ("A check issued by a mortgagee need not be `legal tender' for the loan to be valid. Far from suggesting any fraudulent conduct, the drafts issued by the Savings and Loan in this case accomplished the only conceivable purpose of the transaction: they allowed [plaintiff] to buy the properties at issue"); Rene v. Citibank (E.D.N.Y. 1999), 32 F.Supp.2d 539, 544 ("there is no requirement that a loan must be made with legal tender before a court will deem it valid"); Nixon v. Individual Head of the St. Joseph Mortgage Co. (N.D.Ind. 1985), 615 F.Supp. 898, 900 ("a bank or mortgage company check can be converted into legal tender. * * * It represents a liability of the company, so that the Mortgage Company has in fact given something of value — it's promise to pay the face amount of the check").
{¶20} Based upon the foregoing, appellant did not present a meritorious defense, nor show she was entitled to relief under any of the grounds set forth under Civ.R. 60(B), and the trial court did not err in denying the motion to vacate. Accordingly, appellant's single assignment of error is overruled, and the judgment of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas is hereby affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
Sadler and Whiteside, JJ., concur.
Whiteside, J., retired of the Tenth Appellate District, assigned to active duty under authority of Section 6(C), Article IV, Ohio Constitution

mogel said...

SOP said: "could he be the ac who the bible say "sustain a mortal wound, but reappers (and is healed)"
__________________________________
You're not inferring that they hung Sadaam Hussein's twin double, or the wrong man, are you?

son of a prophet said...

OK, heres the dope on the "wanta story"

as i write, the current guest on the coast to coast show is sean david morton who claims to be a remote viewer (cia opertive??)

he claims that tom cruise will star in a holly wood movie called "charlie wilsons war" about the reagan destabilation of the russian ruble and the wanta money.

he claims that the wanta issue almost caused the shutdown of wachovia bank on nov. 18 '06

he claims that the wanta $4.5T is being bounced around from bank to bank with each bank holdoing it overnight and earning mucho $$$$ from doing this.

lastly he claims that china is threatinenng to pay it off, but the USA is telling china with an oil embargo.

if china pays off the 4.5T, the US dollar immediately collapses and the us goes immediately to the "amero" good in the usa, canada and mexico.

so, there it is, you heard it here first.

so if wanta pay the DG m;oney, you will then need $1 milloin just to fill up you gas tank with worthless dollars! lol!

i believe that morton is cia, if he is right, as only someone on the inside could get this type of info and i dont put much crediblblty into remote viewing.

he also calims to have made 18 months of correct currency calls turning $70K into $3.5millon

www.coasttocoastam.com

sean david morton/remote viewers site is below:

www.delphiassociates.com

son of a prophet said...

lastly he claims that china is threatinenng to pay it off, but the USA is telling china with an oil embargo

"threatening china with an oil embargo..."

mogel said...

"Another 'vapour money' case loses."
______________________________

When you can't get the original promissory note, and you can't get the actual accounting records from the bank, it's difficult to prove the facts and truth that the Court so desperately wants to avoid and ignore and pass off as fiction.

Another court case losing is not surprising! When you fight an unfair system, one should expect to lose unless you come in with a fresh and new approach with new tactics untried before.

I wonder if Theresa Ward is any relation to the Robert E. Ward in the Banc One court case in Florida not too many years ago that was overturned in the bank's favor in the appellant court?

mogel said...

SOP said: "lastly he claims that china is threatinenng to pay it off,"
__________________________________
And China would pay the Leo Wanta trust funds because.....?

mogel said...

SOP said: "if china pays off the 4.5T, the US dollar immediately collapses"
_______________________________

I hate to think that is the likely scenario. Only 4.5 Trillion causes a collapse of the mighty US Dollar, "the envy of the rest of the world?" Wasn't it said in earlier Wanta articles that the 4.5 trillion grew to some ridiculous figure like 76 trillion or so by the banks investing the original amount that was stolen? Can the system be so leveraged out now that only 4.5 trillion needing to be paid, causes a collapse? Is the Federal Reserve System, who protect the dollar, really that stupid with their money & haven't forseen this possibility or they have no remedy other than replacing the dollar with another currency?

Let's say that 4.5 trillion isn't paid in any short time frame, let's say, maybe it's paid out in installments? Then what?

Do you think if the US debt doubles from say 8.5 trillion to 17 trillion, that this would cause a collapse in & of itself or what US debt figure makes all of the cards to fall down? How long would a collapse take just the way things are going now disregarding the Wanta scenarios?

Yetter said...

Vapour momey,inded,what else was the court supposed to do, tell the truth. It only enforces the magnitude of the problem.The court must defend the status quo.

son of a prophet said...

mog,

i guess that china is threatening to pay it off as they have been flooded and ovefull with USD and the other countrtires russia and iran etc. are using the ero in oil transactons and china doesnt want to get left out.

everyone knows that when the usa stopped putting out the mney supply fiugres, like M-3 that they financed thwo whole war with "monopoly money" ie., that they just ran the presses 24/7 to print wotrthless moeny. that is my guess.

now having had tiem to think about it, the bible called it agian.

ONE WORLD GOVT.
ONE WORLD ECONOMY
ONE WORLD RELIGION

well, now you cant have ONE WORLD ECONOMY without a ONE WORLD CURRENCY now can you?

europe has abolished borders and gone to one currency EURO, or ERO in eurpoe as they call it.

well, same deal here...norht americas, no borders and one currency, AMERO, or american euro.
all makes perfrct sense. so no matter what reason they give, the die is already cast to go to one currency, the amero.

how this all affects the DG settlement, we will have to see....

whatdoyoumean said...

Activist judges make rulings all the time. Recently the voters in California overwhelmingly supported a ballot to make marriage be defined as man and woman. An activist judge just ruled that it was unconstitutional and is allowing homosexual marriages. It is amazing how the constitution can be used and ignored depending upon how the judge personally feels about the issue. Even when "We The People" dictate what we want, a judge can change it, but then violate the same document and pass something we wouldn't support.

mogel said...

"According to some estimates, we cannot track 2.3 trillion in transactions"
Donald Rumsfeld 2002


http://www.solari.com/learn/
articles_missingmoney.htm