Deryl Zeleny’s Campaign Against Legal and Financial Corruption in Canada
An Interview with Chris Hales
Chris: Hi everybody, it's Chris from the Collective Imagination. Today I'm speaking with Deryl Zeleny. Deryl is one of the great supporters of the OPPT process that’s been taking place and has been doing some pretty incredible things in the background at great personal expense and some personal risk. I'm here essentially to document the first part of his story, because I think we're going to have to do this in more than one bite. Well, I do hope to actually end up with a description of where he is today, because there’s some interesting things happening right now in his particular life. So good morning Deryl.
Deryl: Good morning Chris, how are you?
Chris: I'm fine. It's about 8:30 in the morning for you?
Deryl: Yes it is.
Chris: You're at the moment sitting in a house that is yours, was unlawfully stolen from you which you've just repossessed?
Deryl: That's correct. I came back; found that one of my machines worth about $26,000 was stolen from here so I've taken my home back.
Chris: How many days ago was it repossessed or should I say stolen from you?
Deryl: As I understand from one of my friends they actually, the sheriff or someone, took the vehicle or took the skid steer from the yard the day after the police were here to evict me. So within one day.
Chris: So they had already planned that in advance obviously.
Deryl: They may have, yes. It’s a valuable machine on the market, so the bailiff or whoever came in and took it. Now this is in addition to ... I have another property with a shop. I have a complete cabinet shop and tractor trailers there. Last week I was driving past and I noticed a tow truck over at my shop. I had stopped in to ask the driver and the gentleman there what was happening. They indicated to me that this guy was a bailiff and he was there to take the vehicles and clean up the yard. I asked him to drop the vehicle and asked him for identification. They refused to give it to me. They refused to give me paperwork and then we phoned the police department.
Waiting there for 20 or 30 minutes, I was talking to the driver. I said I have no arguments with you I know you're hired, but show me some paperwork which they really didn't have. He also indicated to me that they were there earlier in the morning. They'd stolen another truck out of one of the bays. It's a two bay shop. Anyway the police arrived about 30 minutes after and I indicated who I was. I was the owner and I was peacefully under the criminal code defending my land. These gentlemen were here and they have stolen a vehicle, a truck out of one bay and they are hooked onto the other one. I said this is theft. He indicated to me he was a bailiff, which he is not. I asked him to show paperwork, which they did not have. The police officer went over and asked him for any paperwork. He had nothing, asked him to drop the vehicle and leave. Said it was a civil matter and please do not bother the police again.
Chris: So that's two properties. You actually have three properties at the moment that are going through the courts in this incredible production line theft system that they've got going in Canada for automatically putting any property the bank decides to foreclose upon through the courts without any paperwork or court cases actually really being submitted to, paperwork being submitted to the court or any court cases really taking place.
Deryl: Yeah, no trial actually takes place, no evidence is presented. They actually deny you the ability to present evidence in court, so what it is is an administrative foreclosure. It's just a rubber stamp. The bank does not prove or provide any documentation of the original note, original signed signature because that is monetized and sold over and over again and bundled. I have gone through two procedures one in Superior Court in Ottawa and the other one in Hamilton, Ontario.
Chris: Neither of the courts would even really review the case, let alone have a trial.
Deryl: That’s right. Evidence was put forth and it was completely ignored. We have the endorsement from both judges and at the closing the judge said it was the interest in supporting our system that they denied me trial. I'll send that to you Chris.
Chris: Yeah, the interest in supporting their system, that is the system where they're actually unlawfully stealing things from people and enriching themselves, that system. That's the system they're supporting.
Deryl: That's correct. The corrupt system. They have to keep the integrity of the corrupt system going in order to keep them funded.
Chris: Outstanding. So there's a third property involved.
Deryl: Yeah, that is a condominium or an apartment block. It's a four-plex unit. I've had renters in there. After I found out about the semi fraud with respect to mortgages in the financial system, I stopped paying the mortgage on that one. Well actually all three and said to the tenants basically as long as they cover the utilities and stuff they didn't have to pay me rent.
Chris: How long ago did you actually cease paying your mortgages?
Deryl: Ok, well I guess we gotta jump back a little bit of history here. I spent four years in the army and 22 years in the Air Force.
Chris: In that order?
Deryl: Yes. Ok. I retired in 2007 and while I was working, I had built up my business. I was an Operations-I was a pilot first. I flew overseas and all the fun spots; like North Africa, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Turkey, Tabuti(sp). (laughs)
Chris: What kind of aircraft were you flying Deryl?
Deryl: I flew the C-130 in those missions. Relief support and tactical operations, special operations and stuff like that. Actually was in the first Gulf War and then I flew for three months in Northern Iraq helping to support the Kurds in their liberation.
Chris: So you’ve really been in the thick of it over the years.
Deryl: Yeah, I was held captive in Iran for three days. That was at the end of the Iran/Iraq war, '88 or '89 I think. I was also supporting operations in the late '80's into Pakistan when they were trying to overthrow the Russians.
Chris: So you've been in a very long-term military service. That's quite a long military career actually. How many years was it?
Deryl: It was 26, just shy of 27 years total.
Chris: 27 years. So after 27 years of service you retired and you had a request to come back to do a special project.
Deryl: Yeah, I was requested to go back to NDHQ. There were still jobs that were available to me because of my skill set. The one that they needed work done was the defense of Canada. Between 2015 and 2030 basically, a staff paper and a study determining what threats were to Canada and what equipment, manpower and technologies.
Chris: How long was the project?
Deryl: Well, I started the project before...I never did go...I'm in the Reserve now. I never did go back in active service at NDHQ, because of what I found. So that would have commenced, my investigation would have commenced in 2011 I believe. I had, years ago I had worked with a lawyer as an assisting officer. What an assisting officer does is track and collect data for court cases. I had been taught to follow the money. So what I was doing is visiting various chat rooms, Islamic groups, etc and just trying to get a feel for what was happening out there and also tracking gold shipments, money shipments, looking at Swift transfers and seeing where the money came from and where it went to.
Chris: So you were asked to essentially research and write a paper which would have been your opinion based on the research for what represents a real threat to Canada for the next say five-six years, so that they could budget and organize for those threats. Was that the thrust of it?
Deryl: That’s right.
Chris: So you actually proceeded because of your background with this lawyer you proceeded amongst other things to watch money trails.
Deryl: Money trails, also gold shipments are a big thing because...
Chris: How do you track gold shipments?
Deryl: Well, the data is out there and at the year-end shipments between countries, settlements are done with gold. Swift transfers are another thing. I have some contacts overseas too and you just get a kind of feel and you build a data base and you see what's shifting back and forth. What concerned me was what was happening back in North America. It kept snapping me back here to North America. When you do a threat assessment, you look at what your enemy is doing or what you think your enemy’s doing. What he's building up. He's building up equipment, ammunition, food stocks, increasing enrollments for instance. That was actually happening in the United States which I found as a shock. For instance, they were ordering MRE's, which is meals ready to eat at an alarming rate. Well why do you need those for domestic use? Why do you need blankets? Why do you need all sorts of other things?
Chris: Well there's one stage somewhere in 2011 with our buying large numbers of plastic coffins as well.
Deryl: Yes that’s right. Talking with contractors who have been down to the southern states. They actually showed me the video. Because he has excavators he stopped in ... I guess it was one cemetery and there hundreds of cement coffins buried in the ground and another portion of the cemetery that had already been covered over. So they were preparing for some sort of disaster. Whether natural or man-made, we don't know.
Chris: Ok, so how many months did you track, were you getting the feel and tracking financial movements and looking at what was going on around you?
Deryl: 2011 up until 2012, like April of 2012 when I came to my assessments. Also we're tracking, the other thing is payment in weapons, opium and the drug trade. That's a huge financial income for the black operators and for terrorist operations.
Chris: Ok, so at some point during that process you realized that ... well let me put it to you as a question. Did you realize that the governments that were involved were being, if you like, manipulated by external forces? That what was going on with governments was really being controlled by, not by the administration of those organizations? By something outside?
Deryl: At that time yeah ,based on my threat assessment. My threat assessment, I went to see a justice or judge to show him what I had found. My assessment was the threat to Canada was the existing so-called government and the banking institution here in Canada. What I had gone through is a series of government documents, court cases over the last, well since 1930 and bringing me right up to February of 2012 when I was looking at what the government was issuing in bonds. I'll give you as example. There was a six billion dollar bond issue to the various banks, we'll call it six banks and what they had done is they'd written it as a bookkeeping entry. No loans were ever transferred, but it was a three-month interest payment which I found odd, okay? They're not (inaudible) certificates, but every three months they would pay these six banks the interest on that 6 million dollars and this is taxpayer money. So I describe it as kiting checks. at the taxpayers’ expense. This is only one bond. That was listed, that bond was, one of it was HSBC and HSBC of course has been under investigation and has been indicted and fined $1.95, I think, billion dollars for drug money laundering and interest rate rigging. Along with Coutts Bank, that’s the queen’s bank in England and Wachovia and other financial institutions.
Chris: Your conclusion was based on financial movements, gold movements, drug movements, arms sales, government policies, bank policies, and you could see that what was being purported in the main stream media and I guess in standard government reporting to be the activities of the government was not what was going on.
Deryl: It was the exact opposite. Okay? When you follow the money, see what’s actually happening and the numbers just don't add up. For instance, what they spent on the G8 and G20. What was reported to the media, what was actually spent, the money was going somewhere? Now I didn't chase it down, my assessment was what is the threat to the sovereignty of this country? Well the main threat is the alleged government and the banking industry. I also determined that I found by research and actually talking to the Bank of Canada how much they had in gold reserves. It's only three tons and they had sold this over the years, all of Canada's gold reserves through a deal in the 1930's, 1936 through the protocols for the Bank of International Settlements to get rid of the treasury of gold here in Canada. So we have nothing backing it up. We only have three tons of gold and that would have been as of last fall.
Chris: So do you see that as a move to deliberately weaken the economy of Canada? Or is it just a matter of North America?
Deryl: When I found this out, then we look at Russia, or I'm sorry the Soviet Union, same sort of plan was initiated with the Soviet Union. It was a total of, Chris, of 37 countries that I could seriously identify and say this was the plan to systematically destabilize the economy of the country, force it into bankruptcy and then the investors of the private banks can come in and they now own it.
Chris: Knowing that these countries are also corporations.
Deryl: Yes, so the interest is to support the people. However the interest of a corporation is to make money for the investors.
Chris: Did you ever, when you were investigating, sorry to interrupt, but this is a burning question I have because it cuts across the board in regard to corporate nations. Did you get any kind of information on who actually owns the corporation that is Canada? Who are the owners of that organization?
Deryl: Well, if you follow the SEC that would be the United States, because that's where they're registered. Of course, the United States Act of 1871 would probably be the Congress and House of Windsor and of course we take the House of Windsor to the Vatican.
Chris: Hmmm. Ok. Well that means that countries like Australia are also in that same boat, because this country’s Commonwealth, the company that is this country, is also registered in Washington DC.
Deryl: Yes that’s right.
Chris: Ok. No great surprise there. So you brought yourself to a point where you were ready to submit your report, you created your report. Your report said that the greatest threat to the sovereignty’s nation is the government itself and the banks.
Deryl: That's correct. I went to see a judge to seek advice of how to proceed, because when you find treasonous acts done by your alleged government where do you go? What do you do? So I said well we can start, we need to get this on public record. We need to get this in the court and I guess at the lower end with systemic fraud within a mortgage system. I said well I have three mortgages. I just won't pay the mortgages. We'll get an opportunity to get it into court and we'll present this evidence, but join the note etc and the judge said to me, he said Deryl, it's gonna take too long. You're gonna have to go to the media. So we talked a little bit. He said I can't touch the file. He says I know you're a good officer you know exactly what to do. We left it at that. He did read some of the documents, but it was a hot potato. He couldn't get really involved and I turned my evidence over to the RCMP. I briefed them. They had the whole package. I said this is fraud and needs to be investigated by their criminal or commercial fraud division and look at what the government is actually doing issuing bonds etc. at taxpayers’ expense.
Chris: Now what month did you actually see the judge in 2012?
Deryl: I'm going to say it was around April or May. I can't remember right now.
Chris: Okay, and...
Deryl: Okay, it would've been April because it's (been) a year.
Chris: Yep, and how soon after that did you actually submit your information to the RCMP?
Deryl: Well, that very next day.
Chris: Right. So about a year ago you submitted it to them. Now the judge obviously wasn't going to touch it. What did the RCMP do with it? And by the RCMP for people... for Canada it's the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, which is essentially the police force of the country.
Deryl: Yeah, they are the 4th branch of the armed services in Canada. They have the Navy, the Air Force, the Army and of course the fourth one being the RCMP. So it is a national force.
Chris: Mm hmm. Would you call it a police force or is it something a little bit different to what we would consider a police force in a country like Australia? Because Australia has state police and then a smaller, federal police force. So would it be an equivalent of our federal police?
Deryl: Yes, so it would be your federal police.
Chris: Yep. Did they take any action? Were they even interested in talking to you about it?
Deryl: They took the information, all the data, government documents that I collected and I have not heard back. I did my mission and the other portion which the judge suggested, was informing media, much like yourself, articles going out there, government documents going out there that you see on the blogs, etc.
Chris: Did you actually attempt to talk to any of the mainstream media in Canada?
Deryl: Oh yes, Fox News, Sun News, CBC. I believe I sent you emails back and forth with documentation to CBC. They've taken no action. Mainstream media in the US: CNN, RT News.
Chris: Did any of them even come and talk to you?
Deryl: No. Not at all. Won't touch it at all.
Chris: Wouldn't touch it. Did any of them proffer any kind of response or did you just get no response?
Deryl: No response at all. No response at all.
Deryl: Now over the last year I have...I guess it would be last eight months ... members of Parliament have been given the documentation. They've been given a summary basically of what's going on. The Parliamentary Budget Officer has been given the data and he was actually forced to resign. He was seriously considering suing the government, taking them into court but he has now left his position, or has been forced to leave his position because the various branches have denied him access. In order for him to do a proper audit, he has to know where the money is spent, so of course various departments don't give him the data so he can never find out where the money is spent. However, he has been given my information and documents and so forth. So he has a background that way, but unfortunately he was relieved of the job.
Chris: Hmmm. So from April until the end of 2012, you were just working on trying to get the information out into the media. At what point did you actually decide to put your own properties into foreclosure to get it on the record. Was that after you saw the judge?
Deryl: Yes. That would've been in April or something like that.
Chris: Now was that in recognition in the fact that you felt that the actions with the media were simply going nowhere?
Deryl: No. I will not support a criminal organization.
Deryl: I will not support a drug-running cartel. That has to stop.
Chris: Yeah. It certainly does. So how... you’re still paying the mortgage... how long did it actually take them to start the administrative process that you discovered was going on?
Deryl: The start of the administrative process would've been last October, I believe, and it took until... January was the first one. I had submitted my paperwork to one court in Ottawa, which is called the Defense and Cross Claim, and when you start the process to go to trial. I found out in January, the sheriff showed up up at my door saying I was being evicted and I said well, what do you mean? I said this is before the courts and actually when I checked the mail, what they had done is they had mailed back my Defense of Cross Claim. They had stamped it in the court, yet they mailed it back to me saying I was in default for failing to provide a Defense of Cross Claim, so I found that quite interesting.
Chris: You didn't even know that that had actually been scheduled to be heard?
Deryl: No I did not. And that's a procedure - an administrative procedure and if you don't follow in the timeframe, they automatically foreclose on you.
Chris: So you have to file a defense, but you're never actually given the timeframe.
Deryl: Well, no, I was given the timeframe and I was within the specific timeframe. I submitted it to the court. They stamped it, but here's what then they did, is they sent my documents back to me and saying I failed to file. Well, if I failed to file, how can you send it back to me, and how can you stamp the documents? So I then filed a motion in January to set aside the default judgement based on the fact that the court papers were actually stamped, showing I had filed it, and that they had either made an error, or they intentionally sent it back to me.
Chris: So it wasn't actually in the records.
Deryl: That's right.
Chris: But if they've stamped it, then somewhere in their system there will be a record of that document having been received.
Deryl: Right, which was submitted in court. So basically we caught 'em with their pants down.
Chris: Incredible. Now the other significant thing that happened at the end of 2012 would have been the release of initial batch of filings on December 25, by the One People's Public Trust. Now that really caught your attention.
Deryl: Yes it did, because I had been studying various types of law. I had been studying trust law and I was getting up to speed on that. I came across... I think on the 26th, the initial announcement. I contacted Heather the next day - maybe the 27th or 28th - by a phone call and also by email. Basically stating that her filings or her findings were similar to what I have found also.
Chris: Because she had created and was involved in the research for the writing up for what's become known as the Paradigm Report.
Deryl: That's right.
Chris: Which was, if people haven't seen it, you can find it on the OPPT website. It's essentially a document that summarizes several years of research done by Heather and several other people in Europe mainly, looking at the systemic fraud in the system and coming to the conclusion after testing and looking at different hypotheses about how they could actually fix the system from the inside, concluding that the system could not be fixed and that it really needed to be shut down.
Deryl: Yeah, that's right. I wish I had come across the investigation earlier and I think it was started what, in 2008, 2009?
Chris: Yeah somewhere around there, yeah.
Deryl: The other interesting thing I'd come across through going through various government documents is the Immunity Act. Because I had done research into the Bank for International Settlements and what transpired between 1930 and 1936, and how all major countries had signed onto the protocols and basically had given their gold over to the BIS. What had happened in 2007, is the Parliament had actually granted the Bank for International Settlements immunity prior to the financial crash. So you have to ask yourself the question, why? Now looking at the deficit and how the Bank of Canada and how Parliament was set up, Parliament was the legislative body to actually coin money in the country under Section 9114 of the Constitution Act. They were supposed to be using, under actually their original documents or charter, was the Bank of Canada to coin. Then they look at the deficit that's out there and the actual debt.
What I found odd... I'll give you an example. Let's say... these are pretty close numbers. The debt is 500 million dollars, and over a 5-year period, the interest we pay is a billion dollars a year from taxpayers money, and this is based on an audit by Sheila Frasier, looking at the very same thing. So over 5 years, at a billion dollars a year, you would've paid off that debt. But in actual fact, our debt is closer to 625 billion dollars and we keep paying interest. The initial charter for the bank in the act, is the Bank of Canada was set up to provide loans interest free. So now what makes you wonder, if the government is going to borrow money for various projects and so forth, if you have your own printer there that prints your own money, why would you then ignore your bank and go to international agencies and borrow money from there? If you were running a business... I look at it at that stance, and you reason as so, you would not do it. If you had let's say a printer print ten thousand dollars out, and that was your company, you decided not to use that printer that was available to you, yet you went out... and it provided you money interest free... why would you go out and borrow from another agency and then pay them interest? It makes no sense whatsoever.
Chris: Then why would you actually never try and pay off the principal?
Deryl: That's right. Unless of course your intent is to intentionally bankrupt the country.
Chris: The conclusion you have to come to is that the political processes of these corporate governments are completely in collusion with the financial processes, the banking systems in those countries and elsewhere.
Deryl: That's right.
Chris: They're completely in one another's pockets. The triumvirate, the third point in that triangle, has to be the legal system working in collusion with both those organizations to make sure that the cash flow is smooth.
Deryl: That's right. It's rubber stamp.
Chris: Everything is rubber stamped.
Deryl: Yes and it's all monetized. Now, for instance, an aircraft captain or a skipper, you would go overseas. You would provide the Customs agent of the manifest of the contents on board the aircraft. It would have a certain value and a certain docket number, in order that each place that you transit, they would get a percentage of whatever was on that aircraft.
Deryl: Same as shipping. Exact same.
Chris: Yup. Well, see that's one of the reasons that Scott Bartle became familiar with some of the commercial processes that he's ultimately used for some of his process documents, such as the Courtesy Notice that's in use. It's his experience as a ship's captain in handling manifests and moving various kinds of goods internationally on a ship. It wasn't a cargo ship; they're still moving various sorts of bits and pieces of cargo. Paperwork had to be done, that gave him that experience. Here we are, in now April 2013. The OPPT has gone through this rather incredible appearance and metamorphosis and shift. Certainly provided a tremendous background to something that was already in process for you, because your houses went into the court system before the OPPT even went public.
Deryl: That's correct.
Chris: You actually made a decision as ... well, you were trying to get aspects of this unlawful process on the court record and also the unlawful activities and banks that you've found while you were doing your research. You wanted to actually, if you like, ensure that during the court case, as much of that material as possible went on the record.
Deryl: That's exactly it. That was the tools that we had available at the time. I knew it had to be reflected for the public to hear.
Chris: Yup and when the OPPT material went public, obviously you had enough confidence in it, could see what it was trying to do to add that to the material that you were trying to get on the record.
Deryl: That's right. I did that in the first court hearing in February. I think it was February 12th. I was able to get ... geez, I can't remember now ... oh, the Press Release, the Paradigm Report, documents showing that there was suspension of the United States corporation and all other sub-agencies. The government of Canada; it was on record that the government of Canada corporation has been foreclosed on. They were acting on behalf of the foreclosed entity and they had no standing.
Chris: Well it also ... the reality of the situation is the court you were standing in, which is part of a corporate government ... in fact the legal system in countries like Canada or Australia are actually in their own rights private companies. They've been foreclosed on too.
Deryl: That's right and this went directly over their head. They were looking at me. They knew something was wrong, but (laughs) they had ...
Chris: Cognitive dissonance is probably the best term to describe it. They just wouldn't be able to believe it.
Deryl: Yes. I had given also Courtesy Notices to the opposing attorney and said that ... well, let me first say that in my introduction, I had said that I was here to assist the court in this transition period. That I was conducting an investigation into terrorist activities and financing. I had come across this evidence and it was important to get it onto the record. Later on, I had cautioned the opposing counsel that they were committing fraud, conspiracy to commit fraud, and they were now complicit in the act by bringing this forward.
Chris: Yeah. They're quite bizarre thing about it is you're standing there operating in a court, which doesn't exist. The thing is they believe it exists. They're trying to play the game as if it still does.
Deryl: Because no one has told them. So to have this individual come in and lay the story down and disrupt their whole belief system was rather shocking. It was at this point that the judge was supposed to either allow me an opportunity to go to trial, he said it could 20-30 minutes. He did not. He came back and apologized, saying "I will have to email it to you. I have to give this further consideration." So it was actually about a day and a half later I did get the email from him and basically he said "Yes, the court made an error by not following my documents. Yes, this second item or requirement was met." However, the third requirement that there was some evidence was completely ignored. He said "There's no evidence and no cause to go for trial." Even though I gave him the Paradigm Report, which he read or not, it's irrelevant at this point.
Chris: Were you able to also use the report that you'd done for the RCMP?
Deryl: No, I was not. Actually those items were listed as 10 points within my motion. It was an oral presentation. An oral presentation which I backed up with specific documents. See that really had more to do with terrorist activity. What we were dealing with there was a mortgage foreclosure. What we had to deal with was the fraudulent nature ... in other words, if there was a loan, show me the note...produce it. Well, in Ontario they have a streamlining process that do not require that evidence to be submitted.
Deryl: Well, why would they change the law? They would change the law because they know the process down the road is they sell the notes that don't have it. Therefore, let's change the law so that it's not a requirement so we can make it easier, if we don't present evidence.
Chris: Okay. There's the courts protecting the activities of the banks right there.
Chris: The fact that they also refused to acknowledge the fact that the loan itself, regardless of the monetization of your signature on the loan application, that the loan itself is actually a fraudulent loan. It's not actually a loan.
Deryl: It's not a loan. It's created X's and helos (?). It's created out of nothing. For a legal contract to exist, both parties must submit something of value.
Chris: Yes and they don't, of course. They don't submit anything.
Deryl: No they don't. This is a money creation story, so let's say it's two children there. One is going to buy something off the other. They choose potato chips as the form of currency. Okay? So they're barterting. The payment method will be 10 potato chips. One child can't give you pretend potato chips. This is basically what the bank does. They give you pretend money. They create X in the helo (?). They have no authority to do that.
Chris: Well, also they're actually coining money, which is against your constitution anyway assuming what existed, which means that for generations they've been illegally creating money.
Deryl: Yes, they have. Parliament is the only legal authority to coin money.
Chris: Yeah, now one of the aspects that I always try to point out to people when you look at the situation where a bank creates a fraudulent mortgage with someone who actually signs the application form and as you say they don't bring any value to the table, the only thing that's of value on the table is the person's signature, because we have value. We hold the value in this entire situation and we're lied to about that. People, for instance, think that if you bought a house and the bank's giving you this money, that you've got this house and somehow or other, you feel if you stop paying this mortgage because you feel the bank's created a fraudulent situation, you've got a free house.
Okay, what I'd like to point out to them is this, two weeks after that document is signed, let's look at the balance sheet. The balance sheet for the person; the balance sheet for the bank. The person actually has what they believe to be a lawful debt, which they're going to pay off over a period of 20 years. It might be a $500,000 dollar loan and it might cost them $1,000,000 dollars by the time they get to the end of that if they successfully get through to the end. The bank on the other hand has rushed out and monetized their signature, grouped it into some other bonds, created a financial instrument and sold it 10 times over. So that made at least $5,000,000 dollars two weeks later. Now what they don't do is phone you up and say 'Thanks Deryl, we did really well monetizing your signature. Don't worry about paying us anything back, because it's already paid for.'
Deryl: That's exactly right. There's actually three crimes that are committed here. The first one is there is really no loan made. It's called a debt credit entry under the (inaudible) money mechanics. You're obliged to pay back, like you said, that non-loan to them at an interest rate. Okay? So, under law of consideration, there is no contract. The contract is broken, because they didn't provide you...
Chris: It's null and void.
Deryl: It's null and void. The second fraud is they have under LIBOR rigged the interest rate. So, they have fixed that and it has already been proven, admitted that and have been fined. So that's the second fraud. The third one you mentioned is they bundle those mortgages together and sell them as mortgage-backed securities to another agent, they may (inaudible) 10 or whatever, so that mortgage is once again paid off, like you said, three, four, five, six, seven times. Yet you're still paying your monthly mortgage and interest rate, even though that mortgage has been sold off.
Let's also jump in to the other fraud and this is why all the banks are showing huge profits. Okay? Let's say your home is worth $100,000 and you sign a mortgage for that. They take that original note, they go and monetize that under modern mechanics. They can make nine times out of that. So they would monetize that for $900,000 dollars, deduct $100,000 dollars from their books that they have to keep to 10% and put $800,000 dollars in their pocket. For instance, they sell it to Bank B. Bank B has that amount there of $900,000. They do it again and again. So that's how they inflate it through the fractional reserve system.
Chris: (affirmative response) Completely fictitious.
Deryl: Completely fictitious. So that brings us up to present day.
Chris: Actually can I just add two more criminal acts?
Deryl: Sure, go ahead.
Chris: Insurance fraud, because mortgages are insured. One of the reasons they have to put mortgages through a court is they have to get a court order to give to the insurance company to again refund them for this loss that they've made, because the property was foreclosed on because the person failed to pay this so-called loan back. Now the actual loan itself is fraudulent, so the insurance claim against the foreclosure of the property is also fraudulent. The whole thing's poison. So that's another thing you can add to it.
Another one is a charge, which in Australia is called unjust enrichment. That's again something that there's fairly steep penalties for. Clearly when you look at the amount of money the bank would make in total out of you simply putting your signature on a piece of paper versus the thing that you get out of it if you successfully pay off the loan, which is a property. If you look at the period of 20 years and how much money they would make out of the monetization of that original signature, you would end up with a property...say it's worth, you paid $1,000,000 dollars for it and at that point it's worth $1.2 or $1.5 million...and say 'god, I've done quite well'. Well look what the bank's done. Don't forget what we described a moment ago was simply the first few months of their activity with that monetized signature. That goes on for 20 years. In their ponzi scheme, builds up this HUGE value. So the amount...well, this apparent value. We know it's not real. We know there's no real value in it. There's a value in a portion of it, but it's only because you signed the piece of paper.
This is how in this country here where there's 23-odd million people, the banks make $16 billion dollars profit per year out of 23 million people. That is ridiculous. This is how they're doing it. It's all completely fraudulent. They'll be doing the same thing in Canada or just slight variations thereof, depending on how their systems actually work.
Deryl: All western nations and all central banks are doing this ponzi scheme. Nothing different than what Bernie Madoff did.
Chris: You're, at this stage, if we bring it up to this present moment of now, you've got three properties which are in ... are they all in the same stage of foreclosure? Have they all had the rubber stamp yet?
Deryl: They've all had the rubber stamp. So now they're getting their (inaudible) invoices, Declaration of Facts, and true commercial bill. Well, I've given one invoice out. I'm running behind, (laughs) but the others will get there shortly. There's more important issues here at this time, Chris.
Chris: Yep, well you've actually already been evicted out of one of the properties. Do you want to describe that briefly? Because you spent a fair bit of time talking to the enforcement guys, who are the purported sheriffs or whatever they call themselves in your system.
Deryl: They call them actually enforcement officers. Let me get some dates here. I had received a notice again on the property that I live at that I had to be out by the 26th of March. The sheriff that I had spoke to in January, because I filed a motion and I got that one delayed. The bank actually withdrew until we went to trial. Anyway, the sheriff had come over on the 25th and I talked to Ken a few months earlier in January and he said 'Well, you know you gotta be out of here by tomorrow morning'. I talked to him a bit and said "Well, I'm not leaving. This is what's going on' and he said 'Well, okay, I will have to come over tomorrow and evict you.' I said 'If you do that, I will charge you.' Everything was cordial and so forth and I said I'd get some paperwork ready for you.
So the 26th rolled around, I had various documents for him. We determined that they had set the swat team up at the top of the hill. There were four cars out there; this was roughly 10:30. We were waiting for them to show up. We had cameras and tape recorders and stuff ready to go and the documentation ready. They had come down at 10:55. They started down the driveway. Something happened and they backed out and left. We went 'Huh, that's strange.' So we waited around another hour and it was decided that well, we'll just go down to the courthouse and see what's going on. So approximately 3:00, I went down, confronted the acting, alleged sheriff and I asked for the deputy Ken. She said he had left for the day.
Chris: Just to clarify something, because one of the comments in our earlier discussions was that you discovered that these enforcement officers do not work under oath and bond.
Chris: So they're not, in no way are they a bailiff or a sheriff. They are just corporate employees acting as enforcement officers; as thugs literally, to carry out the orders of the unlawful courts.
Deryl: Yes, when I asked them...and I'll get into that here...on the 26th, I went down at 3:00, confronted the alleged sheriff and I asked for Ken, the deputy there. She said he was not around, he had left for the day. I said I had some documents for him. I expected him in the morning and he didn't show up. She said 'Well, can I have the documents?' I said "No, they're not for you. They are for Ken.' Then I asked her, 'So why did you send the OPP to my place?' She indicated that 'Well, we had concerns.'
Chris: What does OPP stand for?
Deryl: Oh, it's the Ontario Provincial Police. They're the provincial police force in Ontario here. She said 'Well, we had concerns for safety.' So I approached and said 'Whose safety?' and she said 'Well, we can't tell you.' I said 'Why Sherry, were you going to hurt me?' and of course (laughs), at that confrontation, the deputy sheriff or enforcement officer Ken came in. I shook his hand and said 'I missed you this morning. I have the documentation we talked about. Can we go to a briefing room?' Which we did and I went over the various documents for him to read. The Paradigm Report, the military order, the foreclosure of the BIS, Federal Reserve; other documents within that showing that Canada and Ontario was a corporation. I had asked him during that point if he had a bond and oath and he did not know what I was talking about.
Chris: Was he the sheriff? Or a deputy sheriff?
Deryl: No, he's called technically a deputy enforcement officer. I had showed him the Writ of Possession and the Notice to Vacate in that. About a month earlier, I had gone to serve the sheriff. I had called her up and she had indicated she was the sheriff. I asked to make sure that she would be there at a certain time.
Chris: So she's actually called a sheriff?
Deryl: Well, this is the documents. It's signed "as sheriff, on behalf", not on behalf, but it says her name and then it says "Sheriff" below. So when I went with the documents to serve her, which was the Courtesy Notice and the Paradigm Report and the military order. I also included documentation of who I was in the military. As she approached, I asked her 'Are you the sheriff?' and she said 'Yes'. I said 'Good. I'm Captain Zeleny. I spoke to you on the phone. I have these documents to serve you.' She then stepped back from me and said ''I'm not the sheriff. I'm just the administrator.'
Chris: Okay, so she's a sheriff or she's not a sheriff.
Deryl: That was my point and I said 'Well, who is the sheriff?' She gave me a quick rundown or BS or whatever and I said 'Well, at this point, it's a mute point right now. You indicated to me you are the sheriff, therefore you are now served.' I asked them to sign the Affidavit of Service in the courthouse, which none of the ladies refused to sign.
Chris: They all refused to sign? None of the ladies would sign it?
Deryl: They would not sign the Affidavit of Service saying that I had served this so-called sheriff and that's their job.
Chris: That person, despite the fact that she has no oath and bond, is called a sheriff.
Deryl: That's right. But however she indicated to me that she was not the sheriff, she is just an administrative assistant.
Deryl: This was brought to the attention of Ken, who's the deputy sheriff or enforcement officer, who's also a retired police officer. I thought it best to deal with him on a professional basis and show him facts and documents. I asked him to review this stuff that night, that would be the night of the 26th, believing that they would try this again on the 27th, which of course they did. So on the 27th, they came again. This time they had the swat team. I had seven big officers at my door.
Deryl: Yes, of course. Vests, bulletproof vests, the whole gear. Anyway, they asked me to leave and I said 'No, under the criminal code I have the right to defend my property.' I invited them in to have coffee and sit down on the table and have the discussion and you have a copy of that video and recording.
Chris: (affirmative response)
Deryl: We went for about an hour. I showed them documents. They knew exactly who I am in the military and what I have done and what I was investigating. However, they refused to ... how would you say it, Chris? ... to acknowledge. They went back into the old paradigm and said 'Well, we have a job to do.' and I said 'Well, I have a job to do also.'
Chris: Well the transcript reads somewhat like the Nuremburg Trials: "We're just following orders."
Chris: "That's nice, Deryl, but we're just following orders". "Yes, I understand Deryl, but we're just following orders". They were probably completely intimidated, to be honest. The only thing they can go back on, fall back into, is the old paradigm.
Deryl: Yes and they were actually showing, they said 'Well, we have a court order to evict you and it's signed by the court.' I said 'Really?' So we got the Writ of Possession and the Notice to Evict and I showed them the document. I said 'Okay, here it's says, this is the sheriff. Ken, you know this, she doesn't have an oath and bond and she indicated she's not the sheriff. So that's uttering a forged document. In the lower right corner of the document is a signature. It's not a signature by a judge. It's a signature from the lawyer of the bank.' I held it up to them and I said 'So what you're telling me, Sergeant, is you're working for the bank.' He refused to acknowledge that, because his belief system is being attacked. He believes he's a public servant. When I'm going through and showing him documents that he's actually not, he's working for the corporation, it's too much for them to take in all at once.
Chris: How do you think they're feeling about it now a week later? Do you think any of it has sunk in?
Deryl: Yes, they know something's wrong. I was advised through a friend ... he actually came over and asked for me to keep a low profile (laughs), because they were looking for me. I don't think I have my own satellite yet, but I'm working on it Chris. (laughs)
Chris: (affirmative response) Your own satellite tasked upon your location. Look, it is ridiculous. The system seems to be completely ... have been swung completely into the mode of trying to asset strip the citizens.
Deryl: Yes, that's collapsing the economy.
Chris: There's lots of agendas going on there, but the modus operandi is to attack the citizens at the very base level of their existence, which is their homes.
Deryl: Yep, because the banks are bankrupt, morally and spiritually.
Chris: Yes, absolutely. Pick one.
Deryl: So what they have to do is steal the assets, so now they can show it on their books. Now we have these assets again. Even though we monetized it. Even though we gambled that money away and we put it in our pockets, the crunch is coming. People are waking up. So let's steal as much as we can get on our books and kick the people out. Most people actually just leave the home. They get intimidated. Here they're in a predicament. I'm probably on the no-fly list right now.
Chris: Indeed. Have you ever ...
Deryl: I can just take the airplane and go myself. That's neither here nor there too.
Chris: They cancelled your drivers license?
Deryl: Yes, they confiscated my drivers' license.
Chris: So you're actually sitting now in a ... you've actually re-entered the home you were evicted from?
Deryl: Yeah, after they stole one vehicle and I came here and I found out they stole another piece of equipment, a skid steer, I said enough of this game playing. I'm taking lawful possession back of my property. Clearly they cannot defend it or protect it, so therefore I must do so.
Chris: Indeed, because people are just coming and stealing your property.
Deryl: That's right.
Chris: Claiming they're working for the bank, but with no documentation to prove anything.
Deryl: That's right.
Chris: So, what kind of system is this?
Deryl: A corrupt one.
Chris: Completely. Absolutely completely. Now are you familiar with Agenda 21?
Chris: One of the aspects of Agenda 21 appears to be a clear thrust to take away private ownership full stop. So private ownership of property is something that they want to make an extinct species, so that they can literally control the population to the nth degree. Well that's their desire. Now I don't think they're going to get there and I think that for a lot of reasons. I think what's playing out here in Canada, in your life right now, is part of that overall program that they've got running.
Deryl: Yes, don't forget they've been trying to get World War III going. They've been trying to get a nuclear exchange. It heated up so much in 2011 and again in 2012, where the Russians had submarines off the coast of North America. From my previous job, I know what cities are targeted. It's not a pretty sight.
Chris: No. No and one sincerely hopes the ridiculous situation of North Korea threatening America with a nuclear attack is just a completely absurd bit of media theater. One hopes that will simply go away at some point in the very near future.
Deryl: Yeah, that's just ... what do they call it out there? .. fear porn.
Chris: Completely fear porn. In fact, I've had some indication that the folks in North Korea are looking at the Western media reports and going 'What? We said what?', which would simply mean if that's correct, it's being spun in the Western media probably to the instructions of the people who control the media in the West, which are also the same groups who control the banks and by definition the governments and the courts. It's all the same thing. They're just trying to generate some fear porn in this final stage of the game which seems to be playing out at the moment, which they are losing in fact.
Deryl: They are losing. Their standard business model is to bankrupt the nation. It's a 70-year business model. We can take this back from 2001 back to 1930. Then we take it back another 70 years. You know they collapsed the stock market in 1929, forced North America into bankruptcy, which we've been operating on since then. Take it back to 1861, where the same thing happened...bankruptcy. So this is, like I say, the business model they operate on. this is what they were supposed to do again with the attack on the Twin Towers, the World Trade Center, was to start another war and then reintroduce the new currency.
Chris: They certainly got a conflict going, but it never really turned into the incandescent blaze that they wanted to turn the Middle East into. Why is that Deryl? Why did that not succeed?
Deryl: They got bogged down, okay? Someone threw a wrench into their plan. There was too much resistance. Now you gotta remember that Saddam Hussein was an asset of the Agency and he was put in there to destabilize Iran and they had the 10-year war. Even before that in 1952, they destabilized the elected government in there, overthrew and put the Shah in place. Noe the Shah, later on in life, who was assisting the Western nations, I think it was British Petroleum at the time. Could be wrong. Or Standard Oil. He became more favorable to the people and he wanted to nationalize the oil companies and give the profits to the people and increase living standards in the country.
Chris: That didn't go down well, did it?
Deryl: No, so therefore a coup was staged and he was overthrown. You can see this repeated pattern through South America, Central America, even to the largest one of the Soviet Union.
Chris: Yeah, the IMF working on ... they go about at a financial level first through the IMF to entice them into permanent debt slavery. If that doesn't work, they just start a war or they start killing politicians until they get what they want.
Deryl: That's right, they either blackmail them, kill them, or hold hostages, or yeah.
Chris: To send in the troops and mess the place up.
Deryl: Send in the troops, that's right. If you don't follow the orders by the corporation that's going in there, then we'll create a phony war and we'll just invade you.
Chris: Yup and then in the countries that really comprise, if you like, the homeland of these rogue organizations, the commonwealth countries: America and large parts of western Europe. On a smaller scale, they're doing it to their own so-called citizens. Just to complete the worldwide looting that's been going on for a really long time.
Deryl: Yes, it's their business model.
Chris: That's the business model. So here you stand and essentially you're in a situation where the swat team could walk in at any moment and actually arrest you this time, because they actually refused to arrest you the first time, I gather?
Deryl: I think somewhere in the interview they said 'Well, we're in impasse here. I'm going to have to arrest you.' I said, 'That's fine. Can you come back at 12:30, 1:00? Because I have to complete the invoice for you.' (laughs) Which they said 'No, well go ahead do that.' They all came into the office here. Well, not all of them. Some officers were lined up in the hall, while I completed the invoice to the sheriff. Of course, very cordial, we're chatting. I don't think ... that's not on the recording. I showed them some information on the new financial system, etc and I said 'Relax gentlemen, watch closely what's happening in Cyprus, because they're going to be coming here to steal out of your personal accounts.' Some of the officers were actually paying attention, listening, and understanding what's going on.
Chris: One can only hope that the energy guy that we communicate with, who is able to actually detect the effect that the OPPT is actually having on the system energetically. His view of the Courtesy Notice is it's like lobbing an energetic hand-grenade into an organization. The effect that it has on people. The discussions around the water cooler. The discussions people have with their superiors when they pass the documents up to them. The degree of confusion it's creating within those organizations and questions being asked and not answered is really having a serious effect on the system. It's starting to happen worldwide, as the whole concept and the documentation actually spreads. Singlehandedly, you're probably going in like a tank squadron at this point from an energetic point of view. Even if you look at the effect that you actually had on the judge when you were in court and the opposing counsel who actually refused to get in the lift with you, because she thought she was going to be arrested. (laughs)
Deryl: That's actually a good one. It opened up during the banter back and forth. Of course the judge, he had a nice booklet about an inch and a half thick with all the documents in there. I was surprised. He never even looked at it. The process was set up to make it easy, the administrative process. The motion was to not go to trial, which the other party put forward. I had my opportunity there and I presented the evidence and it was accepted in court. This would be the ownership of the treasuries, I believe, the military order, the foreclosure of the governments and the foreclosure of the BIS. What the counsel for the bank had asked for in her closing remarks, she had asked the judge to on the endorsement ensure that Mr. Zeleny not arrest me. That opened the door for me, so I stood up. Before that the judge said this was nonsense. So I stood up and said 'Your Honor, this is fraud, conspiracy to commit fraud and Ms. Dunbar is once again complicit in the act. I refer Your Honor to the military order and direction, paragraph one or whatever on page 4, that says I can arrest and detain anyone owning, abetting a private monetary system.'
Deryl: So, that was put on record. He actually looked at the book and he looked at the page and he got flustered and slammed it shut. It really didn't matter. All the points were made. It is now on public record. When we left the court room, there was three of us. Two ladies got on to the elevator and I was about to proceed and she was extremely nervous and asked me not to get on the elevator. "Do not get on the elevator", basically is what was said. I said 'Well, Nicole, you have all the documents there. I suggest you read it.' Then the elevator doors closed and that was it.
Chris: Yup. So, what's your position now? What do you think is coming up next for you in this situation?
Deryl: Well, I have the charge sheets I'm doing right now for the agents and actors , all five and anyone else who wants to play.
Chris: So you're actually going to charge them under one of the ...
Deryl: International Defense Act, international law and criminal law.
Chris: That is for the guys who actually evicted you out of the house in the first place?
Deryl: Basically it's the sheriff, because the sheriff is the one who is instigating and acting on behalf of a foreclosed entity and calling these actors and/or agents into action, with respect to this mortgage foreclosure.
Chris: Wow. Well, Heather Tucci the ... well, I can't actually call her the trustee of the OPPT ... the former trustee of the former OPPT. Because if you've been following the story of the OPPT, it's actually quite literally shut itself down in the interests of maintaining the equity of the people and handing the equity of the people back to them. But Heather actually says "the most important action of a human in asserting their value is to BE and to DO". As far as the BE'ing and DO'ing, Deryl, you've got it in spades. I just want to pass on my thanks and congratulations for all of your incredible efforts. Just the sheer audacity of putting literally your property portfolio on the line to get this on the court's records and to have an impact on the system.
Deryl: Well, that's basically based on my investigation. We had a saying "not on my watch". If I know there's something wrong, I have a duty as a public officer to correct it, bring it to the attention and make it right. That's all we're doing here right now. I can see the end result down the road. It's just a process that we have to go through right now. There may be a few hardships here and there, but in the end it will all be corrected. It'll be a better place. I've been telling people that we've got a lot of cleanup to do, so get the big brooms ready.
Chris: Yeah look, when the situation finally hits the fan, there's going to be an awful lot of explaining to have to be done at so many levels across our entire system. It's going to be a fire hose of information. That's how it's been described. The other thing I wanted to point out to people who are listening to this tape is that the military order is certainly one part of the filings from the One People's Public Trust, which despite the fact that the Trust has dissolved itself, the filings stand in perpetuity. Okay? The UCC is from, a lawful point of view, has been archived in the state that it was as of the date of the final filing, which I think was February the 18th. Don't quote me there folks. But what that means, is that anything that is part of those filings actually stands as law at this point in time.
Now one of the declarations and Declaration and Orders, in fact the Summary Declaration Order, which is one of the more useful documents because it actually restates the situation, if you like, from an overall point of view. One of the things it does, is it actually makes the following statements: "All BE'ings of the Creator shall forthwith assist all public servants identified herein to implement, protect, preserve and complete this Order by all means of the Creator and the Creator as stated herein, etc, etc." The Order is that "no blood or other value shall be taken from any state of body and that any and all private money systems issuing collection legal enforcement systems operating slavery systems (inaudible) against any and all states of body are forthwith terminated"; that's the Order. What this actually says is that all BE'ings shall assist in this process. Now the military has a special role to play, but I just wanted to draw attention to that particular stipulation in this Declaration and Order, because that clearly places a responsibility on all of us to close down the old system, not just the military.
Deryl: Yes it does.
Chris: Just wanted to leave that as a kind of final point to people that if we want our freedom it's up to us. We're doing this here down on the ground. There's no one coming to save us. We're not quite done yet. There's still some things we have to do. We've come a long road in the last few months. Deryl, I'm sure you agree with that. The whole process that's been undertaken by the OPPT is quite gobsmacking in the breadth of it and the effectiveness of it.
Deryl: It certainly has been an interesting adventure.
Chris: Oh, hell yeah. That is about to manifest into visibility in the political and particularly in the media systems over the next few weeks. I'm hoping we can have a completely different conversation in a couple of weeks time, Deryl?
Deryl: I think we will.
Chris: So, I absolutely hope we do. Look, we'll end it here, unless you have any final comments? Any things that you want to add in before we finish up?
Deryl: No, I think it was very good. Thanks for calling. Let's see what develops in the next week or so.
Chris: We shall. We shall. Deryl, thanks for your time. Look after yourself.
Deryl: I will and you too Chris.
Chris: Thanks, okay, good night.
Deryl: Good night, bye.