It took me some time and I took extra care and caution to prepare the right response to a situation that had gone a little bit out of control. I would be happy, if you could post the following for me.
Good evening, Mr. Crayford,
Let me begin by apologizing for an unfortunate choice of language in our last exchange. I admit that I acted emotionally and in haste, and genuinely regret a lapse so out of character. Particularly so, as a business as serious as the Global Debt Facility is deserving of sound, well balanced dialogue.
My grievance in dialogue with you to date has two aspects :-
You lay claim that Office of the International Treasury Controller has control and oversight of the Global Debt facility, yet offer no substance to support that claim, other than reference to claimed Treaty documents all housed within extensive Secrecy Agreements. In order to wholesomely accept that claim, I, - and I am sure others - need to observe a certain substance, which is not forthcoming.
I have tendered copies of documents for your perusal, which documents, on their face, provide compelling challenge to that claim of the Office of the International Treasury Controller, but I have received no response.
Not even a curt reply stating that you have no interest to pursue credibility of the tendered documents. What could possibly promote such a discourtesy ?
Dialogue referencing myself began when you chose to enter an exchange between myself and Ms Hudes, Acting General Counsel of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development.
I believe we can both agree, that the announced primary goal of Ms Hudes was to expose and correct what she conceived as corruption within the institution she served. As she warmed to her subject, her interest rapidly broadened through such issues as Gold Backwardation, The Network of Global Corporate Control, and a computer modeling of power transition, which led to her appreciation that a “currency war” was imminent.
As a graduate economist, she perceived that threat as potentially more dangerous to the nation in a geopolitical sense, than the corruption she addressed in her original platform. Thus, her interest in the Global Debt Facility, which was the catalyst that brought we three into contact.
Here I should state that I found it astonishing that Ms Hudes, in a senior legal position within the World Bank, could not immediately access such documents as would acquaint her with the most sensitive details of the Global Debt Facility, since that institution claims, as you do, that they, the World Bank, hold sway over application of that facility.
The dialogue was not always harmonious, and we journeyed through several “rough patches” as each sought to assert their own viewpoint.
For the record, let me make quite clear that I have never claimed to be the accredited signatory for the Global Debt Facility. That accolade was coined by Ms Hudes, after due consideration of documents I tendered for her review.
Again for the record, I want to stress that my objective was born of a perception that the Philippine people had been deprived of a legacy carefully set for their benefit by their former President Ferdinand Marcos.
I am by training a lawyer, though my business career was as an international banker. Upon my retirement, I became interested in the various tales, both fact and fiction that surrounded the larger than life figure of Ferdinand Marcos, and I began to research his activities. He was, without doubt, an enigmatic and colorful person, brilliant lawyer, and steadfast supporter of everything “Filipino”. His professed “dream” was to make his beloved Philippines the “Pearl of the Orient”.
I have spent many years at my research, and as my document library expanded, it became abundantly clear that the plans carefully laid by Ferdinand Marcos had been surreptitiously infiltrated by forces intent on depriving the Philippine people of their legacy. That knowledge set my objective - I would do all within my power to restore that legacy, and in so doing, assure sound recognition of Ferdinand Marcos both as a patriot, and as a man of vision cruelly treated by those he considered allies, and vilified by an entrenched hierarchy which coveted his wealth.
Thus, I place myself on the record, for all to see, to investigate, make inquiry, pursue any avenue of choice, and I will not be found wanting, as I have never varied from that objective. My life is an open book.
Why do I make lengthy explanation ? Simply for the sake of transparency.
I have nothing to hide, no latent or covert agenda, and will pursue my stated objective as long as robust health permits.
So now, Mr. Crayford, what of you ?
I am well aware that you personally are not the International Treasury Controller, and that you act in consultancy capacity to that office, but you are a passionate supporter of the O.I.T.C., if I may use that term. From your advent as “Whistleblower”, through disclosure of your given name, and to the present, you remain the active voice of O.I.T.C., it’s constant promoter, defender, and champion.
I have no precise knowledge of you, but assume you to be a lawyer, and with that assumption, further believe that you have made appropriate professional due diligence enquiry as to the station, legality and sound governance of the office you serve as consultant. Strangely, the Office of the International Treasury Controller, if it has the substance you claim, has attracted a very negative press.
Allow me to cite some examples :-
Wikipedia suggests that O.I.T.C. is a fraudulent entity. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_International_Treasury_Control
The Cambodian press report similarly.
The Fijian press are less than enthusiastic about O.I.T.C.
The above references are not examples specifically chosen to cast O.I.T.C. in a bad light, as similar reports abound, but will suffice for press reports, as there are far more interesting questions that deserve to be answered definitively, if the claimed substance is to attain plausible credibility. For instance :-
Dr. Ray C. Dam is identified on the O.I.T.C. web-site as a sovereign, a protected person, free from suit, with powers plenipotentiary to control the Global Debt Facility.
Why then was he arrested in his native Cambodia, allegedly tortured while incarcerated, and only released at the point of near death?
How could that be possible for such an important person ? Who is responsible for the unforgivable lapse in his personal security ?
Granted that nothing is impossible these torturous days, vide the arrest of another sovereign, Manuel Noriega, in his native Panama, rendition to America and trial in an American court.
Similarly, the murder of a further sovereign, Muammar Qaddafi in his native Libya.
But the O.I.T.C. web-site continues to insist that the person who occupies the post as International Treasury Controller is protected against such an eventuality.
The web-site claims recognition and endorsement by the United Nations under Charter Control Number 10-60847. but the United Nations claims that there is no such authority as a Charter Control Number issued by that august body.
http://exopolitics.blogs.com/exopolitics/2014/05/ - reporting on enquiries made by the United Nations representative in Fiji.
I do not propose to labor the point of a less than appreciative press, but the Telegraph newspaper of London reports that the telephone number on letterhead of the O.I.T.C. does not exist, and that the given address is a false address.
How does one justify your claim of United Nations endorsement or empowerment of your claimed activity when that same major global institution denies a principal tenet upon which the credibility of O.I.T.C. hinges?It is pointless protesting that the empowerment is “secret”, when the named institution publicly denies existence of the quoted reference.
If it was truly a “secret”, the more appropriate response would have been –
“The subject document falls within ambit of a series of Treaties and Agreements, which are restricted for public viewing, but readily accessible by Finance Ministers and like authorities”.
Such a response is not exactly a totally satisfactory explanation, but sufficient to grant “the benefit of the doubt” in favor of O.I.T.C., but that was NOT the response. The response was entirely negative in that it unequivocally stated that NO such authority existed.
I present these factors in a public forum, as they are all drawn from readily accessible public sources. You and I had the opportunity to debate such issues privately, but your apparent reluctance to address the matter of documentation provided to you in good faith for critical review, denied that possibility.
As a non-practicing, yet graduate lawyer, I hold to the opinion that the documentation at my disposal is compelling evidence of an interest to benefit of the Philippine people, in those composite financial assets now known under the title “Global Debt Facility”, and in pursuit of my objective to secure that legacy to their benefit, I will probe, inquire, and pursue all legal avenues to reach that goal.
There are some who erroneously suggest that I am a “fortune hunter” intent upon plundering assets in which I have no vested interest, but the public record demonstrates that such an accusation is frivolous in the extreme.
Observe the following offer made by Ms Hudes, who, in her capacity as Acting General Counsel for the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, was presumably authorized by her Board of Governors to tender the following offer :-
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 6:26 PM, Karen Hudes <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
Please let the Board of Governors know when you have finished insisting that you are the sole authorized signatory, and when you are prepared to accept one-fourth of one percent as the Redeemer under Article 7 of the Monetary Agreements
As I have mentioned before several times, the Board of Governors is authenticating each and every transaction in the Global Debt Facility using different persons that Marcos assigned his signature rights under the Global Debt Facility.
Acting General Counsel
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development
Legal Counsel Global Debt Facility, TVM-LSM-666
It is public record, Mr. Crayford. One quarter of one percent simply to surrender my documentation, and possibly deliver an attendant Quit Claim. One quarter of one percent of fabulous wealth is not simply a “King’s Ransom”, Mr. Crayford, it is the equivalent of several such ransoms, and my acceptance would have established my personal wealth as superior in value to that of many countries.
I did not consider acceptance for an instant, as acceptance would not achieve my goal to cause the Philippine people to realize their legacy, and would have destroyed the very essence of my being. I am totally committed to my objective. I would have enjoyed the cut and thrust of debating my position with a fellow lawyer, as I am intent upon a legal resolution of what I perceive as a major injustice, and a concerted effort by yet unidentified forces to deny what is palpably the true intent of President Ferdinand Marcos.
Since you elect not to answer my correspondence in that regard, I am left to speculate on the honor, credibility and integrity of the Office of the International Treasury Controller. While I elect a policy of forthright transparency, you and those you serve prefer a veil of secrecy enshrined in covert agreements, Treaties and other devices of a secret society. You claim to serve the world, but the world sees no evidence of your activity.
We have an analogy from time of the Roman Empire, which I quote from memory, but I am sure of the substance, and I quote :- “The wife of Caesar must not only be pure, but must be seen to be pure”.
Take note, Mr. Crayford, that as I have demonstrated, the world does not perceive the Office of the International Treasury Controller as “pure” by any means. If O.I.T.C. genuinely provides such services to the world as you claim, then step forward, reveal your good work, and accept the appreciation of a grateful world pleading for humanitarian assistance.
I am not a conspiracy theorist, but your failure to establish substance of the office you serve, leaves me no alternative but to accept the conclusion of Wikipedia, that the Office of the International Treasury Controller is a fraudulent entity.
Be aware, Sir, that if Office of the International Treasury Controller is ever conclusively demonstrated to be a fraudulent entity, then your role as champion of their cause will brand you as a co-conspirator, and the same nemesis which overtakes that entity will embrace you personally, as party to that fraudulent activity.
Farewell, Mr. Crayford, we have nothing further to discuss, and I leave you to pursue the relentless rhetoric you promulgate through the O.I.T.C. web-site and your public correspondence.
Wolfgang Erich Struck.