Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

Accounting Literacy Matters. Cause-based Literacy Doesn’t. (Spring 2010, Ellen H. Brown tangles with Walter Burien’s info, or at least tries to.) [First Published 5-3-2014].

with 3 comments

It’s July  2017, I’m about to reference this post again, so I’m cleaning up some formats, changing its basic font, and adding post title with short-links to its contents as is now my habit.  Part of this habit is also from adjustment to the blog upgrade, which has a sort of sickly-looking background color, unless changed at the top of each post, I discovered after the upgrade…(!) The post title was also incorporated into the Blog Motto on upgrade, and it gets mentioned on my top “sticky” post and related page — so I guess over time I have considered the points it’s making still vital! They show in part a lawyer’s response who became involved in pushing the “public banking” model to someone knowledgeable of the significance of CAFRs and their presentation of collective revenues and assets of government entities, etc.

On the update, re-checked the IRS and found it unusual timing that just two weeks after this “never-registered”(as a charity) Public Banking Institute based in California was first published (May 3, 2014) the IRS revoked its status (May 15, 2014), shown below.  For status to be revoked requires three years of non-filing (tax returns) let alone the requirements to file as a 501©3 within the state of California. This sends an overall message that “rules,” and laws, are for someone else, not the reform-minded…So, I posted that information too, along with the EIN# which hadn’t been shown before, I believe.

Anyhow, enjoy!   //LGH on 7-7-2017.

Accounting Literacy Matters. Cause-based Literacy Doesn’t. (Spring 2010, Ellen H. Brown tangles with Walter Burien’s info, or at least tries to.) [First Published 5-3-2014].

This blog has been sitting in draft since January. I cleaned it up, fleshed it out and am publishing. Meanwhile, I’ll be over at Cracking the Cult of the Constitution by Clint Richardson, and tell you why when I get back. Particularly on the topic “Corporations Sole.” (3 part series from August 2013).

Look for these two colors in a side-by-side column format to see the conversation that inspired this post.  I’ve added material to a middle section one day after publishing this post (added Sun. 5/4/2014) because I think it’s relevant.  Alternating color scheme (dark green/light-beige with red fonts) section is more about the particular institute set up AFTER the conversations of 2010.

I wouldn’t bother with this, or all the pretty colors, except that attempting to communicate CONCEPTS through the cognitive dissonance of people who mis-understand why “government” and its “social services” and “justice systems,” aren’t solving the problems, even when the word “problem-solving” is appended (like “problem-solving courts.”), is getting old.

Half the understanding is a matter of basic vocabulary, and paying attention to others’ speech. Here, I’m listening in. For followers who are just interested in “the courts,” — too bad. The courts are part of government, and if you don’t get that, I can’t help you. I did my part!! (see blog).

I find the colors, and the conversation, interesting.  Hope you do too — but the point isn’t this person, or that person.  The point is, how to make sound judgments (it shouldn’t take that long) and assessments when authority figures, or would-be authority figures/leaders, start talking.  And notice what happens after you do NOT get a straight answer.

Some months ago, I also got entangled with the “Web of Debt” conversation; not because of CAFRs, in particular, but because I also live in California and wanted a few answers I wasn’t seeing on the site. 

The strange response to a single comment on a blog (from someone I was a complete stranger to) led to my further inquiries about “Inquiring Systems, Inc.” and some of the issues below.  What I see is someone trying to sound more intelligent than he or she is (see below), and trying to seem more concerned about the disenfranchised 99% (us poor slobs) than the associations and behaviors would indicate.

Which one was the attorney, well keep reading.


Remember, you cannot judge a book by its cover?”
Well, you can’t judge a corporation by its website, or by what causes it’s in favor of.
Yesterday (well, about 1/23/2014), I got another good, fast, one-day lesson on the Environmental/Green Progressive/OneWorldOnePlanet (Our planet = Our Plans) movement by simply paying attention to a passing conversation, and then follow-up.
See How and When to Change, Ditch (or Track) the Conversations of Public Interest Crusades.  While the public is supposed to be entranced by their messages, networks, and international connections, we should habitually change the focus BACK to the accounting practices, and then talk about it — and with these as the subject matter.

Don’t be so easily distracted like children (which we are being treated as in this matters)!!  Insist that people you hang with also grow up. The art of distraction has many purposes, but often it’s for the purpose of stealing, and that is what has been done from individual people subject to income taxes, who do NOT play this game in the manner those seeking to rule the planet have been playing it.
I almost left the conversation (follow-up on this conversation): “Know Misdirection / Omission when seen:  Ellen Brown CAFR article” — however when it began with misquotes, led to mis-use of nonprofit status to shield others groups …(all charging fees and taking donations) to do the same all over California (in particular), and  an advisory board reaching to a progressive Congressman from New Mexico attempting to start a public state bank . . . and another to the United Nations Environmental Programme and its Financial Initiatives starting with a “small group of” (multinational) banks — I felt there was a reason the one individual “couldn’t” (didn’t) want to understand, or follow through with what Mr. Burien has been saying — and where he disagrees with Gerald Klatt, who put up the cafrman.com website and disagreed with Ms. Brown.
That is a ONE-page conversation, easy to read. I place the 2010 conversations side by side, and note that after NOT answering Burien’s corrections, Ms. Brown went off and hooked up with another group to promote “The Public Banking Institute” (2011).

See insert  (with olive-green background) my Jan. 23, 2014 post,  Get Real(itybloger)! — Call In, Read the Links on CAFRs, Review Regularly.  

Notably, ‘The Public Banking Institute” didn’t file for its own nonprofit, but underneath this one:

[LINK CHANGED — LOGO NOW MISSING – Updated Screenprints Provided 2017]:

(from ISI “Implementation Guide” highlights)

Major promotion of itself as fiscal agent- see tax returns!

When “Change the Nation” groups, like this one (PBI), just don’t bother, or, strangely, don’t want, to be their own corporations but form up under another “Fiscal Agent” (nonprofit), that making it harder to track who was, and wasn’t, paying to push for state banks, which seems to be the primary agenda of the PBI, there.   They want the high public profile, but not the funding transparency.  In the case of ISI, they picked a real interesting one.  Particularly when I notice that agenda was something of a NWO agenda.

Campaignforpostalbanking.org shows a D.C. address, but is being pushed in Oakland, Santa Rosa (California) I see ..//LGH 2017

add an “org” to that name to find website. Then go click on “Donate” page for details.

2017 UPDATE – for example, an ISI project (showing © 2015 at bottom of page) has a catchy name, recommends “Postal Banking” (whatever that is) and a typical solicitation page: “Make the check payable to Commonomics and send it to ISI.” So, does Commonomics have its own bank account then, or ISI have multiple dbas and so can cash check from its many on-line website solicitation like this one, as it has been for years?? I don’t know, just asking:

CommonomicsUSA (another ISI project page/ solicitation)

PBI fundraising page (Membership Drive,actually under “DONATE,” notice it goes from $5, “Members” through “Founders’ Circle, $1,000” up to “Endowment, $25,000” etc.  Hey, anyone can ask, right?  Endowment privileges:

“All the benefits of the Living Legacy Membership, plus a personal tour/retreat to the public bank system of Costa Rica, Germany, or New Zealand for two.”


New donation facilitator link: https://pbi.nationbuilder.com/monthly_donation is much simplified.  Main site (NationBuilder.com) advertises donations without transactions fees, and (bottom of page, fine print) a Los Angeles address, with offices in Vancouver, London, Los Angeles, New York and Sydney (Australia), obviously a software offering:

NationBuilder is a dba for “3dna, Corp.” and Bloomberg.com summarizes it as a private company formed in 2009 with three co-founders (two men and a woman):

Founder, Chief Executive Officer and Director
Co-Founder and Vice President of Design
Co-Founder and President of NationBuilder Stories

3dna, Corp., doing business as NationBuilder, provides an online community organizing system to help leaders grow and organize communities. The company’s solutions include content management systems to build Websites; and an interactive database for managing social media, action campaigns, face-to-face contacts, email, and texting. It offers its solutions to political campaigns, non-profits and NGOs, advocacy and environmental groups, membership organizations, political parties, unions, and PACs and IEs in the United States and internationally. The company was founded in 2009 and is based in Los Angeles, California.

520 South Grand Avenue 2nd Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 United States

Founded in 2009

Phone: 213-394-4623

A mildly interesting SOS Business Search in California shows three entities, two of them with Gilliam’s name on them.  3dna Corp in California was set up in 2007 by “Legalzoom” as the registered agent, 1,000 shares of common stock “no par value” and in its one-pager description, took time to make its purpose of indemnifying its owners (or board) clear:

It then merged into a Delaware “3dna Corporation” (apparently also set up by James H. Gilliam, when– only Delaware knows for sure…) as the non-surviving entity, and this version has Gilliam as the registered agent.  A third one of similar, but not identical name, formed in 2003, I DNK of has any connection.  Probably the “founded in 2009” referenced by Bloomberg refers to when the Delaware corporation was founded, I DNK and am not going there just now (feel free to yourself).   If so, it’s playing cross-continental (USA) hopscotch — 2007 Calif, 2009? Delaware, merge the California one into the Delaware one, register the new one in 2011.  Click either image to enlarge. Might this have anything to do with making it harder for various state-located tax boards to catch up?

[End of THAT part of 2017 update, so far…]

[PBI’s] “New Learning Academy” (on-line) goals.  Listen to the lingo?  Catch their drift?

Public Banking Institute offers new learning academy

As part of the renewed commitment at PBI to support local efforts to establish public banks, we are creating a learning academy to help everyone understand the benefits and challenges of public banks.

Our plan is to create a core curriculum of online courses at PBI, to make the Public Banking Institute one of the world’s first and best places to learn about the real history of the economy and money, to clarify the crucial role public banking has played and is playing in the US and around the world, to explore its potential in creating a more prosperous and sustainable civilization in the 21st century, and much more.

This strategy fulfills two mission critical goals of PBI: it educates widely about public banking and our new paradigm –and we expect that it will inspire local and regional actions to create public banks.

We envision at least four levels of courses.  First, courses for the general public such as an exploration of the real history of the US economy and money’s little understood role.  How is money created and by whom?

Next will be a series of courses for students of economics (and hopefully even some economists), with an examination of the insidious power of interest, how it limits public policy potential, and how it can affect an economy – with a history of the Fed over the last 100 years.

A series for bankers will include how community bankers have profoundly benefitted from the BND,** and a class on money creation for bankers what they never taught you in school. A series for activists and legislators will include lessons since 2010 for public bank proponents’ successes and setback


“*BND” means their model, “Bank of North Dakota.”

Or, you can “Take the “Establishing Public Banks Course by clicking below ($50, paypal) etc.

Our Team” interesting assortment

There’s also a section near the top, and also near the bottom of that post (dark khaki with red borders, you can’t miss it) on more of these matters:


Walter Burien below mentions CALPERS and CALPERS International.

I saw “CALPERS” as among the list of groups which has signed the United Nations Environmental Programme Financial Initiative, along with 200 other members, many of them from the United States.  (Public Banking Institute‘s “Advisory Team” clued me to the UNEP Finance Initiative connection).

Jamie Brown is a Project Director at BASE, a non-profit Collaborating Centre of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in Basel, Switzerland that works to mobilise finance for sustainable energy worldwide.

Jamie was Founding Head of Secretariat for the UNEP Sustainable Energy Finance Alliance (SEF Alliance), the only convening body in the international system for public finance agencies in the clean energy sector.

She is currently organising an effort on behalf of BASE, the UNEP Finance Initiative and IISD to engage the global finance policy system on sustainability.
Jamie is a U.S. Presidential Scholar and holds an MSc with Distinction in Development Management from the London School of Economics.

Yes, and more on the London School of Economics, which seems heavily involved with the Obama Administration. Put that together with the Rhodes Scholars also trained at Oxford University and its influence on our Welfare Reform policies of 1996, and that’s real, well, “re-assuring” (??).  Notice which years are referenced:


President Obama’s Administration and the LSE*
Peter Orszag, Paul Volcker and other alumni and associates of the LSE have been named to the Obama administration

Dr Peter Orszag, a Princeton graduate who studied economics as a Marshall scholar at the LSE, earning an MSc in 1992 and PhD in 1997, has been named Director of the Office of Management and Budget in the new US administration.

Two LSE economics professors have paid tribute to the brilliance of President Obama’s new budget director. Peter Orszag is one of an impressive retinue of LSE alumni appointed by the new President. Aged just 40, Dr. Orszag will be a key member of the economic team, advising on a variety of issues including federal spending programs and managing the federal budget. His job, Obama said, will be to eliminate “those programs we don’t need and insisting that those we do need operate in a cost-effective way.”

Professor Emeritus Lord Richard Layard was so impressed with Orszag’s work as a Masters student that he invited him to Moscow in 1992 in the early post-Soviet period to work on the influential monthly publication Russian Economic Trends. “He’s very much the right kind of person for Obama, with very sensible, balanced views which are relevant to the problem in hand. I wasn’t surprised at his appointment as I felt that it was very predictable.”

Professor Danny Quah taught macroeconomics to Dr. Orszag as a PhD student in 1993 to 1994. “I think his experience at the LSE shows that Ph.D. training is not necessarily just for preparing for a career as an academic. The knowledge we transmit and the conversations we have in the LSE economics department will transfer into the type of good policy work that Peter will do.”

Dr. Orszag’s supervisor during his Ph.D. was Charlie Bean who is now deputy governor of the Bank of England. During the Clinton administration, Dr. Orszag served as special assistant to the President for Economic Policy (1997–1998), and as senior economist and senior adviser on the Council of Economic Advisers (1995–1996).

*(there’s only one more para. on the page, I quoted most of it)


Walter Burien is trying to stop taxation, with a clear awareness of why it’s not needed.

Ellen Brown wants to repurpose the collected wealth of collective governments and says nothing about stopping taxation.

She’s also announced through another website that she’s running for California State Treasurer (mainly to promote this theme), which I find pretty interesting giving the decision to kind of hide the institute promoting it under a noncompliant California nonprofit.

A section on that topic….

Here’s that article from “Web of Debt” (January, 2014):

 “California Dreaming:  Why I’m Running for State Treasurer

Two years ago, in the fall of 2011, a bill for a feasibility study for a California state-owned bank passed both houses of the California legislature.   The Public Banking Institute, which I founded and chaired, was instrumental in helping to get the bill as far as it got.**  But it died when Governor Jerry Brown vetoed it.  His reasoning was that we already had a banking committee, and that the matter could be explored in-house. However, we have heard no  more about it since.

I am therefore running for California State Treasurer on a state bank platform, along with Laura Wells, who is running for Controller. Our vision is to transform California, the world’s eighth largest economy, into a financially sovereign state. We are running on the ticket of the Green Party, because it takes no corporate money.  Candidates who take corporate money – and that means nearly all conventional candidates – are beholden to large corporate interests and cannot adequately represent the interests of the disenfranchised 99%.

I got my undergraduate degree at UC Berkeley in the 1960s, when tuition was free; and my law degree at UCLA in the 1970s, when tuition was $600 a year.  …

[[then, about 11 years abroad; from the Web of Debt, “About Author” section]]:

…Brown developed an interest in the developing world and its problems while living abroad for eleven years in Kenya, Honduras, Guatemala and Nicaragua. She returned to practicing law when she was asked to join the legal team of a popular Tijuana healer with an innovative cancer therapy, who was targeted by the chemotherapy industry in the 1990s. That experience produced her book Forbidden Medicine, which traces the suppression of natural health treatments to the same corrupting influences  that have captured the money system. She also co-authored the bestselling Nature’s Pharmacy, which has sold 285,000 copies.



Apparently she missed quite a bit of what was happening in the United States, meanwhile, (like major restructuring of federal financing to the states courtesy 1996 Congressional Budget called “Welfare Reform,” the privatization of government it introduced, and setting up a proliferation of unnecessary industries related to “curing poverty” (which I blog on, right?) and a few other minor details).   Or, just doesn’t want to talk about it.

[Material added day after post published, on 5/4/2014]

I’m looking at a printout of Tax Return for Inquiring Systems, Inc. for 2011 (EIN# 942524840, July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2012) which lists Public Banking Institute not even as the first four projects (Section III of the form), but #2 in a list of about 39 MORE projects listed in “Attachment O.”   There’s no evidence showing on the legislative record that “Public Banking Institute” and Ellen Brown specifically, helped author this bill or get it passed.  Here’s the previous year’s, which does NOT show PBI as a project.

[Charity Search Tool, from California’s “OAG” — type in that EIN# to see this and other years, and a financial snapshot — and that  ISI has a pattern of disrespect for Californians (and rules about charities) in consistently filing late — sometimes over a year late.  Which can also be seen at that site). = = = = = =

Did Ellen Brown & the Public Banking Institute, then help write this legislation?

For four state senators and 5 assembly members to have introduced it in February 2011, and get it past both houses of the state legislature, in the state with THE largest economy of the “big four” coastal state (California, New York, Texas, Florida) and THE largest court system in the country,  by the next September, this Public Banking Concept (and bill)  already had backers. Ms. Brown (and the institute which is a project of a dubious charity with a web presence and some NWO and Green Party connections, GLOBALLY) just lined up with their purposes.

And there’s no written evidence in the history of the bill (as it is in some other bills) of her or her institute having gotten it passed in her capacity  of having founded an “institute” which doesn’t show up until after July 2011, and even then barely — and did not exist as a corporation in the State of California at the time.  

Look at the dates:


INTRODUCED BY   Assembly Member Hueso
   (Coauthors: Assembly Members Gatto, Roger Hern�ndez, Lara, and
   (Coauthors: Senators Evans, Hancock, and Pavley)

                        FEBRUARY 17, 2011

   An act to add and repeal Division 5 (commencing with Section
64160) of Title 6.7 of the Government Code, relating to finance.

Compare the date California Bill AB750  was introduced to the date Public Banking Institute registered as a California Corporation, four months laer on May 19, 2011, Registered agent, Stuart Loren Cole.  Compare the two registrations:

Search yourself at http://kepler.sos.ca.gov/   Compare the Institute (Left side) with its Fiscal Agent (right side)

Entity Number: C3382791
Date Filed: 05/19/2011
Status: ACTIVE
Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
Entity Address: PO BOX 2195
EntityCity, State, Zip: SONOMA CA 95476
Agent for Service of Process: STUART LOREN COLE
Agent Address: 21885 BONNESS RD.
AgentCity,State,Zip: SONOMA CA 95476
Entity Number: C0893973
Date Filed: 08/08/1978
Status: ACTIVE
Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
Entity Address: PO BOX 2037
Entity City, State,Zip SONOMA CA 95476
Agent for Service of Process: LOREN COLE
Agent Address: 21885 BONNESS RD.
AgentCity,State,Zip: SONOMA CA 95476


(It’d be interesting to see how many PO boxes are registered to Stuart/Loren Cole in Sonoma)

PBI didn’t register in California as a charity yet, although it, and its backers, want to write legislation for my state:


Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
PUBLIC BANKING INSTITUTE Charity Not Registered SONOMA CA Charity Registration Charity
Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
INQUIRING SYSTEMS, INC.  034547 Charity Current SONOMA CA Charity Registration Charity

QUESTION Year 2017 update— if you are using a fiscal agent, why do you need your own EIN# from the IRS, and why, having one, aren’t you filing returns under that number, instead of a fiscal agent, especially such a “dicey” one as ISI, above?  A re-search on the same website (which now displays EIN#s in initial search results) for Public Banking Institute has it still “Not Registered” (ever), but coughs up an EIN#, which I then took to the IRS Exempt Organization (Select) Check, and searched all three options for that EIN# (see next two screenprints).  You can see that, although it wasn’t published for a year, the IRS revoked its tax-exempt status just a few weeks after I published this post (5/3/2014 vs. 5/15/2014).  No “reinstated” date shows so far.

That IRS (Pub. 78) database site comes with disclaimer — want to know for sure?  Call the 800#!” Perhaps a call would clarify why it’s both listed as active and able to take in tax-deductible contributions AND revoked, but not reinstated, a situation I’ve seen with other organizations since.


Back to May 2014 text.

The second charity listed, the one that says “Current” was only current under threat of losing their nonprofit status for failing to file the proper required returns (“RRFs”).  To date (on the years showing — which omits about the first 20+ years of its existence, see corporation filing date of 1978!) , returns are due 4.5 months after fiscal year end.  Which would be by October 15th of the SAME (not next) calendar year shown on the “Year-End.”

At all these times they were pulling in well over the minimum levels for not filing.

1st Delinquency letter, Nov. 2009, they should’ve filed for all previous years, but instead they only produced (Dec. 7, 2009) for the previous year until threatened again in March, 2010.  Notice that by this time EHBrown had been pushing the public banking model on Web of Debt, it seems, since about 2008, having not formed any “institute” to do it with.  After the second threat letter from the USDOJ/Charitable registries, they then filed for the missing years.   Evidence:

ISI EIN#942524840, CharDetails,FiledRRFs only Under Threats (EHB’s PublicBankingInstit FISCL AGENT)

Chronic Dishonesty and disregard for the basic regulations + claims to be concerned about the public, and Californians in particular = (judge for yourself).  This is such a common pattern among nonprofits doing business with government, although this one claims not to be.  This shows that for six years, even after first notice, they simply didn’t file.  An RRF isn’t hard to file (it’s a simple one-pager, for anyone not taking government grants, two-pager if they are:  Just state gross receipts and assets, date and sign after answering about six, or after some point in time, eight, simply Yes/No Questions!

[March 26, 2010 to Inquiring Systems, Inc.]


On November 30th, 2009 the Registry of Charitable Trusts sent a Warning of Impending Tax Assessment (copy enclosed) to the captioned organization.To date, no response has been received. Pursuant to that letter, the following required filings are delinquent:

1. Registration Renewal Fee (RRF-1) Report (s), together with required renewal fee, for fiscal year(s) ending: 06/30/03, 06/30/04, 06/30/05, 06/30/06, 06/30/07 & 06/30/08.

2. IRS Form 990, 990-PF, or 990-EZ report(s) for fiscal year(s) ending: 06/30/03, 06/30/04, 06/30/05, 06/30/06, 06/30/07, 06/30/08 & 06/30/09.

Failure to timely file required reports violates Government Code section 12586.


If this writer has been dishonest about the above facts, what about the ideas being promoted, then?  If there were an intention towards honesty, then why file under a noncompliant registry that had ALREADY received 2 warnings?  Because of concern for the public and the poor ?

[End, material added day after post published, on 5/4/2014]

A look at the bill, which was indeed veto’d in September 2011, but passed by both houses?  shows that they want to set up another California Investment Trust Fund, a blue ribbon task force to advise on it, which of course would involve another nonprofit with expertise.

. . . . This bill would establish the investment trust blue ribbon task
force to consider the viability of establishing the California
Investment Trust, which would be a state bank receiving deposits of
state funds
. The task force would be required to consider how the
investment trust could strengthen economic and community development,
provide financial stability to businesses, reduce the cost paid by
state government for banking services, and provide for excess
earnings of the trust to be used to supplement General Fund purposes
The bill would establish the membership of the task force, which
would include the Secretary of Business, Transportation and Housing,
or his or her designee, and specified individuals with a background
in finance appointed by the Legislature, and the Governor,
Controller, and Treasurer, or their designees
, and would require the
task force to be staffed by an organization selected by the task
force that is a nonprofit corporation, or other private corporation
that has specified expertise, including expertise in public finance
and public institutions models

The bill would require the task force
to report to the Legislature by December 1, 2012, on specified
issues relative to the California Investment Trust, including, among
other things, its recommendations relating to the viability of
establishing the trust and its impact on state government services,
as specified. The bill’s provisions would become inoperative, and
would be repealed, on January 1, 2017.

After this (next) conversational Non-Exchange (it appears no answer was given to Burien’s objections to being misquoted and using the CAFR theme to promote state banking), it looks like another conversation took place later in 2010, then the PBI, above, got started up, but using a different fiscal agent as cover.  More on that at the bottom of this post.
[Later, after I questioned here and probably on the Web of Debt comments field also, the ISI as fiscal agent, it appears the PBI landed that is, registered, as an actual business entity in Pennsylvania — however, that statement is as I recall without actually retracing all the steps involved finding that out years later in 2017].
If you want to see paragraphing as it was originally, see the links.  I’ve added lots of separation lines because my blog platform otherwise strips out paragraphs.  Don’t blame either writer for my color schemes.   The righthand (pink) column was written earlier.
W.Burien 6/28/2010 | E. Brown 5/21/2010
Know Misdirection / Omission When seen – Ellen Brown CAFR Article by Walter Burien 06/28/10

When Ellen Brown’s article appeared on the internet with my name in it I knew it that day. http://rense.com/general90/caf.htm I sent an email to (was an attorney) Ellen Brown (EB) the day she published this article requesting a call back to correct a few misrepresentations / misdirections / omissions. She wrote an article designed to put more power in the state’s hands through creation of their own bank. I was not getting a reply so I sent my communication sent to her to five people she knew who forwarded the same to her (wanted to make sure she could not say she did not see it) No call or email reply as of 06/28/10 has come. She may have a good reason for not replying but in any event the issues I wished to clarify with her are addressed here. (POST NOTE: No call to me has come from EB as of 05/19/11)

A few of the points / corrections I wanted to pass on to her were: PERSONAL CORRECTION:

1. Line one: I was never an accountant. I have never used the word conspiracy, I have always said “this is the basics that the public has been kept oblivious to due to the money and control involved.

2. Paragraph three: “Burien was originally alerted to this information by Lt. Col. Gerald Klatt“. This is outright false. I was alerted to the CAFR and the structure behind it in 1990 during the Hands Across New Jersey days when I took over looking at the NJ budget and true income for the state of NJ. This is well documented. I briefed Gerald Klatt in 1999 on the collective government ownership of it all and challenged him to put up a website for the purpose of doing CAFR surplus reviews. Six months latter he met my challenge and http://CAFRMan.com was launched by Gerald with surplus reviews of a few states and with him being from Tucson, AZ he did several AZ local city and county reviews.

I note that EB did not give the crucial information per the mention of Gerald’s name with that being: his website and that CAFR reviews were there to be seen by all. Omission of these two factors is indicative of being 100% in compliance with a government agenda. I note my website

CAFR1.com was not mentioned also.


1. Second paragraph: “54,000” reports noted and as of 2007 GFOA notes 186,000 separate government entities with 3,600 participating in their Certificate of Excellence Award Program“.

The comment made of “stashed away in surplus funds” is a incorrect statement. The controllers within government have gone to great lengths to create their own self interested statutes and financial oversight laws to justify each and every fund of which their are hundreds if not thousands of separate funds in each state.

2. Fourth paragraph: EB mentions “Government Finance Officershttp://GFOA.org the private association who started by promotion to government the CAFR accounting structure in 1946.

Comments made here that are misdirections / misrepresentations: the use of the term “rainy day funds” I have also been very clear in my writings that these rainy day funds are a title misdirection and equate them to being like your pocket change jar kept on you kitchen counter. The other funds maintained by governments can and will dwarf these entitled rainy day funds.

Then there is “Unlike private businesses, which have bank credit lines they can draw on if they miscalculate their expenses, local governments are required by law to balance their budgets” This is cute double-speak. Local Governments have massive credit lines. Every bond issue is a credit vehicle, local governments borrow from themselves and other local governments, and within any local government they have enterprise operations that they will from time to time borrow from under agreement.

Well, the balancing of the budget is where the shell game is played. What income source is promoted to the public to balance the budget is tax income. What is excluded is a mention or review of the many specialty investment funds; enterprise wealth; or balancing out standing balances from the many advanced liability accounts for need verses practical use towards the overall picture. This again by omission being 100% in compliance with a government agenda

3. Fifth paragraph: “a cushion from 20% to 75% more than their budget actually require” This type of fund is what is designate (entitled) the rainy day fund and is addresses above.

4. Sixth, seventh, and eight paragraphs: California the (PMIA) and (LAIF) are mentioned. These funds you can view as deposit accounts for other local governments. You would not want your bank or brokerage account to take your investments and tell you: “We needed your funds so we took them. gone” No you would not. The issue here is not taking the funds but looking at where the funds came from in the first place. Back about ten years ago Rebekah Southerland from the Carolina’s brought to my attention that the Edgefield County School district who was crying poverty, who needed a tax increase due to budget shortfalls had twenty-seven million dollars invested with the local government investment pool at the same time that they were promoting a budgetary shortfall. Per these types of funds in different states, here is where the looking per the example given of Edgefield needs to be done.

5. Ninth, tenth, and eleventh paragraphs: Here the screw turns. “downgraded to just above that of Greece, driving the state’s interest tab skyward” I have noted in many of my articles that government promotes debt at the front door and funds it with their own investment assets through the back door.

Here the banks act as the

middle-man for a piece of the action.

 Government invests massive funds with the banks and then the banks use that investment capital to fund government’s own debt instruments. Government in turn then gets to lock the people into repayment of that debt guaranteeing themselves a good return through the banks from their original investment.

And you thought the banks were responsible for all that usury interest drain on the population. Again, the banks are the middle-men getting a piece of the action. If it be consumer mortgage; credit cards; government debt, government is the primary investor in each! 

Government bailouts of the Banks??? They were making sure their OWN investments stayed in the black. GET IT?

6. Twelfth paragraph: CalPERS is mentioned. EB mentions three large funds in her article when from all local governments in CA there are over 100,000 funds large and small that in collective totals dwarf the totals expressed in her article. A conservative estimate if collective total value from all local government investment funds “in” CA were totaled would be 8 trillion dollars.

Per the CalPER fund I have mentioned it in the past a few times but the real point of interest that I have mentioned over and over again is the off-shoot of CalPERS called “CalPERS International” that was set up in the early 80’s to do international assignments of investment capital for not just CA but any local government in the USA.

CalPERS International on their CAFR will show low balances of 40 to 50 billion dollars when you look at it. This is being that it was set up as a transfer assignment entity to assign the investments worldwide under different management groups.

So even though trillions have funneled in and out of the door for assignment, what they show on their books in the final accounting of their CAFR is what is in the process of going out or coming back in. NOT what has been assigned under management which is in the trillions of dollars. Through that massive pool of assigned funds scattered around the globe but under the direction of “CalPERS International”, they have now as off-shore funds outside of direct scrutiny of the CFTC and SEC moved the markets and in fact have allowed for the destabilization and takeover of countries. EXAMPLES: Mexico in the 80’s, Soviet block countries in the 90’s, and the cross hairs being on China and India in the 2000’s.

The CA State budget promoted shortfall could be corrected AND done so with an extra 20 billion applied for a buffer from less than a SMALL fraction of 1% equally allocated from the many and all collective holding / investment funds from all local governments in California..

7. Thirteenth paragraph: The use of “meager interest” is 100% false. They reap tens of billions of dollars per year doing what they are doing on these two large funds she mentioned. And then for a bait and switch the mention of: “It could do this by owning its own bank.”

8. I never once in over a decade of disclosure given have mentioned or recommended a “state owned bank”

The article has the effect of saying: “Look there is sand on the beach” as she holds some sand in her hand and then says: “now we must turn the beach over to the state under a new structure of state banking”..

 REALITY CHECK: the state (government) already has control over and owns the beach so let’s let them double tax us for the sand on the beach by letting them loan it back to us at interest as they continue to generate massive investment returns from the beach they have taken over and own already. Slick sound-bite portrayal me says, but then Ellen is an Attorney.. so 1 + 1 = 93…. and from that equation in reality it equals: 2 for the people 91 for government.. She gets an A+ on that one, as an ex-attorney that is and scores some brownie points with the government gang.

I did not appreciate the use of my name and the CAFR to do a bait and switch misdirection damage control article indicative of being 100% in compliance with a government agenda.

READ MY LIPS: There is no need for taxation period! Collective government since 2001 now brings in the largest percentage of their gross income from investment return!

A complete and true audit of “all” government domestic and international investments that cuts through the smoke and mirrors pulling back the curtain exposing the wizard will establish this fact in conjunction with that all taxation can be eliminated with the application of the TRF creating a prosperous world economy by capital investment now openly seen and thus properly used for all time to come.

The Tax Retirement Fund application can and will do this one venue at a time when and if implemented. Now, later, or never as always you and the forces behind and with you will decide.

Please share my comments with others.

Walter Burien – CAFR1 P. O. Box 2112 Saint Johns, AZ 85936 Tel. (928) 445-3532 __________________________
http://CAFR1.com and http://TaxRetirement.com
Any local government can be restructured to meet their annual budget needs “Without” taxes. TRF (Tax Retirement Funds) paying for every City, County, State’s annual budgetary needs!

To automatically subscribe to CAFR1 NATIONAL posts – http://CAFR1.com/phplist/?p=subscribe ————– Important PS: http://CAFR1.com/DNT.html (for the kitty)

The Mysterious CAFRs How Stagnant Pools Of Government Money Could Help Save The Economy By Ellen Brown 5-21-10

For over a decade, accountant Walter Burien has been trying to rouse the public over what he contends is a massive conspiracy and cover-up, involving trillions of dollars squirreled away in funds maintained at every level of government.

His numbers may be disputed, but these funds definitely exist, as evidenced by the Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports (CAFRs) required of every government agency. If they don’t represent a concerted government conspiracy, what are they for? And how can they be harnessed more efficiently to help allay the financial crises of state and local governments?

The Elusive CAFR Money Burien is a former commodity trading adviser who has spent many years peering into government books. He notes that the government is composed of 54,000 different state, county, and local government entities, including school districts, public authorities, and the like; and that these entities all keep their financial assets in liquid investment funds, bond financing accounts and corporate stock portfolios. The only income that must be reported in government budgets is that from taxes, fines and fees; but the investments of government entities can be found in official annual reports (CAFRs), which must be filed with the federal government by local, county and state governments. These annual reports show that virtually every U.S. city, county, and state has vast amounts of money stashed away in surplus funds. Burien maintains that these slush funds have been kept concealed from taxpayers, even as taxes are being raised and citizens are being told to expect fewer government services.

Burien was originally alerted to this information by Lt. Col. Gerald Klatt, who evidently died in 2004 under mysterious circumstances, adding fuel to claims of conspiracy and cover-up. Klatt was a an Air Force auditor and federal accountant, and it’s not impossible that he may have gotten too close to some military stash being used for nefarious ends. But it is hard to envision how all the municipal governments hording their excess money in separate funds could be complicit in a massive government conspiracy. Still, if that is not what is going on, why such an inefficient use of public monies?

A Simpler Explanation I got a chance to ask that question in April, when I was invited to speak at a conference of Government Finance Officers in Missouri.

The friendly public servants at the conference explained that maintaining large “rainy day” funds is simply how local governments must operate.

Unlike private businesses, which have bank credit lines they can draw on if they miscalculate their expenses, local governments are required by law to balance their budgets; and if they come up short, public services and government payrolls may be frozen until the voters get around to approving a new bond issue.

This has actually happened, bringing local government to a standstill. In emergencies, government officials can try to borrow short-term through “certificates of participation” or tax participation loans, but the interest rates are prohibitively high; and in today’s tight credit market, finding willing lenders is difficult.

To avoid those unpredictable contingencies, municipal governments will keep a cushion of from 20% to 75% more than their budgets actually require. This money is invested, but not necessarily lucratively. One finance officer, for example, said that her city had just bid out $2 million as a 30-day certificate of deposit (CD) to two large banks at a meager annual interest of 0.11%. It was a nice spread for the banks, which could leverage the money into loans at 6% or so; but it was a pretty sparse deal for the city.

Meanwhile, Back in California That was in Missouri, but the figures I was particularly interested were for my own state of California, which was struggling with a budget deficit of $26.3 billion as of April 2010. Yet the State Treasurer’s website says that he manages a Pooled Money Investment Account (PMIA) tallying in at nearly $71 billion as of the same date, including a Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) of $24 billion. Why isn’t this money being used toward the state’s deficit? The Treasurer’s answer to this question, which he evidently gets frequently, is that legislation forbids it. His website states:

Can the State borrow LAIF dollars to resolve the budget deficit? No. California Government Code 16429.3 states that monies placed with the Treasurer for deposit in the LAIF by cities, counties, special districts, nonprofit corporations, or qualified quasi-governmental agencies shall not be subject to either of the following: (a) Transfer or loan pursuant to Sections 16310, 16312, or 16313. (b) Impoundment or seizure by any state official or state agency.

The non-LAIF money in the pool can’t be spent either. It can be borrowed, but it has to be paid back. When Governor Schwarzenegger tried to raid the Public Transportation Account for the state budget, the California Transit Association took him to court and won. The Third District Court of Appeals ruled in June 2009 that diversions from the Public Transportation Account to fill non-transit holes in the General Fund violated a series of statutory and constitutional amendments enacted by voters via four statewide initiatives dating back to 1990.

In short, the use of these funds for the state budget has been blocked by the voters themselves. Bond issues are approved for particular purposes. When excess funds are collected, they are not handed over to the State toward next year’s budget. They just sit idly in an earmarked fund, drawing a modest interest.

What’s Wrong with This Picture? California’s budget problems have caused its credit rating to be downgraded to just above that of Greece, driving the state’s interest tab skyward. In November 2009, the state sold 30-year taxable securities carrying an interest rate of 7.26%. Yet California has never defaulted on its bonds. Meanwhile, the too-big-to-fail banks, which would have defaulted on hundreds of billions of dollars of debt if they had not been bailed out by the states and their citizens, are able to borrow from each other at the extremely low federal funds rate, currently set at 0 to .25% (one quarter of one percent). The banks are also paying the states quite minimal rates for the use of their public monies, and turning around and relending this money, leveraged many times over, to the states and their citizens at much higher rates. That is assuming they lend at all, something they are increasingly reluctant to do, since speculating with the money is more lucrative, and investing it in federal securities is more secure.

Private banks clearly have the upper hand in this game. Local governments have been forced to horde {sic, she means “hoard”} funds in very inefficient ways, building excessive reserves while slashing services, because they do not have the extensive credit lines available to the private banking system. States cannot easily incur new debt without voter approval, a process that is cumbersome, time-consuming and uncertain. Banks, on the other hand, need to keep only the slimmest of reserves, because they are backstopped by a central bank with the power to create all the reserves necessary for its member banks, as well as by Congress and the taxpayers themselves, who have been arm-twisted into repeated bailouts of the Wall Street behemoths.

How the CAFR Money Could Be Used Without Spending It

California, then, is in the anomalous position of being $26 billion in the red and plunging toward bankruptcy, while it has over $70 billion stashed away in an investment pool that it cannot touch. Those are just the funds managed by the Treasurer. According to California’s latest CAFR, the California Public Employees’ Retirement Fund (CalPERS) has total investments of $360 billion, including nearly $144 billion in “equity securities” and $37 billion in “private equity.” See the State of California Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2009, pages 83-84.

This money cannot be spent, but it can be invested — and it can be invested not just in conservative federal securities but in equity, or stocks. Rather than turning this hidden gold mine over to Wall Street banks to earn a very meager interest, California could leverage its excess funds itself, turning the money into much-needed low-interest credit for its own use. How? It could do this by owning its own bank.

Only one state currently does this — North Dakota. North Dakota is also the only state projected to have a budget surplus by 2011. It has not fallen into the Wall Street debt trap afflicting other states, because it has been able to generate its own credit through its own state-owned Bank of North Dakota (BND).

An investment in the State Bank of California would not be at risk unless the bank became insolvent, a highly unlikely result since the state has the power to tax. In North Dakota, the BND is a dba of the state itself: it is set up as “the State of North Dakota doing business as the Bank of North Dakota.” That means the bank cannot go bankrupt unless the state goes bankrupt.

The capital requirement for bank loans is a complicated matter, but it generally works out to be about 7%. (According to Standard & Poor’s, the worldwide average risk-adjusted capital ratio stood at 6.7 per cent as of June 30, 2009; but for some major U.S. banks it was much lower: Citigroup’s was 2.1 per cent; Bank of America’s was 5.8 per cent.) At 7%, $7 of capital can back $100 in loans. Thus if $7 billion in CAFR funds were invested as capital in a California state development bank, the bank could generate $100 billion in loans.

This $100 billion credit line would allow California to finance its $26 billion deficit at very minimal interest rates, with $74 billion left over for infrastructure and other sorely needed projects. Studies haveshown that eliminating the interest burden can cut the cost of public projects in half. The loans could be repaid from the profits generated by the projects themselves. Public transportation, low-cost housing, alternative energy sources and the like all generate fees. Meanwhile, the jobs created by these projects would produce additional taxes and stimulate the economy. Commercial loans could also be made, generating interest income that would return to state coffers.

Building a Deposit Base To start a bank requires not just capital but deposits. Banks can create all the loans they can find creditworthy borrowers for, up to the limit of their capital base; but when the loans leave the bank as checks, the bank needs to replace the deposits taken from its reserve pool in order for the checks to clear. Where would a state-owned bank get the deposits necessary for this purpose?

In North Dakota, all the state’s revenues are deposited in the BND by law. Compare California, which has expected revenues for 2010-11 of $89 billion. The Treasurer’s website reports that as of June 30, 2009, the state held over $18 billion on deposit as demand accounts and demand NOW accounts (basically demand accounts carrying a very small interest). These deposits were held in seven commercial banks, most of them Wall Street banks: Bank of America, Union Bank, Bank of the West, U.S. Bank, Wells Fargo Bank, Westamerica Bank, and Citibank. Besides these deposits, the $64 billion or so left in the Treasurer’s investment pool could be invested in State Bank of California CDs. Again, most of the bank CDs in which these funds are now invested are Wall Street or foreign banks. Many private depositors would no doubt choose to bank at the State Bank of California as well, keeping California’s money in California. There is already a movement afoot to transfer funds out of Wall Street banks into local banks.

While the new state-owned bank is waiting to accumulate sufficient deposits to clear its outgoing checks, it can do what other startup banks do – borrow deposits from the interbank lending market at the very modest federal funds rate (0 to .25%).

To avoid hurting California’s local banks, any state monies held on deposit with local banks could remain there, since the State Bank of California should have plenty of potential deposits without these funds. In North Dakota, local banks are not only not threatened by the BND but are actually served by it, since the BND partners with them, engaging in “participation loans” that help local banks with their capital requirements.

Taking Back the Money Power We have too long delegated the power to create our money and our credit to private profiteers, who have plundered and exploited the privilege in ways that are increasingly being exposed in the media. Wall Street may own Congress, but it does not yet own the states. We can take the money power back at the state level, by setting up our own publicly-owned banks. We can “spend” our money while conserving it, by leveraging it into the credit urgently needed to get the wheels of local production turning once again. Ellen www.webofdebt.com


and the primary idea behind the group “The Public Banking Institute” fronted by Ellen Hodgson Brown (formerly practicing law in southern California) who hooked up with “Inquiring Systems Inc.” to push her agenda — and did NOT properly incorporate to show the public its own tax returns and the group’s own finances, choosing instead the dubious and “too busy saving the world to send in our paperwork” nonprofit initially formed with 6 PhDs, 4 Masters, and a BS – I stayed on the task and learned what time of day it is in the New World Order.



At the end of the day I looked up yet another of the many credits of EcoSystemologist Loren Cole, Ph.D. (his summary claims — but doesn’t reference — three other PhDs or when or where he got them), his claim to be Chairman of the Board of BeOnHoldings and Essential Foods, Inc. (very, very organic and socially responsible?).

I didn’t see his name anywhere referenced on any of the lists of boards of directors for either corporation — but then again, it’s a private corporation not a nonprofit.

HOWEVER, the certifying corporation which is all over the website, IS a nonprofit: But you can pick up quite a bit just  looking up, on-line, from anywhere you can get on-line, and for only the price of your time in exchange for better insight, who they’re referring to (boasting about) as either their accomplishments, who’s on the board, what the board members are paid, and who they are redirecting money or grants towards.  You get a picture of size and proportion of grants to program service revenue, which in another category would simply be called Sales of products and services.

Usually on the IRS statement of Revenue (ca. page 9? check) you can also see of its revenue, which part was “government grants” although good luck finding out from which parts of government.  Not shown  on the IRS form, supposed to be mentioned (at least in California) on a separate form called the “RRF” (annually).

You can do the same for any single corporation that caught your eye — or wants your money — or is contracting with government to better serve you — other corporations who appear to be certifying, accrediting, validating, and approving of their accomplishments.

You can compare website to tax returns to corporate registrations where they’re available.  And you can get better at this with practice, and from it pick up a better understanding of how things are going in the realms of “we’re the greatest and going to help humanity” at least when it comes to nonprofits.  The website is the public face (sales portal), but the tax return is closer to its inner workings (character).  Tax returns are the organization’s “sales report” to the IRS (and to some degree, to the public).  They provide more information (although it’s a pain in the neck to look through forms, rather than having them to be extracted on a form we could choose to compare across corporations, or across years in one corporations), FOR THIS PURPOSE:  to categorize it and then decide whether to (see last post), ditch or track the conversation.  It is another point of reference (two-dimensional); without it you are reading flat-lined propaganda.

Looking at tax returns of a nonprofit (online) then brings up the issue of the databases that show them, where one state may show, or allow you to sort on different fields than others.

The B Lab in Wayne, Pennsylvania, nonprofit formed in 2006 (Tax return) .


Again, please see the red & khaki blocked sections from this post, especially towards the bottom — for some follow up to the earlier 2010 conversations.

Get Real(itybloger)! — Call In, Read the Links on CAFRs, Review Regularly.  

What the heck — here’s a good chunk of it here. Notice that after the May, 2010 // June, 2010 exchange (Burien’s reply seems to have been basically ignored) here comes another round a few months later, it looks like. As can be seen from the 2011? startup of “PBI” under “ISI” to promote Public Banking, in combination with various UNEP advisory board members and other global, green individuals, someone is on an agenda and simply doesn’t care. I don’t think Ms. Brown is particularly that influential — I think she’s simply promoting a program that plenty of people, globally, want. Consider, or see it back at the link above (Jan 2014 post):

(I’m going to reverse the color scheme above, hopefully this will catch someone’s attention, if we have become a nation of people who only respond to moving pictures and bright animated creations that capture our imagination — for a few months, weeks, or moments at a time…) (Neither writer is responsible for my sense of color….):

CAFR1 on State Run Banks – In Reply to Ellen Brown’s article of 9/10/10:On Fri, 9/10/10, Ellen H Brown wrote:

From: Ellen H Brown
Subject: latest article — “A Solution to the Federal Debt Crisis?”
Date: Friday, September 10, 2010, 6:06 PM

Hi, here is my latest article, posted on Global Research:
“A Solution to the Federal Debt Crisis? Time for Helicopter Ben to Drop Some Money on Mainstream”
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=20962Best wishes,
Ellen Brown



Speaking in Plain language for all to understand:

CAFR1 on State Run Banks
by Walter Burien


Ever hear of the New World Order?  — A NWO primarily run by corporatist government attorneys?

Government is the NWO. The NWO is not coming from the outside; it is home grown by institutionalized government finance right here.

Over the last seven decades government investments have quietly taken the investment wealth all over. The mortgage bailout mentioned in the article I am replying to cites that $1.25 trillion dollars was used to buy distressed mortgage bonds at the end of 2008. In reality, that money was used to bail out the government’s own investments to keep themselves in the black.

 (Burien, cont’d, @ CAFR1 on State Run Banks – In Reply to Ellen Brown’s article of 9/10/10)“So what is this presentation within the article I am replying to about state run banks promoting?ANSWER: The next step in the ability to steal massive wealth while the public is treated like 100% idiots. The Federal Reserve was created as a centralized valve for constraining or releasing dollars, whereby the economy was controlled. Wealth transfer was consistently accomplished to serve its primary investors, the various institutional investment fund of “government”.The fact that collective governments are the primary investors with the Federal Reserve banks gives the meaning and definition of the “silence is golden” rule.So now that the grand theft has taken place at the end of 2008, phase two goes into operation: “Cut out the middle man and hold the bags of cash yourself”.Disengaging from the Federal Reserve that government has always kept under lock and key in government’s pocket since day one, our government proposes doing it from this point forward directly for themselves through a conglomerate of state run banks.By exercising the blatant greed and their own tendency for theft, already firmly established within their own corporate personas, the state banks can vastly expand the ability to apply fractional reserve banking and do so up front and personal.  This expands their already over- bloated wealth bases.. . . .[there’s more…]


3 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. daveyone1

    May 4, 2014 at 4:25 am

  2. […] the lines of the recent post Accounting Literacy Matters.  Cause-based Literacy Doesn’t (even though it’s dealing with a different topic), I then looked again (hindsight […]

  3. […] [2/1/2014; see also three links at the end of the 3-page pdf).  The May post "Accounting Literacy Matters, Cause-Based Doesn't" followed up on that type of conversation].  This candidate for state Treasurer is a California […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: