update with voluntary withdrawal of complaint by keenan in re ces nom to intervene with exhibits and...

$OUTHEW DIfSTNCT REPORTERS P.C. INVOICE

ID # 13-2775946 500 Pearl St Room 330 New York, N.Y. 10007 U.S.A. (2 12) 805-0300

Bleaklev.Platt & Schmidt One North Lexington Ave. White Plains, NY 1060 1

Attention: William H Mulligan

INVOTCE NO. 025 1796-IN

INVOICE DATE 06/06/20 12

CUSTOMER NO. 10002 17

WORKORDERNO. 121487

SALESPERSON Siwik, Christine

Job Date =ENAN V BOSCO

CASE NO. 1 lCV08500

5/30/20 12 Original

PAYMENT IS DUE UPON RECEIPT OF THIS INVOICE

28 PGES At 3.120

Net Invoice: Less Discount:

Freight: Sales Tax:

Invoice Total:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

NEIL F. KEENAN, Individually and as Agent for THE DWGON FAMILY, citizens of foreign states,

Plaintiff,

DANIELE DAL BOSCO, et al.,

Defendants.

11 CV 8500 (JMF)

_ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ - - - - _ - - - - - - - -X

New York, N.Y. May 30, 2012 3:30 p.m.

Before :

HON. JESSE M. FURMAN,

~istrict Judge

BLEAKLEY, PLATT & SCHMIDT Attorneys for Plaintiff

BY: WILLIAM MULLIGAN, JR.

CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK, Pro Se Proposed Intervenor

SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300

(In open court)

DEPUTY CLERK: Matter of Keenan versus Dal Bosco, 11

Civ. 8500.

Counsel, please state your name for the record.

MR. MULLIGAN: Good afternoon, William Mulligan, Jr.,

member of the firm of Bleakley, Platt & Schmidt in White

Plains, New York, attorneys for the plaintiff.

THE COURT: Good afternoon, Mr. Mulligan.

MR. STRUNK: My name is Christopher Earl Strunk, I'm

pro se self-represented without being an attorney. I'm a

proposed intervenor and I'm responding to the order of the

Court.

THE COURT: Good afternoon, Mr. Strunk.

Before I get to the motion to intervene, Mr. Mulligan,

I read your letter. I have reviewed the complaint. It's an

unusual one. Give me a little bit of a better sense of what

exactly is going on here and what the status is of your

efforts, if any, to serve the defendants.

MR. MULLIGAN: Yes, your Honor. Did you say you

perused the complaint?

THE COURT: I can't claim to have read in deep care

every single word, but I certainly read through the complaint

and have I sense of what is going on.

MR. MULLIGAN: Thank you, Judge. I did the best I

could to satisfy the judge's request for a status report and


condensed that on 111 pages and being as straightforward as I

could be.

Nothing has changed since, your Honor, in that I have

not served any of the defendants yet for a variety of reasons.

I'm getting reports as recently as 12:48 a.m. this morning. I

still cannot locate Mr. Dal Bosco or Mr. Sale. We believe

Mr. Sale is in Thailand with Defendant Dam, who was the head of

the OITC.

It's funny now being able to talk about this case

after 15 months. And as one of the attorneys said to me, it

reads more like a screenplay than a complaint, and I said I

would take that as a compliment.

But we haven't served, Judge. I set forth as best I

could the reasons why. The primary reason is that I can't find

three of these guys. We wouldn't be here if Mr. Dal Bosco

hadn't stolen the bonds from my client, Mr. Keenan. And he is

on the run, so to speak.

I'm still gathering information, Judge. I'm being as

straightforward as I can. Some of it has to do with

jurisdictional issues. And as the months were going by, I

1 said - - I don't want to, for instance, serve the U.N., get a

timetable going there. To be frank, some defendants are going

to have defenses which might be more difficult to overcome than

others.

I had my eye on the 120 days. I had my on eye on the


last sentence in Rule 4(m) about not applying to foreign

defendants, although I realize I may be in the wrong circuit

for that. But essentially I have come to the conclusion that

the defendants will be served to the extent that I can find

them. I believe it is likely that I will have to amend the

complaint. And I have never been in a situation like this. I

never had a case like this, obviously, that I was just waiting

for things to happen.

My client has been in Indonesia for three months. We

communicate by Skype sometimes, otherwise by e-mail, and I am

doing the best I can to try to get this thing off the ground.

My concern as the plaintiff, and in light of Rule 4(m), I would

rather not have the case discontinued, albeit without

prejudice. That's just an inherent defensive tactic, I don't

want to have the case discontinued. On other hand, 1'11 be

honest, I may well have to amend the complaint, which will

start the ball rolling again. I don't think I will have a

statute of limitations problem, because the essential tort here

is conversion. I think it's three years, and I think I have

until 2013. I'm being totally frank with you, Judge, what is

going on through my mind.

So as I put forth in my letter, my main concern at

this point was to appeal to the Court, even though it's not

formally presented by motion or anything, by the Court or

anyone else, that - - I'm hedging, I am hedging, I admit it, but


my primary concern would be maybe to get the Court's permission

to have that 120 days extended. I realize it's been extended

by 60 days by fate with the replacement, I understand that.

THE COURT: Can I stop you for a second, and I will

get back to the service issues in a few minutes, but before I

address those, I had one threshold question which is, as you

know, the Court is required to raise sua sponte the question of

subject matter jurisdiction where there's any question about

it.

I have read that portion of your complaint with some

care, and I understand that you're claiming subject matter

jurisdiction on two grounds, and I wanted you to discuss that

in a little bit more detail because it's not clear to me that

there is subject matter jurisdiction here. The provision of

the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act that you cite has a

definitional provision defining what a foreign state is for the

purposes of the act. You invoke federal common law, but

certainly don't cite any authority in support of the

proposition that would give rise to subject matter

jurisdiction.

MR. MULLIGAN: Well, maybe not in the complaint, your

Honor, but in our research I do believe that what we have here

is the expropriation of United States Federal Reserve notes.

If you go on the Federal Reserve - - and I do believe it's

uniquely federal interest in that they are notes issued by the


federal government - - withdrawn, not the federal government,

the Federal Reserve, which is not part of the government.

And I think that given that there are perhaps $134.5

billion worth of Federal Reserve notes floating around that

have been stolen, that would be subject to the auspices of the

Federal Reserve Bank in New York, that this Court, because

there are uniquely federal interests involved in the possible

black marketing, if you will, of United States Federal Reserve

notes, that a federal court, and certainly in New York where

the Federal Reserve Bank of New York is located, would have

jurisdiction.

one of the things I'm going after, Judge, goes to that

point. And I can't say I have the affidavit, but I have a

draft, which I received as recently as yesterday, and in

essence, Judge, what I would be arguing, if that issue were

specifically here - - I know you raised it sua sponte, which

you're entitled to do, but the argument would be that the

Dragon family is the largest single depositor holding assets

and counter assets managed by the Federal Reserve Bank of New

York.

Therefore, illegal use the Dragon family assets such

as gold, for which we in turn - - the I1we1' there, this would be

authored directly from a member of the Dragon family. This is

one of the first direct contacts I had from this family. It's

not to me but through my client. He cites to and we would cite


C5UTKEEC

to the responsibility of the New York Fed, which is to serve as

the fiscal agent of the United States for foreign central banks

and official international financial organizations. It acts as

the primary contact with other foreign central banks. This is

off their web site.

THE COURT: This is off the Fed's web site?

MR. MULLIGAN: That part, not the proposed affidavit

that I was reading from. And I said proposed, it's not signed,

I don't have it, but I'm being as straight as I can with you,

Judge.

I think that when pressed, if I have to brief it, that

I could do a better job than I'm doing right now about

explaining the federal common law jurisdiction.

THE COURT: I think you'll have to brief that. If you

would prefer to wait for that, I'm happy to let you. I will

tell you I'm not - - sitting here and without doing any

research, I can't tell you I'm inclined to think that the fact

that these are Federal Reserve notes alone suffices. Cash, I

have a $20 bill here, it says at the top "Federal Reserve

note." It would be hard to imagine that a federal court would

have subject matter jurisdiction in a case involving the theft

of a large amount of cash, or cash regardless of how much of it

was involved. So you can address it.

I MR. MULLIGAN: I hear you, and it's not totally

unexpected. And I would also like to address the Foreign

SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 8 0 5 - 0 3 0 0

MR. MULLIGAN: I realize I may have a few more upon

11 information and belief allegations in my complaint than I

I I started out, but with respect to the role of the Italians - -

and I would be happy to further that, your Honor, if you're

suggesting that you're putting it to me to explain or brief the

I subject matter jurisdiction, I would like the time to do so and

I would be happy to do so.

THE COURT: I think there's a serious question going

I / to the Courtls jurisdiction, so I am going to ask you to brief I I that. Obviously you proffered two bases for it, you can brief

I I both of those. I think assuming that the foreign Sovereign

I I Immunities Act gives rise to jurisdiction over Italy and I I Italian officials that you named, I would say you should also I I address whether that is sufficient - - whether that gives rise

I to jurisdiction over the whole matter or just with respect to those parties.

MR. MULLIGAN: Certainly not all the defendants.

THE COURT: So we'll talk about a timeline for that, i

but I think you have to address that.

I I Now a related matter also going to the Courtls

I I jurisdiction is the fact that the United Nations and Ban Ki-moon are named as defendants here. I think you probably

SOUTHERN' DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 8 0 5 - 0 3 0 0

know this, but under the Convention on the Privileges and

Immunities of the United Nations, the United Nations itself is

immune from ''every form of legal process except insofar as any

particular case it has expressly waived its imrn~nity.~~ I take

it there has been no waiver here, certainly.

MR. MULLIGAN: Certainly not, your Honor. It's an

uphill battle, but I don't think that you can claim sovereign

immunity and offer $100 million bribes, whether the U.N. or Ban

Ki-moon or anyone else.

THE-COURT: My understanding of the convention is

pretty basic, that the United Nations itself and Ban Ki-moon

may be in different positions in the sense that the United

Nations, I understand, is absolutely immune absent a waiver,

and the secretary general is immune with respect to acts

performed in his function as secretary general. So there may

be room with respect to the secretary general that there isn't

with respect to the United Nations.

MR. MULLIGAN: Certainly, Judge, it certainly comes as

no surprise that that would be the primary issue on your mind

and certainly on the U.N.'s mind if they were served, and that

will be an expected argument.

THE COURT: So we will get to the schedule on that as

well, but I think I will have you brief the question of whether

there is jurisdiction with respect to those defendants and/or

give you a date by which you can obtain a waiv@r of their


immunity. I find it hard to believe that would be forthcoming.

MR. MULLIGAN: I don't think that will happen.

THE COURT: So we'll get back to that.

Again, before we run to the issue of service, I want

to address Mr. Strunkls motion to intervene. 1 understand from

your letter that you oppose the motion and wanted - - well, let

me hear from Mr. Strunk first what his interest is in the

matter that gives rise to his motion.

MR. STRUNK: Thank you, your Honor.

I have been researching the post World War I1

arrangements of the U.S. government and its relationship to the

Society of Jesus in particular and the role of de Chardin

starting back - - Father de Chardin - - starting back in 2005 for

someone who hired me to do a zoning study in Dutchess County

which ended up in the River's Keeper program. De Chardin is

buried up there. And his involvement inside China was, other

than finding Peking Man and writing The Phenomenology of Man,

he dug up graves, and he was involved with the Office of Naval

Intelligence in transferring large amounts of gold outside of

China through our submarines in 1935 in exchange for Federal

Reserve gold bonds, and the monies were transfer to the Federal

Reserve Bank on the West Coast. So my own interest in history

and my ability to make money doing zoning research led me into

starting to research the history of the Japanese gold

settlements after World War I1 and the involvement of OSS. I


C5UTKEEC

was a Vietnam veteran.

And I knew Stephen Solarz, who was involved in

removing Ferdinand Marcos from government. I had conversations

with him before his death. He was my Congressman. So that I

was aware of many of the gold transfer problems and the fight

over where the buried gold was, and the Imelda Marcos case

where I saw the research, the testimony on the part of various

OSS officers as to the whereabouts of gold and how Imelda

Marcos ended up with the gold from concentration camp victims

in Citibank, and there was testimony on that in the late '90s.

So I have looked at a lot of this research, looked at

court testimony. I looked at Judge Holwellfs decisions on the

matter of which I'm a - - I own two historic gold bonds, one

from 1913, 20 pounds, and one from 1942, a gold-based backed

bond also. And I read the complaint, I felt there were

weaknesses in it, and that since the Federal Reserve was an

essential player, its role is to oversee all of the operations

in the region that the theft occurred, and that I looked at the

agreements between the Securities and Exchange Commission and

the Swiss government on what I believe is an ongoing two-sided

platform in collateralizing the bonds by the Chinese

government, who are the only ones able to use the historic

bonds for the purposes of commercial transactions, and that I

believe is being done in Switzerland.

That was not in the report, but certainly Occam's


razor, the only logical use of these historical bonds, which

they're considerable, is by the red Chinese government inside

Switzerland, and that for that interest - - I am interested in

the merging of the Taiwan government and the red Chinese

government under fair principles in that it appears to me it's

not going to happen in that the Chinese are getting both sides

of the coin.

But I intervene specifically, and I believe that my - -

if you want to put it criticisms, bringing in the foreign bond

holders protection counsel is essential for any bond held by an

American or having to do with an American bond holder. They

were set out by Congress in 1933. They're an extension of the

United States corporation, which is a corporation in Maryland,

not properly up to date, and essentially they are the foreign

bond holders corporation of counsel is the front end opera.tion

operating as if it were the United States corporation, which is

a very unusual when I start doing the research with the

Secretary of State in Maryland.

But that I feel that there are essential parties here,

the foreign bond holders protective counsel who have a duty

under treaty arrangements to essentially do an accounting for

the use these historical bonds and related bonds which are part

of the sinking fund which would guarantee payment in the event

that red China should come together with Taiwan I can get paid.

And I'm not here to get paid, I'm just here to make sure


there's a level playing field and there's a proper accounting

of the proceeds which should be protected both by the federal

reserve as a party to this transaction going back to 1913

through 1942, and that - -

THE COURT: Let me stop you for a moment. And I

appreciate all of this, and I appreciate your interest in this

matter, as your deep interest in this matter is quite evident.

As you may know under the law, in order to intervene

in the lawsuit, as opposed to just following it, you have to

have some kind of stake in the matter. So to sort of simplify

it, what I'm not entirely understanding from your papers or

from your comments now is what you have riding on this other

than your interest in it, which I understand to be a deep one.

If you can briefly explain that.

MR. STRUNK: To the extent that I believe that there's

certain mention of the protections necessary to protect the

sinking fund which would repay me through a two-sided platform,

and that they're using the bonds in order to collateralize, and

they don't ever - - they're there, the shadow of money, and to

the extent that collateralizing what would be my sinking fund,

I have an interest that that the portion of the Dragon family's

financial instruments be accounted for by the Federal Reserve,

and course the foreign bond holders counsel, which it's their

duty under U.S. law to do such.

And I'm here just looking out after my interests. And


I did serve who I thought were parties to this case with the

summons and complaint, the World Economic Forum, Dan Carlo here

in New York, he was duly served, the Swiss ambassador was

served who had to be given notice in any case that this was

going on in his system, and the Italian ambassador was served

as well as Mr. Petty and the foreign bond holders counsel and

the New York City - - the Federal Reserve Bank of New York along

with Bollinger.

And I have just - - I'm just interested in all these - -

if you're going to get involved in something as complicated as

this, then because the Chinese have just been given a position

with the Federal Reserve, now not only are they using the

sinking fund in Switzerland, they're now coming in and using it

here in New York by becoming, as the Hong Kong Shanghai Bank

was brought in, the red Chinese bank is coming in to run our

banking system, and I think these matters should be put before

the Court.

THE COURT: Thank you, Mr. Strunk.

Now back to you, Mr. Mulligan, I'm not going to ask

you to address the particular merits at the moment, but I

understand you oppose the motion to intervene?

MR. MULLIGAN: Yes, your Honor. I reread your order.

' My intent, responding to your request for the information, was

that since there had been no return dates set, obviously since

I haven't served anybody yet, that I would certainly expect


that I would oppose it. And I think your Honor hit the main

point on the head, and I would anticipate that my argument will

be there's just no connection between my case and that case.

With all due respect to Mr. Strunk, if he wants to bring a

lawsuit, go ahead, but there's no connection. I can't imagine

that Rule 24 would be properly invoked here.

THE COURT: OK, well, I think - -

MR. MULLIGAN: But I really haven't briefed it all.

THE COURT: I understand, and I'm going to be giving

you a few assignments today, one of which is to address that.

I think it makes sense. You're correct, there was no return

date, but it makes sense today to set a briefing schedule and

take a brief from you and then allow Mr. Strunk an opportunity

to respond if he would like it.

That brings us to the issue of service which you

started to address before, and I wanted to just return to,

number one, can you just help me - - you have referenced the 120

day rule and Rule 4 (m) .

MR. MULLIGAN: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: I want to sort of make sure we're on the

same page as to who is and who isn't subject to that rule.

MR. MULLIGAN: Yes, your Honor. By my account, your

Honor - - and I read rule 4(m), the last sentence says what it

says, that the 120 day rule does not apply to essentially

service of process overseas, at least under 4 (i') and 4 (j ) .


It's in my letter. And I read yesterday in this circuit there

are plenty of cases, there was an '87 Second Circuit case, but

that was under the predecessor to Rule 4(m) which said that you

at least have to show that you tried to serve somebody. And

that does seem to be the law in this circuit, and it's been

cited by many district courts, as opposed to law in some other

circuits. And so I recognize that.

THE COURT: That's good.

MR. MULLIGAN: Yes.

THE COURT: Let's start by figuring out who is and who

is not subject to 4 (m) .

MR. MULLIGAN: Eleven of the 14 that I have that I

would argue - - when and if I have to, and if I have to do it

now I will do the best I can - - who would not be subject to the

120 day rule automatically would be Dal Bosco.

THE COURT: Since the other group seems to be smaller,

why don't you identify for me who you think is subject to - -

MR. MULLIGAN: I would say World Economic Forum

U.S.A., the U.N., Ban Ki-moon. I'm having trouble reading my

own writing here.

THE COURT: Why not Cesare Maria Ragaglini?

MR. MULLIGAN: Ragaglini I have a question mark. I

think she has a residence here.

THE COURT: What about Giancarlo Bruno?

MR. MULLIGAN: Well, Bruno I allege, and I think he


does have a residence here, so that's a possible. I consider

him to be a resident of Italy, but that's an arguable point.

THE COURT: OK.

MR. MULLIGAN: So my eleven might be - - I have three,

U.N., Ban Ki-moon, Ragaglini. If I said eleven, I probably

should have ten, your Honor.

THE COURT: And talk to me about the OITC, what

exactly that is.

MR. MULLIGAN: Well, that's a great question as to

what they are. The addresses that they claim are in Kumphawapi

City in Udon Thani , Thailand, and Kampong Karmon (ph) , Phnom

Penh, Cambodia. There is a web sit which lists an address at

1133 Connecticut Avenue Northwest in Washington DC, also.

THE COURT: Do you have reason to doubt that?

MR. MULLIGAN: I'm just not sure, Judge, to be honest.

I'm not sure if that's real or not.

THE COURT: OK. Is the organization real?

MR. MULLIGAN: Oh, it's real. They have a web site.

I think that they're a highly questionable organization, but

they have certainly been around, and I stand by all the

allegations in my complaint concerning them. Ray Dam, who was

their leader, has been in and out of jail. He's either in

Cambodia or Thailand right now, to the best of my knowledge.

Dal Bosco, present whereabouts unknown. Dam, not certain.

David Sale, unknown, but possibly in Thailand with Dal Bosco.


C5UTKEEC

OITC we talked about. I do have a West End Avenue address for

Giancarlo Bruno. I will speak with Mr. Strunk, I think he just

mentioned that he served him. World Economic Forum U.S.A.,

Inc. at 3 East 54th Street.

Sorry, Judge, not sure where going. Should

run through for you what - -

THE COURT: By my count there are, at least according

to your complaint, probably five defendants who have presence

in the United States, if not New York: The United Nations, Ban

Ki-moon, Ambassador Ragaglini, World Economic Forum and

Giancarlo Bruno. I don't see how any of those five would not

be subject to the 120 day rule. Do you have a different

position?

MR. MULLIGAN: No, your Honor, I don't.

THE COURT: OK.

MR. MULLIGAN: I think that would be - - certainly as

to three of them, but looking at my notes here and my own

question marks, you're certainly not wrong.

THE COURT: OK. And are there others aside from those

five who you would conceive or acknowledge are subject to the

120 day rule?

MR. MULLIGAN: No, I don't think so, Judge.

THE COURT: Focusing on those five for the present,

talk about why you have not served them as of now. And by your

acknowledgment, I think it is closer to 180 days at this point.


than 120.

MR. MULLIGAN: The reasons I stated in the letter,

Judge, I really didn't want to initiate a piecemeal litigation

and have different timetables for all types of different

people. We were determined to find Mr. Dal Bosco first. We

haven't been able to. I have also felt I probably will have to

amend the complaint, so I took the approach of let's wait,

let's see what happens. And if the case is going to be

discontinued, I would have rather discontinued it on my own,

albeit that the rule also states clearly it's without

prejudice, and I would refile.

And frankly, I looked forward to coming here today, as

I did two months ago with Judge Holwell, so I could just get to

the bottom of this and see which way - - I admit, it's sort of a

hedge. I would like the Court's permission to extend the time

so if's not discontinued, but if it's discontinued, I will

regroup and I will refile. And the complaint might be amended

or not. It might not be as long, a couple of defendants might

not be included, but this is the first opportunity I have had

to sort of bring it to a head, so I appreciate where you're

headed.

THE COURT: And what steps, if any, have you taken

with respect to the foreign defendants to serve them?

MR. MULLIGAN: 1 can't find three, as I said, and I

have not physically attempted to serve them. Again, I have


been taking a wait and see attitude to see when everything was

going to come together, waiting for my people to get me more

information on whereabouts of Dal Bosco, and when the complaint

is served, that everyone is served in reasonably the same

period of time so we don't have twelve different schedules

going forward.

THE COURT: And what about the defendants, other than

those three, that is the foreign defendants that you do know

where they are?

MR. MULLIGAN: I have not attempted to serve them,

Judge, straight out.

THE COURT: OK. I have to say I appreciate your

concern about not proceeding in a piecemeal fashion. The flip

side is I'm not interested in this case remaining on the

Court's docket for years and years and years because you're not

able to locate a particular defendant and we're waiting for .

that defendant.

MR. MULLIGAN: I understand.

THE COURT: I would actually rather hold you to the

rules and hold you to a relatively strict timetable. And to

extent that you can comply with that, I will allow it to

proceed, and to the extent you can't, you will have to suffer

the consequences. But to that end, I mean I guess I haven't

previously given you notice that I might dismiss as to the

domestic defendants pursuant to Rule 4(m) and giving you an


C5UTKEEC

opportunity show good cause for failure to serve them. I am

happy to do that now, although in some respects I think you

already made your proffer.

MR. MULLIGAN: I think I have. I attempted to do that

in the letter. I'm like you, I'm not into playing games with

this, and I'm being as straightforward I can.

THE COURT: I will be straight with you, which is I

don't think you have showed me good cause for failure to serve

those defendants. I'm happy to give you an opportunity to

brief that as well if you want an opportunity to show good

cause or persuade me that what you have said - - cite cases

showing me that qualifies for a good cause, but you can tell me

that you don't want to proceed in that fashion or you can try

and persuade me, but at the moment I'm not persuaded.

MR. MULLIGAN: I understand that, Judge, and I don't

think - - I could ask for two weeks to try to persuade you, and

I don't think it would work because I have nothing more to tell

you, straight out, than what I have said either in my letter or

here. So to the extent,that I would ask for 60 more days, I

take it that would be denied.

THE COURT: Correct.

Now let's talk about schedule with respect to the

foreign defendants, who I take to be there are 14 defendants

total, correct?

MR. MULLIGAN: I think so, Judge.


THE COURT: So talking about nine.

MR. MULLIGAN: Yes.

THE COURT: Let's talk about how much time you need to

locate and serve these defendants.

MR. MULLIGAN: I would ask for 60 days, Judge.

THE COURT: OK. In your letter you talk about the

need to go through the Hague Conventions and have things

translated and so forth. I would rather give you more time if

you feel that more time is necessary and require you to update

me periodically.

MR. MULLIGAN: I got a little shy.

THE COURT: Hang on. You tell me how much time you

need, I will give you that time, and in the interim I will ask

you to update me on the steps you are taking to locate and

serve. I will hold you to that, and if you demonstrate

diligence in doing so, so be it, I will give you the time that

you ask for now. If you don't, then I will end up dismissing

for failure to prosecute and failure to serve in the time. So

I want you to - -

MR. MULLIGAN: Under Rule 4, without prejudice.

THE COURT: Correct.

I want you to be realistic. You know about more these

defendants than I do. Needless to say, I don't think Italy is

hard to locate. I don't think Silvio Berlosconi is hard to

locate. I don't think the Italian Financial Police are hard to


C5UTKEEC

locate. There may be practical considerations with serving

those entities, but you tell me.

MR. MULLIGAN: I will stick with the 90 days I asked

for in my letter rather than the 60.

THE COURT: Meaning that you're OK if I set a deadline

of 90 days from today to serve those defendant?

MR. MULLIGAN: To serve those defendants. And so I

understand, as to the domestic defendants, the case is

discontinued?

THE COURT: I am going to dismiss as to the five

defendants who I believe, based on your complaint, have a

presence. I'm not going to dismiss as to the United Nations

because I think the United Nations is in a different position,

and I strongly suspect that I will dismiss to them as to

different grounds. But I will dismiss as to the other four

defendants who are subject to the 120 day rule by your

concession, that is Giancarlo Bruno, World Economic Forum

U.S.A., Cesare Maria Ragaglini and Ban Ki-moon, for failure to

serve within 120 days and failure to show good cause for that

failure. That is pursuant to Rule 4(m), and pursuant to that

rule is obviously without prejudice.

MR. MULLIGAN: Then the 90 days or the same thing

would occur with respect to the foreign defendants?

THE COURT: 90 days or the same thing will occur with

respect to the remaining defendants. Obviously you're entitled


to make a case that you have good cause td the additional time.

I'm going to ask you in 45 days to submit a letter to the Court

apprising me of what steps you have taken to locate and serve

the defendants to demonstrate that you are exercising due

diligence throughout the period, and I will expect in that

letter that you will have exercised due diligence in that

regard.

MR. MULLIGAN: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: I think that takes care of the service

issues. Let's set a briefing schedule first on the motion to

intervene.

Mr. Mulligan, how much time do you need to file a

memorandum of law opposing the motion to intervene?

MR. MULLIGAN: Could I ask for 30 days, Judge?

THE COURT: 30 days from - - I will give you until

Friday, June 2 9 .

MR. MULLIGAN: OK.

THE COURT: And then Mr. Strunk, I will give you an

opportunity to respond to Mr. Mu1ligan.l~ memorandum. By

June 29 he will file memorandum with the Court and serve a copy

on you. You can discuss with him how best to do that, and then

I will give you four weeks after that to file something in

response, so by July 27.

MR. STRUNK: That's generous, thank you.

THE COURT: So that will deal with that issue. And


then Mr. Mulligan, the last remaining issue is the question of

subject matter jurisdiction. How about I give you the same

period of time until June 29 to file memorandum on that.

MR. MULLIGAN: That's fine.

THE COURT: And just so we're clear on what to address

in that, I would like you to address the question of whether

the Court has subject matter jurisdiction in general, over the

entire case that is, and specifically as well whether there is

subject matter jurisdiction with respect to the United Nations

in the absence of a waiver of immunity. And if by that time

you are able to obtain a waiver of immunity, obviously that

would be one way to address that issue, but in the absence of a

waiver, your memorandum of law should address what the subject

matter jurisdiction is with respect to the United Nations.

Are we clear on that? I

MR. MULLIGAN: Yes.

THE COURT: Anything else that we need to deal with?

MR. MULLIGAN: On the Foreign sovereign Immunities

Act, do you also want me to - -

THE COURT: As I understand, you are premising subject

matter jurisdiction for the Court on the Foreign Sovereign

Immunities Act and federal common law.

MR. MULLIGAN: Correct.

THE COURT: Your memorandum of law should address both

of those issues and also address specifically the question of


whether there is jurisdiction over the United Nations either by

obtaining a waiver, or in the absence of a waiver, why the

absolute immunity of the United Nations doesn't deprive the

Court of jurisdiction.

MR. MULLIGAN: OK.

THE COURT: Let me give you some page limits and

things. On the subject matter jurisdiction memorandum I will

give you up to 25 pages. On the motion to intervene,

Mr. Mulligan, I will give you 20 pages. And Mr. Strunk I will

give you the same 20 pages to respond, and I think that's all I

need to do on that front.

MR. MULLIGAN: OK.

MR. STRUNK: Your Honor, is that single or double?

THE COURT: Double spaced.

MR. STRUNK: All right. Judge Rakoff normally

discussed single.

THE COURT: No, I prefer double spaced, sir.

Then I am going schedule another conference for - -

Mr. Strunk, you don't need to show up unless the motion to

intervene has been granted, but to discuss the issues of

service. 90 days from today would be - - why don't we set it

for right after Labor Day. That gives you a few days beyond

the 90 days. That is not to say that that deadline is changed,

but just our next appearance will be right after Labor Day.

September 4th at 3:00 p.m. And again, Mr. Strunk, no need for


you to appear unless your motion has been granted, but you're

obviously welcome, the Court is open to the public.

Anything further for today?

MR. MULLIGAN: It occurs to me, Judge, thinking out

loud, in light of the dismissal as to the domestic defendants,

that may cause me to more seriously consider more quickly

filing an amended complaint, which might moot - - I will advise

your Honor. Does is that sound right to you, if I amend the

complaint, the 120 days would start all over again, as I

understand?

THE COURT: Well, let's take it a step at a time. You

can look into that. You're welcome to amend the complaint if

you like, and if, based on your research, that triggers another

120 days, so be it. I don't think it moots the question of

subject matter jurisdiction, so that brief should be filed - -

MR. MULLIGAN: Understood.

THE COURT: - - by the deadline that we set.

MR. MULLIGAN: Understood.

THE COURT: It doesn't moot the issue of intervention,

so that should also be filed.

MR. MULLIGAN: Understood, Judge.

THE COURT: It may obviously bring the defendants - -

the five defendants who are present in this country back into

the matter, in which case we'll address those as we do, but I

think I have made it clear that I'm not interested in letting


this thing linger on the Court's docket, and I expect you to

proceed diligently with respect to all defendants, those who

are subject to the 120 days and those who are not. In that

regard, if you determine that filing an amended complaint

brings them back in it, don't assume you can wait to serve

those defendants simply because there are other defendants you

haven't located. OK?

MR. MULLIGAN: Yes, sir.

THE COURT: Anything further for today?

MR. MULLIGAN: I don't think so.

THE COURT: Mr. Strunk, anything further?

MR. STRUNK: Thank you for hearing us.

THE COURT: Thank you. We are adjourned.

000


Case 1 : '1 4-cv-08508-JMF Document 6 Filed 051

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ...................................................................... X NEIL F. KEENAN, individzially and as agent for the Dragon family, citizens of foreign states,

Plaintiff, 1 1 Civ. 8500 (JMF)

-v- NOTICE OF INITIAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE

DANIELE DAL BOSCO, et al.,

Defendants.

JESSE M. FUIPMAN, District Judge:

Plaintiff Neil F. Keenan brings this action seeking monetary and equitable relief against Defendants. Plaintiff filed his Complaint on November 23, 201 1. Service of process has not been effectuated upon any of the Defendants, On January 25,2012, Christopher Earl Strunk filed a motion to intervene as a plaintiff in this matter. By letter dated May 1 1,2012, Plaintiff Keenan indicated to the Court that he intends to oppose this motion.

It is hereby ORDERED that counsel for all parties and proposed intervenor Strunk appear for an initial pretrial conference with the Court on May 30,2012 at 3:30 p.m. in Courtroom 26A of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, 500 Pearl Street, New York, New York. A11 counsel are required to register promptly as filing users on ECF. All pretrial conferences must be attended by the attorney who will serve as principal trial counsel.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 15,2012 New York, New York

~ n k e d States District Judge

Notice Maiied To:

Christopher Earl Strunk 593 Vanderbilt Avenue #281 Brooklyn, NY 11238

BLEAKLEY PLATT & SCHMIDT, LLP

9 1 4.287.61 3 1 WHITE P L A I N S , N E W YORK 10601

[email protected] 9 14.949.2700 FAX: 9 14.683.6956

B P S L A W . C O M

May 11,2012

Via E-mail

Hon. Jesse M. Furman United States District Judge Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 1000'7- 1 3 12

Re: Keenan v. Dal Bosco, et al. 11 Civ 8500

Dear Judge Furman:

We represent the plaintiff, Neil F. Keenan in this matter. This letter is submitted in accord with Your Honor's Order of April 26,2012. This will confirm that there are no currently scheduled conferences or oral arguments with the Court. As the Court is aware, after the filing of this action by the undersigned on November 23,20 1 1, the Initial Scheduling Conference was scheduled on January 13,2012 to be held on March 9,2012. Further, on account of the resignation of the Assigned Judge, Richard J. Holwell, that conference was adjourned sine die by Order dated March 2,201 2.

1. I am counsel of record for plaintiff and there has been no change from the information contained in the Docket. As service of process has not been effectuated upon any of the defendants, no record appearances have been filed by any other counsel, except that a motion to Intervene was filed in early January 20 12 (see fiuther discussion under subparagraph 5).

2. The complaint is comprised of 11 1 pages and the following is a good faith effort to condense that volume into a "brief statement of the nature of the case" in accordance with the Court's most appropriate directive. This case asserts 12 causes of action seeking monetary and equitable relief against a variety of international persons andlor entities, including a foreign government (Italy) and agencies, as well as the United Nations ("UN"), the Office of International Treasury Control ("OITC"), and the World Economic Forum ("WEF"). The action arises initially from the expropriation and conversion of certain negotiable financial instruments

Hon. Jesse M. Furman May 11,2012 Page 2

lawfully owned by the Dragon Family, a highly secretive and informal organization that operates between old families within China and Taiwan. These instruments, the majority of which are comprised of 249 1934 Series Federal Reserve Notes, with a total face value of $124.5 Billion, are referenced in the complaint as the "DFFI," short for Dragon Family Financial Instruments. Plaintiff Keenan, a U. S . Citizen who resides in Bulgaria, had been entrusted with the DFFI between January and May 2009 by virtue of written Special Powers of Attorney, by which he was authorized to coordinate the investment of the DFFI for appropriate humanitarian investment programs. Subsequently, Keenan was introduced to defendant Daniele Dal Bosco, who, at the time, resided in Italy, and who, after months of intermittent companionship and travel with Keenan in furtherance of Keenan's legally authorized objectives, gained his trust to such a degree that Keenan granted custodianship of the DFFI to Dal Bosco in Switzerland in September 2009. Dal Bosco acknowledged his custodianship in writing.

Regrettably, over the ensuing months, Dal Bosco conspired in various ways with other defendants, notably David Sale, OITC and the UN, by which he abused his role as custodian and exerted domination and control over the DFFI to the exclusion of Keenan, including his participation in bribe offers to Keenan to relinquish control over the DFFI. As set forth in great detail in the Complaint, the defendants variously participated as conspirators, andlor aiders and abettors of the fraud and conversion and expropriation of the DFFI. Mr Dal Bosco has refused to return the DFFI, despite due demand therefore, and the whereabouts of the DFFI, at the time of filing the lawsuit, and continuing to the present, remains unknown

3. There are no existing deadlines or cut-off dates. However, as the Court is aware, under Federal Rule 4 (m), if a defendant is not served within 120 days after the complaint is filed, "the court - on motion or on its own after notice to the plaintiff - must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made within a specified time, subject to the provision that if the plaintiff shows good cause for the failure, the Court must extend the time for an appropriate period." Notably, however, as the Rule pertains to the facts and defendants in this case, the 120 day rule in subdivision (m) does not apply to service in a foreign country under Rule 4(f) (Serving an individual in a foreign country) or 4 (j)(l) (a foreign state or its political subdivision, agency or instrumentality). (See further discussion under subdivision 10). By our calculation, no less than eleven (1 1) of the fourteen (14) named defendants in this case are located in a foreign country and subject to such service


abroad.

4. See discussion above - original conference set for March 9,201 2 adjourned. I submit that any matters that might have been discussed at that time are presently set forth in this letter.

5. As reflected on the Docket Sheet (ECF Document #3), on or about January 5,20 12, Christopher Earl Strunk filed a motion to Intervene as a plaintiff as of right under Fed R. Civ. P. 24(a) as "an American Chinese historic Bond holder on the day and month in 201 2, at a time and courtroom designated by the court." In his supporting affidavit, Mr. Strunk also seeks alternative relief under Fed. R. 24 (b) for permissive intervention and attaches a proposed supplemental complaint naming the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and others as required supplemental defendants. Given that issue has not been joined as to any defendant, no action has been taken with respect to this motion. If and when such motion is officially scheduled by the Court, it would be plaintiffs intent to oppose the motion as we see no claimed interest by the proposed Intervenor which in any way relates to the property or transaction which is the subject of plaintiff Keenan's complaint, or in any way implicates the provisions of Rule 24. The foregoing is stated with all due respect to the merits of such independent claims propounded by Mr. Strunk.

6. There are no pending appeals.

7. There has been no discovery undertaken to date.

8. There have been no settlement discussions between or amongst any of the parties.

9. It would be very difficult at this juncture to estimate the length of any trial.

10. We believe this case presents novel factual issues and has potentially enormous national and international economic repercussions. We also represent that the decision to date not to have formally served the complaint has been conscious and deliberate and do not assert that any meaningful effort has been undertaken to effectuate service. We submit, however, that such decision has been made entirely in good faith for various reasons, including without limitation, the following: (a) it became apparent within a short time after filing this lawsuit that additional, largely historical information, which would bolster plaintiffs claims and repudiate certain anticipated defenses, would be forthcoming. We remain


positive in that regard although much of that information, emanating from sources outside the United States, remains outside the possession of counsel; (b) the whereabouts of the person who might be deemed the primary defendant in this action, certainly the original tortfeasor, whose theft triggered the lawsuit, the aforesaid Daniele Dal Bosco, remains unknown, as confirmed by a report received earlier this week; (c) the whereabouts of defendant David Sale has apparently been in an active state of flux, and again, as reported earlier this week, have obtained what might be a good address; (d) the location of defendant Ray C. Dam has also been problematical and although he appears to be resident in Cambodia, Cambodia and Thailand, the two alleged locations of defendant OITC, do not appear to be signatories to the Hague Convention, thus further complicating what federal and New York state cases have traditionally found to be the cumbersome duties normally associated with service under the Hague convention'; (e) service upon the World Economic Forum, based in Switzerland, does not allow service by mail and process would necessarily implicate the Central Authority with requisite Hague Forms and the Complaint possibly subject to translation into French and served through Swiss authorities; (f) service upon the Italian defendants, including former President Silvio Berlusconi, may require translation of the complaint into Italian although Italy does allow service by mail.

In short, in light of the fact that the majority of the defendants named in this lawsuit are foreign entities not subject to the 120 day rule, and further in light of the fact that for the sake of judicial convenience and with a desire to avoid piecemeal litigation with widely disparate times to answer, move or otherwise engage in discovery, we respectfully suggest that the Court, in the exercise of its discretion, allow an additional 90 days to effectuate service upon the defendants within the parameters of Rule 4 (m). We respectfully offer this suggestion as it would avoid any possible discontinuance, albeit without prejudice, as against the United Nations, Ban Ki-moon and WEF USA defendants (those three (3) of the defendants who are located in New York City), and I submit, would be without prejudice to any of the parties. Further, in light of the possibility, indeed likelihood, of the need to amend the complaint, it would be our goal to

1 Recently the 3rd Department ruled that article 10 (a) of the Hague Convention permits service of process by mail, allowing the plaintiff in that case to serve Canadian defendantspursuant to the applicable Vehicle and Traffic Law. By its Decision, the 3rd Dept. shifted course and joined with precedent established in the Second and Fourth Departments. The decision noted a similar division among federal circuit courts of appeal, and adopted the reasoning of the Second Circuit. NYS Thruway Authority v. Fenech, 938 N.Y.S. 2d 654,656 (3rd Dept., 2012).


attempt to effectuate service upon all parties with the same pleading (amended or not) and within the same relative time frame. We do not believe any prejudice would be suffered by any defendants as, if the case is in fact discontinued without prejudice by the Court, or voluntarily by plaintiff, an amended complaint will subsequently be filed.

I am available at any time at the convenience of the Court to answer any questions the Court may have about any of the foregoing.

Respectfully,

William Hughes Mulligan, Jr.

COMMITTEEON THE BUDGET

March 13,2012

The Honorable Gene L. Dodaro Comptroller General of the United States U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20548

Dear Mr. Dodaro:

We write to request that the Government Accountability Office (GAO) conduct a complete and accurate inventory of all U.S. government holdings of all Republic of China (ROC) sovereign bonds issued between January 1,1900 and December 31,1949, whether considered to be in default or not. We expect this accounting to include but not be limited to the Departments of State, Justice and Treasury. In an era when sovereign debt obligations are critical, the U.S. government should recognize all of its creditor relationships.

From 1900 to 1949 the Chinese government issued hundreds of millions of dollars in sovereign debt-most notably, a large tranche of £25,000,000 issued at 5 percent in 1913. Backed by the full faith and credit of the Chinese government, these bonds were sold to investors in the United States, Japan and Europe by international banks, primarily HSBC and Deutsche Bank, and were widely acquired by both banks and governments. The most prevalent American- held bond is the aforementioned 1913 Chinese Government Five Percent Reorganization Gold Loan Bearer Bond, which matured in 1960.

Printed on these bonds is the following statement: "[Tlhese obligations are intended to be biding upon the Government of China and any successor government." Despite this pledge, in 1938 the government selectively defaulted on these bonds, leaving millions of global creditors unpaid. Following the announcement by the ROC that it could no longer service its national debts in the beginning of 1938 due to the Japanese invasion, the government began issuing new bonds denominated in U.S. currency in April of 1938 and continuing through 1940. Some of these bonds carried a 27-year maturity date.

The Republic of China pledged its intentions to resume payment, but when the Communist Party overthrew the government in 1949, the new People's Republic of China (PRC) selectively refused to recognize or honor the bond obligations of the governments it succeeded. In the case of the debt owed to the United Kingdom, however, the PRC settled its obligations in 1987.

PRIMEDON RECYCLED PAPER

We are concerned that the U.S. government may hold a substantial portion of these bonds and, like more than 20,000 private U.S. investors, is entitled to remuneration. With this in mind, we ask the GAO to determine:

1. The overall number of Chinese sovereign bonds held, or previously held, by the U.S. government or any of its authorized associates or affiliates; 2. The various types of Chinese sovereign bonds held, or previously held, by the U.S. government or any of its authorized associates or affiliates; 3. The cumulative value (in 2012 USD figures) of these bonds.

Thank you for your assistance in this matter. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Sincerely,

Member of Congress

Zkf47~ ARD . R CE

* - R . O ~ FRANK R. WOLF

Member of Congress

STEVE PEARCE Member of Congress

I Member of Conmess

Member of Congress

A0 440 (Rev. 12109) !hunmons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No. zcT ( - &%p~ -.

PROOF OF SERVICE (This section slrould not befled with the court unless required by Fed R Civ. P. 4 (1))

$3 Thin summons for ( m e qfindfvidual and title, rfany) (. L,NSd/a.k & Ri - S&pa/4nd

was received by me on (date) Jw. 1/ , 61~13 & 3 3 3" dq&- h30 r

O I personally served the summons on the individual at &lace)

on (date) ; or

O I left the summons at the individual's residence or usual place of abode with (mme)

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,

on (hte) , and mailed a copy to the individuaI's last known address; or

&served the summons on (name ofindividual) Po -f'W L A , who is

designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization) pof19b9bje 6eMe4/T S ~ i f z e ~ ~ f i ~ j ~ on (date) &H. 24,2bia , ; or

Cl I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

b Other (sperm:

- ,

MyfeesareS $d-" for have* and $ ff$b e" for services, for a total of $ Rib 0.00

I declare under penalty of perjury that this infonnation is

Date: *$flr. 2 9. $i-f!14Ld; Server's slgnuture

EdYdRB /fl. 7 ~ ~ ~ i ~ deefl Printed name and title

~ 3 ~ 3 C L A R ~ @ 1.7r~ S A I : ~ - Q ~ , Fl; 3 f . 3 server'; address I I J

Additional infonnation regarding attempted service, etc:

A 0 440 (Rev, 12/09) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No. 7 /-;t c C, - /-- - - +,\ c77-

PROOF OF SERVICE (This section should not befiled with fhe court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (7))

This summons for (name of individual and title, i f any) &I E. Am 6 ~ 5 ~ ~ dsfi BAr6. e //Q s9ei was received by me on (dote) TfiH 3s l o r g "7" i 3 n k Ave , N , ~ ~ N , /

0 I personally served the summons on the individual at (pace)

on (date) ; or

0 I left the summons at the individual's residence or usual place of abode with [ m e )


on (date) and mailed a copy to the individual's last known address; or

dl served the summons on (name ofindivIdua() w h o is - . designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of orgnnization) j4.g. h k 4 35,+&op

$ i~ r ,&N , PC[ &50/46 4 Ned && on Ida@ JW~Y, 10/2 ; Or

0 I returned the summons unexecuted because : or

b Other (specifyl:

My fees are S 90 - O' for travel and S 8') .O for services, for a total of S #/b 0.00

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

I JLj? y7% ,q a Server's srgnature

EJ@4&4 f l ?m&d Jq, Printed name and title

I I

Server's addre>s I

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

A 0 440 (Rev, lm) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No. 2 i -- '7 yL-(." . . PROOF OF SERVICE

(This section should not befiled with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (1))

* This summons for (name ofindividual und title, vany) (? i ~ , ? ~.,q /C r ~ 4 0

was received by me on (date) JY, 2 0 la . 3 cm+T 5 ~ 7 ' ) 57

J

Cl I personally served the summons on the individual at @lace)

on (date) ; or

O I left the summons at the individual's residence or usual place.of abode with ( m e )


on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual's last known address; or - -

d s e i e d the s m o n s on (naaa of individuaI) , who is

designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name oforganizution) GI 4NCP)ah0 & GwCZ and Id-/d Ecwinrc Fefidfl USA. on GN 29; 1 ~ 1 2 ; or

I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

U Other spec^):

My fees are $ " for travel and $ 9s O B for services, for a total of $ /be00 -


;rAdig*, 3 ~ / ~ 2 Date: - Sewer's signature

15duwtd M - PERSCAI J;P. Printed name and title

Server's address /


A 0 440 (Rev. I u09) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil ActionNo. '10 1 1- C/

PROOF OF SERVICE (Thb section should not befiled with fhe court unless requfred by Fed R Civ. P. 4 (1))

This summons for (name ojimiiv,dm~ and *itIe, V ~ Y ) L ee C. Boil, qq er , LA C ) ~ R rn)r~/ wss received by me 00 ( h e ) 3 4 ~ . a 9) 20 l q 7' BeRy * f:l i\lj- dy /'*+r

0 I personally served the summons on the individual at @\ace)

on (date) . . ; or

CJ I left the summons at the individual's residence or usual place of abode with (name)


on (date) and mailed a copy to the individual's last known address; or

+ ?!& served the summons on (kame ofindividual) /5< G4 . who is

designated by law to accept service of p on behalf of (name of wganizafion) c 4 &/hQ4en BChm4u ' ~ . i i ~ e t h ~ k = r v c 'Ekk td -= d~k , on ( k t e ~ Girl/, 24, at913 ; or

I

IJ I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

Cl Other (spec#): ,

MY fees are $ 'SO- 00 for travel and $ 80- 00 fix s e n i c e for a total of $ 4#$60.00

I declare under penalty of perjury that this infonnation is

&A! $4: aw 2 f&7*2 server's stgnattire /

Printed name and title

I Server's a'ddtess

Additional infonnation regarding attempted service, etc:

- . . . ; : . : . -', , . - , . . * : 1 - . . , . -

1 . #'

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT .SOUTHERN DISTRTCT OF MEW YORK , .

- - - - - - - - - - - - - r u - - - - i - r - r ~ - - - - - - - - r X

NEIL F, KEENAN, XnWudly and a~ Agent fw -

THF, DRAGON FAMILY, c i t k m of foreign aatts, ', . . . mintiff, - . . . . . . , . . - . . . . . . . . . . . i ' . + - . - ,. >- -

, .. . . . . . . . .... *&st-, . ,. , : .. . . . . . I . - . ,- . , -1 , . . ' 8 .-

f- 'i+ DANIEIE DAL BOSCO, a~-.-'& f- 'state; Et'd: - . - -.

' .

/ .

, - :...

Defendants. i !

, a sl

--------------------------------------------A-----r---------Z- X ;- *' . ,

+. CWtopher-Earl: In

-TAKE HQTZCS that upon the annexed &davit ofCMstopher--1: Stmnk

in esae, Special-Appearance, a5med January 2% 2010 will move this.Court to . ff inhvmt as an intewener-plaintiff klon Dikct Judge Richard 3. H h l l at a time I

4

- afforded by the Court if necessary at the United States Courthouse, at500 PearlStreet I . New York New York, an the day and month in 2052, at a time and c m r b a m ' . . I

hte& Jan- 2gao10 Brooklyn New York

* 4

e listing of d c e to follow

NEIL F. KEENAN* I ~ u ~ and ahl Agtnt for THE DRAGON FAMILY, dtizcns of foreign states, By BLEAKLEY PLATT & SCHMDT* LLP W d b m H. MuUigm, Jr. (WM 2945) Jus.tin M. Gardner (JMG 6 169) One North kcington Avenue - . White Plains, New Ymk 10601 +

Brooklyn, New.York; . 9

'Einaik cMa@s-ws Cell-W5-90 1-6767 Chrktupher-Earl: Strunk Gin e m ,

rn

FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF NEW YORK, by LEE C. BOLLINGER, Chairman 33 Liberty St. New York, NY 10045

FOREIGN BONDHOLDERS PROTECTIVE COUNCIL INC, by JOHN R . PETTY principal; 90 Broad Street New York, NY 10004-2205

GIANCARLO BRUNO. individuallv. and a s Head of the

DANIELE DAL BOSCO, a citizen of a foreign state, THE OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL TREASURY CONTROL, a foreign corporation ("OITC"), RAY C. DAM ("DAM"), individually, and a s President of OITC, DAVID A. SALE ("SALE"), individually, and a s Deputy Chief of the Council for the Cabinet of OITC

H.E. Ambassador Marcello Spatafora Del Consolato Generale d'Italia a New York 690, Park Avenue New York, NY 10065

Attention: H.E. Ambassador CESARE MARIA RAGAGLINI, Individually, and a s Permanent Representative of the Italian Mission to the UN in New York, H.E. Ambassador LAURA MIRACHIAN, Individually, and a s Permanent Representative of the Italian Mission to the UN in Geneva, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, Former Prime Minister of Italy, SILVIO BERLUSCONI,

BAN KI-moon, individually, and a s Secretary General of the UNITED NATIONS United Nations Headquarters Room GA- 1B-57 New York - NY 10017

Consulate General-Switzerland 633 3rd Ave # 30, New York. NY 10017

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK .................................................................. X

NEIL F. KEENAN, Individually and as Agent for 1 1-CV-8500 (RJH) THE DRAGON FAMILY, citizens of foreign states,

Plaintiff,

-against-

DANIELE DAL BOSCO, a citizen of a foreign state, THE OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL TREASURY CONTROL, a foreign corporation ("OITC"), RAY C. DAM ("DAM"), individually, and as President of OITC, DAVID A. SALE ("SALE"), individually, and as Deputy Chief of the Council for the Cabinet of OITC, the UNITED NATIONS, BAN KI-moon, individually, and as Secretary General of the UN, H.E. Ambassador CESARE MARIA RAGAGLINI, Individually, and as Permanent Representative of the Italian Mission to the UN in New York, H.E. Ambassador LAURA MIRACHIAN, Individually, and as Permanent Representative of the Italian Mission to the UN in Geneva, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, Former Prime Minister of Italy, SILVIO BERLUSCONI, THE WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM ("WEF") a foreign corporation, WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM U.S.A., INC., GIANCARLO BRUNO, individually, and as Head of the Banking Industry of WEF, and various unknown individual co-conspirators, JOHN DOES A-2,

Defendants.

................................................................... X

Christopher-Earl Strunk in esse Affidavit

in Support of the Notice of Motion to Intervene as of right

STATE OF NEW YORK ) 1 -.

COUNTY OF KINGS 1

Accordingly, I, Christopher Earl Sbunk, being duly sworn, depose and say under

penalty of perjury:

1) Petitioner, Christopher-Earl: Sbunk, in esse (hereinafter, "Strunk" "Petitioner"),

am self represented without an attorney, and make this affidavit in support of

Strunk's Supplement to the Complaint Page 1 of 15

intervention as of right with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCvP) Rule 24(a) as an

American Chinese historic Bond holder Intervener-Plaint@ and or

2) That as an alternative this affidavit in support of intervention with permission

with FRCvP Rule 24 (b) (l)(B) (2) (A) (B), in that FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF NEW

YORK (FRBNY) by LEE C. BOLLINGER, its Chairman and President as well as the

FOREIGN BONDHOLDERS PROTECTIVE COUNCIL INC (FBPC) by its principal JOHN

R. PETTY are required supplemental Defendants, as shown and explained in the

Proposed Supplement with three (3) supplemental causes of action added to the

Complaint fded 111231 11 annexed herewith, are necessary parties to clar* the

transactions and injuries alleged by Plaintiffs that without same would infringe upon

Petitioner's rights and property.

3) That Strunk is the bearer of unredeemed "Historic" Chinese Bond property

effected by the failure of the Mainland Peoples Republic of China (PRC ) to re-unite

with the Republic of China (ROC) also known as Taiwan; and that Strunk owns ONE

(1) S20 CHINESE GOVERNMENT FlVE PER CENT REORGANIZATION GOLD LOAN OF

191 3 FOR S25,000,000 STERLING with serial number 41 1339 (see Exhibit A) (herein

after known as "S20 Bond), and ONE (1) $20 NATIONAL GOVERNMENT OF THE

REPUBLIC OF CHINA ALLIED VICIDRY U S DOLLAR LOAN of 1942 with serial number

0064833 payable in accordance with the regulation of October 31, 1953 with semi-

annual interest at 4% per annum (see Exhibit B) (herein after known as "$20 Bond);

and that as a point of valuation reference the combined accrued current $932,848.36

value of the obligations is estimated to be for:

a) the $20 Bond equal to 4.705882 troy ounces of gold or $97.27 in 19 13 Bond

now valued at say 561.2966 boy ounces of gold or based upon the 11 101 12

London PM Gold Price Fixing of $1637 per ounce say $918,842.46; and then


b) the $20 Bond equal to 0.5714 troy ounces of gold or $20.00 in 1942 Bond now

valued at say 8.5558 boy ounces of gold or based upon the 11 101 12 London

PM Gold Price Fixing of $1637 per ounce say $14,005.90.

4) That Strunk's historical bonds involve lawful money previously recorded and

presently discoverable as part of a sinking fund under a double-bookkeeping regimen

used by the Defendant FRBNY and auditable by the FBPC with fiduciary duties.

5) That although Plaintiffs' DFFI property does not coincide with any S20 Bond or

$20 Bond similar to Strunk's property, based upon information and belief the DFFI is

nevertheless part of the sinking fund or reserve created to re-pay the S20 Bond or $20

Bond denomination similar to Sbunk's property when the PRC and ROC re-unite; and

therefore, the disposition of the DFFI is germane and a direct interest to Sbunk.

6) That Petitioner, with the intent not to duplicate matters already settled,

searched for cases with details coinciding with the basis for intervention herein

including those cases disposed in this District by the Honorable Richard J. Holwell;

and that Petitioner found three cases: BALANOS u ROC SDNY 06-CW- 1322 1 (RJH),

MORRIS VROC SDNY 05 Civ. 4470 (RJH), and a more current case fded in the

Northern District of California, TAIWAN C M L RIGHTS LlTIGATION ORGANIZATION u.

KUOMINZANG BUSINESS MANAGEMENT COMM17TEE et a1 NDCA 10-cv-00362- VRW.

7) As to the three cases searched as germane other than important material facts

and fmdings that would apply herein supporting intervention do not preclude

Petitioner intervention as a matter of first impression before this Court.

8) That in the case TAIWAN C M L RIGHTS LlTIGATION ORGANIZATION u.

KUOMINZANG BUSINESS MANAGEMENT COMM17TEE et a1 NDCA 10-cv-00362- VRW I


found an affidavit of the Chinese - US Historical Bond Expert CHENG CHUNG-MO(11,

(see Exhibit C) that applies in support of Petitioner motion to intervene.

9) That according to Chinese - US Historical Bond Expert CHENG CHUNG-MO, in

the affidavit shown as Exhibit C, Article 63 of the Act Governing Relations Between

Peoples Of The Taiwan Area And The Mainland Area states:

"To the extent not contrary to the public order or good morals of the Taiwan Area, it shall be upheld the legal effects of any civil matter together with any right or obligation thereof created in the Mainland Area, prior to the coming into force of this Act, between any people of the Taiwan Area and Mainland Area, or between any two or more of the people of the Mainland Area, or between any of the people of the Mainland Area and any foreign national. The provisions of the preceding paragraph shall not apply provided that there had been laws or regulations in effect, prior to the coming into force of this Act, restricting the exercise or transfer of the rights referred to therein.

The following debts shall not be repaid prior to national unification:

Outstanding foreign currency bonds issued in the mainland prior to 1949 and the short-term Gold Bonds of 1949.

Various debts owed by any government bank as well as any other fmancial institution accepting deposits before their retreat ti-om the Mainland."

10) That according to the Chinese - US Historical Bond Expert CHENG CHUNG-MO

regarding to Article 63 of the Act Governing Relations Between Peoples Of The Taiwan

Area And The Mainland Area shown as Exhibit C:

"This act was promulgated and amended as stated above by Presidential Order on October 29, 2003 and implemented from March 1,2004 by the Order of the Executive Yuan during my term of office as Vice President of the Republic of China Judicial Yuan.

"The intent of this Act in regards to pre 1950 Chinese bonds was to reaffirm their Existence as defaulted foreign debt obligations of the Republic of China owed in the United States and elsewhere and to defer their resolution until

Grand Justice and Vice President of the Republic of China Judicial Yuan 1999-2006, Minister of Justice of the Republic of China 1998-1999, and as a law professor in Taiwan and as a visiting professor at the University of Vienna and Wisconsin. Judicial Yuan is the Republic of China's highest judicial organ tasked with interpreting the Constitution of the Republic of China. Holds LL.D. from the University of Vienna and worked many years as a Law Professor including the position of Chairman of the Law Department of National Chung-Hsing University.


national unification,

"These bonds referred to in Article 63 were all issued by the former Kuomintang Government of the Republic of China or were ratified by the Kuomintang government.

"Kuomintang business holdings are worth billions of US dollars as part of the "black gold system of Kuomintang nepotism corruption and cronyism.

"The issue of defaulted pre 1950 bonds is inexorably tied to the Kuomintang and its Assets in that the Kuomintang has been the main beneficiary of that default.

"Until approximately I991 , the Kuomintang and the Government of the Republic of China were one and the same entity. With the election o f Chen Shui- bian as President of the republic of China in 2000, for the first time the Republic of China was governed by a party other than the Kuomintang and the Kuomintang entirely ceased to be an organ or agent of the state. However, the Kuomintang apparatus typified by the Kuomintang Business Management Committee retained billions of dollars of assets accumulated while the Kuomintang was an organ of the Republic of China ti-om 1926 to 1991. It is entirely plausible that the proceeds, sinking funds, and other benefits of the pre 1950 defaulted bonds referenced in Article 63 have been retained by the Kuomintang Business Management Committee to this day.

'While Article 63 defers overall settlement of the bonds until the issue of Mainland China is dealt with, it does not preclude legal actions for unjust enrichment against the Kuomintang which is now a non sovereign juridical entity."

11) That Strunk contends that in light of the facts in the Complaint associated

with the DFFI and FRN, FRBNY policy and procedure as well as the Foreign Securities

Act of 1933 under which FBPC has fiduciary duties and Article 63 of the Act Governing

Relations Between Peoples Of The Taiwan Area And The Mainland Area, the S20 Bond

or $20 Bond denomination similarly include Strunk's property and are part of the

assets secured by Plaintiffs' claim against Defendants that involve money of exchange

also involve "the proceeds, sinking funds, and other benefits of the pre 1950 defaulted

bonds referenced in Article 63 have been retained by the Kuomintang Business

Management Committee to this d a g that reasonably would include Plaintiffs as well in

such private bansaction(s) with subject securities to form a two-sided market platform


to monetize debt in Switzerland as a transaction defmed under what would be a

pendant action with New York State's "Blue Sky L a f l in New York as well as effecting

eventual repayment and or the guarantee here in New York.

12) That according to the Complaint during the course of its existence over the last

century, the Dragon Family has accumulated great wealth by having provided the

Federal Reserve Bank and the United States Government with asset assignments of

gold and silver via certain accounts held in Switzerland, for which it has received

consideration in the form of a variety of Notes, Bonds and Ceficates such as those

described in Complaint paragraph 2 that are an Obligation of Defendant FRBNY and

Federal Reserve System.

13) That according to the Complaint upon information and belief, these Bonds have

values ranging in the many Thousands of Trillions of United States Dollars, a relatively

small portion of which is involved in the claims giving rise to this action. Each of these

currencies, such as the DFFI / FRN involved in this action, was and remains duly

registered within the Federal Reserve System and are directly verifiable by the Federal

Reserve through its efficient verification system and screening process

14) That Petitioner contends that Plaintiff Keenan as Disclosed Principal of the

Dragon Family admit that their relationship is identical with the Kuomintang Business

Management Committee as

"the Kuomintang appointed guardians of this Gold and the securities issued by the United States who came to be known euphemistically as the Dragon Family. The Dragon Family is, in fact, a highly secretive and informal organization that operates between old families within China and Taiwan, above the political divide of the two independent Chinese Governments."

15) Petitioner contends that based upon information and belief, The Dragon Family

and Defendants seek a Two-side Market Platform in Switzerland to monetize debt

obligations in association with interests of SMOM, CFR and Vatican that effects


Strunk's historic bond assets.

16) That Petitioner contends that Defendants are attempting to comingle DFFI and

FRN in a Two-side market platform in Switzerland to monetize EU ECB obligations

with Strunk's asset.

17) That Petitioner contends that based upon information and belief there is a

Memorandum of Understanding of August 3 1, 1982 (see Exhibit D) between the

Securities Exchange Commission of the United States and the Swiss Government

regarding non-public securities trading that would investigate a Two-side market

platform in Switzerland to monetize EU ECB debt obligations and or transact risk

based investments effecting Strunk's assets.

18) Petitioner contends based upon the Complaint that named Defendants have

proffered an effort to utilize Plaintiffs' DFFI / FRN asset by such action involve

supplement defendants thereby effecting Strunk's assets.

19) That Petitioner contend based upon the Complaint that in light of the facts

associated with the DFFI and FRN as well as FRBNY policy and procedures, Plaintiffs'

claim against Defendants involve money of exchange not credit involving money of

account means that lawful money was and is or probably would be disbursed by either

side in a covered transaction even using a platform of a two-side market transactions

to monetize the DFFI / FRN would be a covered transaction to be accounted for to

preserve Strunk's historic Bond sinking fund as the reserve for re-payment.

20) That Petitioner contends based upon the Complaint that the FRBNY and Lee C.

Bollinger by mis-administration and neglect have placed Strunk's repayment at risk.

2 1) That Petitioner contends he has a direct interest in the DFFI, FRN and related

funds.

22) That Petitioner contends that the International Operations of the FRBNY


represents the Federal Reserve System and the U.S. Treasury, also is responsible for

intervening in foreign exchange markets to achieve dollar exchange rate policy

objectives and to counter disorderly conditions in foreign exchange markets. Such

transactions are made in close coordination with the U.S. Treasury and Board of

Governors, and most often are coordinated with the foreign exchange operations of

other central banks. Dollars are sold in exchange for foreign currency if the goal is to

counter upward pressure on the dollar. If the objective is to counter downward

pressure, dollars are purchased through the sale of foreign currency.

23) Petitioner contends based upon the public record that the responsibility of the

FRBNY, as a private entity, is to serve as fiscal agent in the United States for foreign

central banks and official international fmancial organizations. It acts as the primary

contact with other foreign central banks. The services provided for these institutions

include the receipt and payment of funds in U.S. dollars; purchase and sale of foreign

exchange and Treasury securities; and the storage of monetary gold.

24) That Petitioner contends based upon the Complaint that the FRBNY and Lee C.

Bollinger, FBPC and John R. Petty by nonfeasance are parties to fraud, breach of

contract and replevin action in that the Expropriation and Conversion under Federal

Common Law and international law are under there auspice.

25) That Petitioner contends based upon the Complain that failure of FRBNY and

Lee C. Bollinger, FBPC and John R. Petty to perform duties and obligations would take

Strunk's property.

26) That Petitioner contends based upon the Complaint that FBPC is an essential

party herein because the FBPC was formed under the Foreign Bondholders Act of

1933 (15 USC 577bb through 577hh with law) at the request of the United States

Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury and the Chairman of the Federal


Trade Commission under President Franklin Roosevelt as a private, non-profit

corporation to protect the rights and interests of American holders of foreign defaulted

bonds. The FBPC has been involved in over 40 settlements between American

bondholders and defaulted foreign governments, the most recent being Poland (1975),

Hungary (1975), Bulgaria (1978), and Czechoslovakia (1984). The FBPC records are

maintained in the Library Archives of Stanford University.

27) That Petitioner contends based upon the Complaint that FRBNY and Bollinger

duties and responsibilities are in part to safeguard the use of the Federal Reserve

Notes (FRNs) issued as a result of the transfer of the Gold ti-om the ROC; and

28) That Petitioner contends based upon the Complaint and public record that the

FRBNY and its agents are active interveners into the fmancial matters of the European

Union (EU) and the European Central Bank (ECB) in that Defendants have

expropriated and attempt to convert the DFFI and FRNs thereby effecting both the

degree of fmancial intervention by Defendant FRBNY and the safety of Strunk's direct

interest in the disposition of the sinking fund and or reserve ti-om which to re-pay the

historical bonds

29) That Petitioner contends that the historical bonds involve lawful money

previously recorded and presently discoverable as part of a sinking fund under a

double-bookkeeping regimen used by the Defendant FRBNY and auditable by the

FBPC with fiduciary duties.

30) Furthermore, that according to a mutually acceptable Federal Reserve Bank

expert on double bookkeeping standards and procedures of the Defendant FRBNY.

3 1) That Petitioner contends based upon the history and ongoing facts detailed in

the Complaint that Defendants activities are associated and coordinated with the

Aragon Templars, Society of Jesus, Jesuit General Nicholas control over transactions


and directed outcomes of members of the SMOM, CFR, and FRBNY pose a threat to

the repayment of Strunk's assets; and in that regard

32) Petitioner provides herein the supporting Aftidavit of Eric Jon Phelps who as an

expert on the Society of Jesus before and after the 1540 Council of Trent in their

activities globally (see Exhibit E) that presents allegation to warrant that members of

the SMOM and CFR involved in the matter herein be restrained ti-om a direct

involvement in the relief fashioned herein.

33) That in support of restraint of members of the SMOM and CFR under the

Aragon Templars having shaped events and transactions complained of herein

effecting China and Asia with and that now effect the events and outcome of this

instant action were an accounting not conducted of the sinking fund and reserves, Mr.

Phelps a f f i s an abbreviated history of the Jesuit Company involvement in Asia since

no later than the bull Dominus ac Redemptor Noster, was to forever suppress and

extinguish the Society of Jesus starting at paragraph 22 of the Supporting Affidavit

for Intervention shown as Exhibit E quote:

22..In 1773 Pope Clement XIV issued his infamous bull Dominus ac Redemptor Noster, forever suppressing and extinguishing the Society of Jesus. As did Pope Clement V with the crusading Order of the Knights Templars, so did Pope Clement XIV with the crusading Order of the Society of Jesus---the New Knights Templars. At about this time, the Manchu dynasty (1644-1912) expelled the Company from China. In the future, the Manchus would pay dearly for this, Jesuit vengeance to result in the termination of the dynasty and the destruction of patriotic Chinese nationalism.

23. The Order fled for protection to non-Catholic nations. Embraced by Catherine I1 "the Great" of "heretic" Orthodox Russia, by Frederick I1 "the Great" of "heretic" Lutheran Prussia and by George I11 of "heretic" Anglican England, the sons of Loyola launched their war on the Vatican. Founding the Illuminati in 1776, they ignited the French Revolution leading to the Napoleonic Wars and the secret killing of Pope Pius VI while punishing the papacy and the Roman Catholic monarchs of Europe for suppressing the Society of Jesus. Roman Catholic Freemason Napoleon Bonaparte I was the Company's "Great Avenger."

24. In 1798 Napoleon invaded Malta. Advised by Jesuit Abby Sieyes, he confiscated all the weapons and treasures of the Knights of Malta to be used for his invasion of Egypt in the punishment of the Mamluks for driving the Knights Templars from Acre in 1291. Napoleon then drove the Knights of Malta to Russia, there to submit to terms of the


acting Jesuit General. From then on, the Knights of Malta would never again resist the Society of Jesus. Today, the Knights of Malta control the central banks of the world along with the cartel-capitalist private banks, such as Bank of America, JPMorganJChase and Citibank.

26..Upon the Order's international restoration in 1814 by Pope Pius VII, the Company began to regain its lost power. Directing the British Crown and influencing the American presidency, the Jesuits sought to create a united Anglo-American alliance to be used to conquer first Japan and then China. At this time both Japan and China had expelled the Company and vowed never to readmit their traitorous oppressors.

27. In 1841, via British influence of the First Opium War (1839-1842), the Chinese Manchus were forced to readmit the Jesuits into the Empire. In 1854 the Jesuits used the American Navy with Commodore Perry finally to open u p Japan to the White Protestant nations of the West---especially Jesuit-ruled Great Britain. The Jesuit General's old plan was still inexistence: Conquer China through Japan using her Emperor and military power now to be backed by the British Crown under Jesuit rule.

28..The Jesuits were legally readmitted into Japan in 1865. Emperor Komei stoutly resisted lifting "the Christian Ban" for which he was poisoned in 1867 a t the young age of thirty-six. That same year Tokugawa Shogon Yoshinobu resigned giving his office to the new Emperor Meiji then only fourteen years of age. Meiji "the Great" would serve his Jesuit masters for over forty-five years, centralizing all power in Tokyo and creating the Japanese Imperial Empire---for the use of the Jesuit Order. Japanese nationalists opposing the Meiji regime would be finally defeated in battle, massacred with American gatling guns in 1877.

30..The Society of Jesus began to use its "Japanese Sword of the Church" against the QingJManchu dynasty of China also ruling Korea. In 1894 Japan launched and, in 1895, won the first Sino-Japanese War taking Korea and Taiwan away from China while forcing the QingJManchu government to pay 13,600 tons of silver to Japan for war reparations. That same year Japanese agents of Jesuit-ruled Emperor Meiji brutally assassinated anti-Japanese, pro-Chinese Korean Empress Myeongseong. The surviving crown prince sought and received protection from the Russian legation in Soul, a n act for which Russia would pay dearly.

31..As a result of these loses of the QingJManchu Empress Dowager Cixi along with the continued invasion of foreigners, desperate Chinese nationalists began to resist. Therefore, the Jesuits incited and led the Boxer Rebellion in 1901 (during which many Protestant missionaries were murdered in according with the Jesuit Oath of the Fourth Vow). But the nationalists were betrayed, meeting the armies of eight nations under Jesuit rule or influence in battle. Five of those nations were Japan, America, Germany, Russia and Great Britain. With the foremost Chinese nationalists exterminated and the population weakened with opium addiction, the end of the hated , anti-Jesuit QingJManchu dynasty was approaching.

32..In 1904 Japan attacked Orthodox Russia ultimately destroying two of its three fleets. Termed "the first great war of the 20" century," Japan was victorious, furthering the Order's building of its Japanese Imperial Empire. Conversely, the loss of Russia fueled unrest in Russia leading to the Order's first Russian Revolution against the Romanov dynasty in 1905. For the Jesuits had been formally expelled from Russia by Czar Alexander I in 1820, only to legally re-enter in 1922 with their successful


Bolshevik Revolution financed and promoted by Rome's Anglo-American, Apostate Protestant, International White Power Structure centered in Washington, D.C., and London.

33..In 1912 the QingJManchu dynasty was finally overthrown. China would undergo a series of socialist upheavals and would yet suffer a Second Sino-Japanese War beginning in 1937 to end in 1945. During this time Freemason Emperor Hirohito would do the bidding of his masters residing a t Jesuit Sophia University in Tokyo, the Japanese invading twelve Asian countries for three reasons: to kill the nationalists, to kill all Protestant missionaries and to plunder the gold of the region much of it then buried in 175 "imperial" treasure vaults in the Philippines. After World War I1 (the second act of the Black Pope's Second Thirty Years' War, 1914-1945), much of that gold would find its way to American banks in New York, one of them being Citibank ruled by the Knights of Malta. Other knights facilitating the movement of the gold were OSS chief William Donovan and CIA chief Allen Dulles, a co-conspirator in the Kennedy Assassination.

34..China, now divided into pro-communist and anti-communist camps, would finally be conquered by the Jesuit Order. Suffering the loss of its gold to the Japanese and the loss of its honor via the Japanese Rape of Nanking, the Chinese people, driven to desperation, were ready for the "solution" to their "chaos." In 1949 the Order, using its Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member Secretary of State Dean Acheson, facilitated the successful subjugation of China to socialist-communism perfected by the Order on its socialist-communist "reductions" in Paraguay as per above. All the nationalist, anti- communists fled to Taiwan under the leadership of Freemason Chang Kai-shek loyal to Francis Cardinal Spellman, the mastermind behind the Kennedy assassination. Meanwhile, Communist China was under the dictatorship of Freemason Mao Zedong. Rome controlled both factions via Freemasonry, her open-but-false policy being to support the Nationalist Chinese having fled to Taiwan. But her secret-but-true policy was to back the Communist Chinese on the mainland. It is for this reason the US Seventh Fleet blocked Taiwan's planned invasion of Communist China in 1950 with the excuse that the Fleet was to keep China from invading Taiwan. This blockade enabled Communist China to send one million troops into North Korea to kill American servicemen.

35..Hence, the Jesuit Order via its high-level Freemasons within its International Anglo- American White Power Structure, controls the governments of both Taiwan and China. The peace-meal policy of betrayal towards Taiwan by Jesuit-directed, CFR-ruled American government is intended to end with the martial unity of Taiwan with China. This secret policy of unification, including the re-uniting of Korea and the uniting of Japan with China is to create a Far Eastern coalition of Asian nations for the future invasion of North America. Japan has been used to conquer China, Japan now to be used both commercially and militarily with its Red Chinese ally in the future subjugation of the entire Far East (including Australia and New Zealand) to culminate in a massive Oriental Asian invasion of North America having been invaded with millions of "fifth column" of Red Chinese loyalists including the spy, nuclear scientist and CIA operative Wen Ho Lee.

36..The Knights of Malta rule the pope's Federal Reserve Bank through such men as Peter G. Peterson, former president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York City, the bank holding both title and possession of America's gold in the form of 660,000 gold bars. The Jesuits employ the Knights of Malta in various academic positions, CFR-


member and Knight of Malta John J . DeGoia serving as president of Jesuit Georgetown University, it overseeing the policies of the White House through the Vatican's Vaginal Oval Office of the Virgin Mary

37..The Jesuit Order, in complete control of London, Moscow, Washington, D.C., Beijing, Baghdad, Cairo, Istanbul, Paris, Rome, Berlin, Brussels, Tehran, etc., is therefore in total control of the pope's International Intelligence Community, including all sixteen American intelligence agencies, Britain's MI5JMI6, Germany's BND, Israel's Mossad, China's CSIS, Russia's FSBJSVR, and all other lesser intelligence services. These intelligence services control the government of their host nations and thus the military complexes of those nations for the benefit of the Jesuit Papacy intending to make the pope of Rome the universal monarch of the world.

38..The Jesuit Order, in complete control of all central banks, including the Federal Reserve Bank and Bank of England, rules all stock exchanges and dictates the value of all paper currencies for the benefit of the Jesuit Papacy, the pope presently calling for the establishment of a World Bank---under his secret rule via his Knights of Malta subject to the Jesuit Superior General.

39..Thus, the Jesuit Order, in seeking to destroy the last bastion of the Protestant Reformation here in the United States of America, is now pulling out its manufacturing base relocating it into Red China, Mexico and Europe. This is in preparation for the Sino-Soviet-Muslim-Hispanic invasion of the American Empire after US forces are betrayed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and defeated on a t least two war fronts. And the secret Japanese imperial gold horde has contributed to the financing of our plotted demise.

41.. To facilitate this "Final solution to the Protestant Question," the Order, via its Knights of Malta controlling international banking and commerce, has used its Japanese and Nazi secret gold horde to conduct the pope's Cold War in covertly building Far Eastern communist nations while weakening the Western free enterprise nations of America and Canada in preparation for the Sino-Soviet-Muslim-Hispanic invasion of North America.

42.. This design of using massive amounts of gold is in accordance with the Black Pope's statement a t the secret meeting in Chieri, Italy, in 1825:

"For thesepurposes, it is not enough to haue at our disposal men of talent and men of action---we must haue gold to keep them fast to their work. Aye, giue me gold---plenty of gold; and then, with such able heads and such resources as the church commands, I will undertake not only to master the whole world, but to reconstruct it entirely. " Abbate Leone, The Jesuit Conspiracu. The Secret Plan o f the Order, (London: Chapman and Hall, 1848), p. 134.

34) That were this Court not to take the precaution to protect Plaintiffs' assets from

further degradation with admission of supplemental parties with authority to do the

necessary accounting without the appearance of impropriety Strunk's asset would be

in jeopardy along with that of the Plaintiffs' considerable interest involved herein


35) That Petitioner summary in support of intervention contends the supplemental

parties and Sbunk's intervention as of right with FRCP Rule 24 (a) is done on timely

motion in, in which the court must permit anyone to intervene who claims an interest

relating to the property or bansaction that is the subject of the action, and is so

situated that disposing of the action may as a practical matter impair or impede

Strunk's ability to protect its interest, unless existing parties adequately represent

that interest.; and

36) Further, even were FRCP Rule 24 (b) for PERMISSIVE INTERVENTION to apply

instead then also Strunk is here by a timely motion, that the court may permit anyone

to intervene who: (B) has a claim or defense that shares with the main action a

common question of law or fact; and as with the legal duty of the Defendant FBPC and

it agents under the Foreign Bondholders Act of 1933 requires it as a quasi

governmental Agency to act on such timely motion, as the court may permit a federal or

state governmental officer or agency to intervene if a party's claim or defense is based

on: (A) a statute or executive order administered by the officer or agency; or (B) any

regulation, order, requirement, or agreement issued or made under the statute or

executive order; and furthermore, were Delay or Prejudice. In exercising its discretion,

the court must consider whether the Sbunk intervention will unduly delay or

prejudice the adjudication of the original parties' rights or in fact assist the court in

the litigation.

37) Furthermore, that Strunk has received a copy of the Initial Scheduling

Conference Notice and Order so ordered on January 10, 20 12 by the Honorable

Richard J. Holwell USDJ assigned to hear this case entered January 13, 2012 into the

PACER electronic system along with the Judge's Chamber rules (see Exhibit F).

38) Petitioner intervention requirements satisij the issue of supplement summons.


WHEREFORE, Petitioner Skunk wishes a decision of the Court to grant Intemener-

maintiff status herein for the purpose of expediting a settlement by an order in

assistance to F'laintifls' demand for relief to include:

'r

A. Assign a mutually acceptable special master for an accouhting of the DFFI-FF?N;

B. ~ssign'the special master the task of an accounting of the sinking fund;

C. Assign the special master the task ta scrutinize any or all Two-sided Market Platfbrm(s).

D. Re$&& any member of the SMOM and or CFR from interfering with the accounting including Lee C. Bobges , John R. Petty and or their agents;

1 E. Such other and different relief the Court deems necessary herein.

I have read the foregoing, and in which Petitioner as Intervener- Plaintiff

requests a preliminary Injunction with r e s e t of Defendants and its agents as to the

accounting of t.he sinking fund to safeguard the guaranteed reserve to repay Strunk's

American Chinese historical Bonds; and h o w the contents thereof apply to me by

misapplication and administration of laws as a continuing injury caused by the

scheme to defiaud with unjust enrichment that sects HaintXfs' and Intervener-

Plaint. along with those similarly situated; the same is true to m y own knowledge,

except as to the matt& therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as

to those matters I believe it to be true. The grounds of my beliefs as to all matters not

stated upon inforrnatiun and belief

personal knowledge.


NEIL F. KEENAN et al. v. DANIELE DAL BOSCO et al. 11-cv-8500 (RJH)

Strunk Affidavit i n support o f Motion to Intervene

Exhibit A



Exhibit B



Exhibit C

I

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

I1

t2

13

14

15

16

1'.7

18

l9

20

21

22

23

25

26

2'7

28

THOMAS EASTON CSB #109218LAw OFFICE oF THoMAS EAsroN967 Sunset DrSpringfield, Oregon 97477Tel/Fax:541 [email protected]

JONATIIAN H, LEVY CSB #15803237 Royale Pointe DrHilton Head, South Carolina 29926Telr 843-837-8413Fax:202-318'[email protected] for Plaintiffs and the Class

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TAIWAN CIVIL RIGHTS NO. CV r0-0362-VRWLITIGATION ORGANIZATION;aat,

-- DEcLARATIoNqE!B-oI'qsIQRcHENGCHUNG.MO IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS'

Plaintiffs, MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGEMENT

KUOMINTANG BUSINESSMANAGEMENT COMMITTEE etal,

Defendants,

I. CHENG CHUNG-Mo. declarei

L I am not a party to this law suit and if called to testify in this matter will do so as

follows below.

2. I make this declaration from my own personal knowledge acquired while Grand Justice

and Vice President of the Republic of China Judicial Yuan 1999-2006, Minister ofJustice ofthe

Republic of China 1998-1999, and as a law prof'essor in Taiwan and as a visiting professor at

tire Universities of Vienla and Wisconsrn.

3. The Judicial Yuan is the Republic of China's highest judicial organ tasked with

interpreting the Constitution ofthe Republic of China.

4. I hold a LL.D. from the University of Vielna and worked many years as a Law

Paee 1 of 3

Case3:10-cv-00362-JW Document46-1 Filed07/29/11 Page1 of 3

I

2

3

4

5

6'7

8

9

l0

l1

t2

13

t4

15

t6

t'7

18

19

20

2l

22

23

)4

25

26

27

28

Professor including the positior ofChairman ofthe Law Department ofNational Chung-Hsing

Univelsity..

5. I was also the Minister of Justice for the Republic of China from 1998 to 1999.

6. I am familiar with Article 63 of the Act Gol)eming Reldtions Between Peoples Of The

Tctiwan Area And The Mainland Area whi,ch states:

To the extent not coltrarv to the public order or good morals of the Taiwan Area, it shall beuphiia ihe legat ellects of any crr i l maner logelhei wiLh any riSht or obligation lhereof createditii-tr. urintu?a 4i"", prior t6 the coming inio force of rhis Ait. between any of the people ofthe Trir{cn Area and ihe Matnland Area. or bet\ een an) two or more ol the People ol meMainlald Area. or betneen anv of the people o[ the Mainland Area and any lorerBn natlonalThe provi.ions of the precedin! paragrhph shall notaPPly provrded thal there had been Iaq s orie ei, hrion.a in iffeci. piior Lo thEiomi"ne inLo force of this Att. restricting the exercise or lransferofthe rishts refefied'to therein.

The folliwing debts shall not be repaid prior to national unification:

h"j$f#lt?,r"r?;gn cuffency bonds issued in the Mainland prior to 1949 and the short-term

2. Various debts owed bv rnv government bank as well as any other financirl institutionrccepting deposits before iheiire'ireat from Lhe Mainland.

7. This act was promulgated and amended as stated above by Presidential Order on

October 29, 2003 and implemented from March 1,2004 by the Order of the Executive Yuan

during my tenn of office as Vice President of the Republic of China Judicial Yuan

8. The intent of this Act in regards to pre 1950 Chinese bonds was to reaffirm their

existence as defaulted foreign debt obligations of the Republic of China owed in the United

States and elsewhere and to deler their resolution until national unification,

9. These bonds referred to in A icle 63 were all issued by the former Kuomi[tang

government of the Republic oi China or were ratified by the Kuomintang govemment

10. Kuomintang business holdings are wofl:h billions of US dollars as part ofthe "black

gold" system of Kuomintang nepotism, coruption, and cronyism

1 l The issue of defaulted pre 1950 bonds is inexorably tied to the KuomintanS and its

assets in that the Kuomintang has been the main beneficiary of that default.

1 2. Until approximately I 99 I , the Kuomintang and the Govemmert of the Republic of

China were one and the same entity. With the election of Chen Shui-bian as President of the

Page 2 of 3


I

2

3

4

5

6'7

8

9

l0

l l

12

l3

l4

l5

t6

l7

I8

t9

20

2 l

22

23

24

25

26

2'/

28

China in 2000, 1br the first time the Republic of China was govemed by a party other than the

Kuomintang and the Kuomintang entirely ceased to be an organ or agent of the state However

the Kuomintang apparatus typified by the Kuomintang Business Management Committee

retained billions of dollars of assets accumulated while the Kuomintang was an organ of the

Republic China from 1926 to 1991. It is entirely plausible that the proceeds, sinking funds' and

other benefits of the pre 1950 rlefaulted bonds referenced in Article 63 have been retained by the

Kuomintang Business Management Committee to this day.

13. While Article 63 defers overall settlemert of the bonds until the issue of Mainland

China is dealt with, it does not preclude legal actions for unjust en chment against the

Kuomintang which is now a non sovereignju dic entity.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing

is true and cofiect and executed at Washington, DC on

,2010.

Page 3 of 3




Exhibit D

M E M O R A N D U M OF

UNDERSTANDING

The United States Securities and Exchange Commission

The Government of Switzerland

II I

Washington, D.C. August 31, 1982

THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

THE GOVERNMENT OF THE SWITZERLAND

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

I . I n t r o d u c t i o n

1 . This HOg i s a s t a t e m e n t o f i n t e n t s e t t i n g f o r t h the u n d e r -

s t a n d i n g s reached by the d e l e g a t i o ~ of Swi tze r l and and the

United S t a t e s a c t i n g on b e h a l f o f t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e governments

( e the p a r t i e s ~) to e s t a b l i s h m u t u a l l y a c c e p t a b l e mean8 f o r

improving i n t e r n a t i o n a l law enforcement coope ra t ion in the

f i e l d of i n s i d e r t r a d i n g . These unders t and ings cont inue a long

t r a d i t i o n of law enforcement coopera t ion between Swi tzer land

and the United S t a t e s ar~ were reached in the course of

c o n s u l t a t i o n s between r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f Swi tze r l and and

the United S t a t e s in .Bern on March • and 2w 1982e and £n

Washington, D.C. on August 30 and 31, 1982: The Swiss d e l e g a -

t i o n was headed by M i n i s t e r ~ean Zwahlenw head of the Economic

and F i n a n c i a l Se c t i on o f the Federa l Departme'nt o f Fore ign

A f f a i r s , and inc luded o t h e r r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of the 8aid

departnentw Lutz Krauskopfw Deputy Chief o f D l v i s i o n r

and L ione l F r e i , Chie f o f . S e c t i o n , In the Fede ra l Department

o f ~ u s t l c e and Pol lce0 a~l ~ e p r e s e n t a t l v e s o f the Fede ra l

• Denking Commission and the Swiss Na t iona l Bank. The d e l e g a t i o n

0£ the Unite~ S t a t e s inc luded ~ h n H. Fedders , D i r e c t o r o f

the D iv i s ion of Enforcement o~ .h3 S e c u r i t i e s and Exchange

Commission (gSECe)w Edward Fo Greenew General Counsel of the

- .

. . . . ° . . . . . o

Q .

" 3 "

whose b e h a l f the t : a n s a c t i o n was a f f e c t e d and o t h e r r e l e v a n t

i n f o r m a t i o n . However, Swiss law p r o h i b i t s banks in p r i n c i p l e

from d i s c l o s i n g i n fo rma t ion wi th r e s p e c t to a customer u t i l i z i n g

I t s se rv i ces .

4. The par t l@s concluded t h a t the conduct of persons who

u t i l i z e Swiss banks to e f f e c t s e c u r i t i e s t r a n s a c t i o n s In the

Uni ted S t a t e s , In o rde r to take advantage of m a t e r i a l non-

p u b l i c i n f o r = a t i o n , i s d e t r i m e n t a l to the i n t e r e s t s of both

n a t i o n s .

5. On the b a s i s of the foregoing c o n s u l t a t i o n s , the p a r t i e s

r e a f f i r m e d the two c o u n t r i e s ' i n t e r e s t in mutual a s s i s t a n c e

In law enforcement m a t t e r s In accordance wi th m u t u a l l y

a ccep t a b l e procedures and In conformi ty with i n t e r n a t i o n a l

and n a t i o n a l lawr In p a r t i c u l a r a s s i s t a n c e :with r e s p e c t t o

t r a n s a c t i o n s e f f e c t e d by persons In pos se s s ion of m a t e r i a l

non-pub l i c i n f o r m a t i o n .

6, During the consu l t a t i ons the p a r t i e s engaged In an

exchange of op in ions pu r suan t to A r t i c l e 39, paragraph 1

o f the T rea ty Between the United S t a t e s and the ~ i s s

Confede ra t ion on Mutual &ss i s t ance In Cr iminal Kattersw

which became e f f e c t i v e on January 23w 1977 ( the 'J1,977 T r e a t y J ) .

S ec t i on I I o f t h i s Memorandum of Understanding memoria l izes the

exchange of op in ions and r e l a t e d unders tand ings t h a t the

p a r t i e s have reached .

-5 -

a . A r t i c l e 1 , p a r a g r a p h 1 og t h e 1977 T r e a t y

p r o v i d e s t h a t t h e C o n t r a c t i n g P a r t i e s ' u n d e r -

t a k e t o a f f o r d each o therw £n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h

p r o v i s i o n s o f the Treatyw-mutua l ass is tance

I n " L n v e s t l g a t l o n s o r c o u r t p r o c e e d i n g s In

r e s p e c t o f o f f e n s e s t h e p u n i s h m e n t o f which

f a l l s o r would f a l l w i t h i n t h e J u r i s d i c t i o n

o f t h e J u d i c i a l a u t h o r i t i e s o f t h e r e q u e s t i n g

S t a t e or a s t a t e o r c a n t o n t h e r e o g , m T h i s meansw

f o r example , t h a t an i n v e s t i g a t i o n by t h e SZC

s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d an i n v e s t i g a t i o n £ o : which

a s s i s t a n c e cou ld be f u r n i s h e d (1£ t h e o t h e r

r e q u i r e m e n t s o£ t h e T r e a t y a r e met ) a s long a s

t h e l n v e s t i g a t l 0 n ' r e l a t e s t o c o n d u c t which m i g h t •

be d e a l t w i t h by t h e c r l n i n a l c o u r t S o

b° The 1977 T r e a t y r e q u i r e s t h a t a p a r t i c u l a r

o f £ e n s e be a c r ime unde r t h e laws o f e a c h

n a t i o n i n o r d e r £o r c o m p u l s o r y a s s i s t a n c e t o

be r e q u i r e 4 under t h e T r e a t y . The p a r t i e s

u n d e r s t a n d t h a t t r a n s a c t i o n s a f f e c t e d by

p e r s o n s I n p o s s e s s i o n o f m a t e r i a l n o n - p u b l i c %

i n f o r m a t i o n c o u l d be an o f f e n s e u n d e r A r t i c l e s

148 ( f r a u d ) # 159 ( u n ~ a i t h f u l management) o r 162

- 7 -

u n d e r t a k e to c o n s i d e r w h e t h e r c o m p a r a b l e d i p l o m a t i c n o t e s

s h o u l d be exchanged w i t h r e s p e c t t o o t h e r o f f e n s e s r e l a t i n g

t o s e c u r i t i e s t r a n s a c t i o n s c o v e r e d by t h e T r e a t y .

X I I . The P r i v a t e & g r e e m e n t ~ n g Memberm o f t h e Swiss Banke r s ~ & s s o c i a t i o n

1o The p a r t i e s r e c o ~ n i z e t h a t t h e r e may be s e c u r i t i e s

t r a n s a c t i o n s e f f e c t e d i n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s b y Swiss banks

a c t i n g on b e h a l f o f p e r s o n s who p o s s e s s m a t e r i a l n o n - p u b l i c _

i n f o r m a t i o n , f o r which c o m p u l s o r y m e a s u r e s would n o t be

a v a i l a b l e unde r t h e 1977 T r e a t y . Such a s s i s t a n c e cou ld n o t

be o r d e r e d I f a v a i l a b l e i n f o r m a t i o n d i d n o t i n d i c a t e t h e

e x i s t e n c e o f an o f f e n s e unde r t h e Swiss P e n a l Code. As t h e

Swiss Federal Council will submit to the Parliament a bill

on t h e m i s u s e o f i n s i d e i n f o r m a t i o n , t h i s l a c u n a cou ld be

f i l l e d . For o a s e s i n which t h e T r e a t y i s n o t a p p l i c a b l e , o r

i n v h i c h i t i s n o t p o s s i b l • t o ~ la ther e v i d e n c e . b y employ ing

c o m p u l s o r y p r o c e s s , p e n d i n g t h e e n a c t m e n t o f Such l e g i s l a t i o n ,

t h e p a r t i e s d i s c u s s e d • p r o p o s e d p r i v a t e Agreement unde r t h e

a e g i s o f t h e Swiss Ban k e r s e A s s o c i a t i o n w which would p e r m i t

p a r t i c i p a t i n g banks t o d i s c l c s e t h e i d e n t i t y o f • c u s t o m e r

. and c e r t a i n o t h e r 1 r e l evan t l n f o r m a t i o n r u n d e r c e r t a i n s p e c i f i e d

c i r c u m s t a n c e s , i n r e s p o n s e t o • r e q u e s t made by t h e Depa r tmen t

o f O u s t i c e on b e h a l f o f t h e SEC and. p r o c e s s e d t h r o u g h t h e

- 9 -

d e f i n e the c i r c u m s t a n c e s under which the Commission o f

Enqu i ry " s h a l l s be s a t i s f i e d t h a t t he SEC h a s - r e a s o n a b l e

grounds to make the r e q u e s t . In a l l o t h e r c a s e s i n which

t h e c r i t e r i a a r e no t mete t h e p a r t i e s unde r s t and t h a t

t h e Commission o f Enqu i ry w i l l be r e q u i r e d t o r ev i ew the

i n f o r m a t i o n s u b m i t t e d by t h e 8EC to dec ide whe the r i t I s

r e a s o n a b l y 8 a t i s f i e ~ t h a t t h e SEC has r e a s o n a b l e grounds

t o make a r e q u e s t . A c c o r d i n g l y , t h e p a r t i e s unders tand*

t h a t a f a i l u r e by t he 8EC t o meet t he t h r e s h o l d c r i t e r i a

s p e c i f i e d in t he p r i v a t e Agreement s h a l l no t r e s u l t i n any

p r e sumpt ion t h a t t he SEC does n o t have r e a s o n a b l e grounds

t o s a k e the r e q u e s t f o r a s s i s t a n c e under t h e te rms o f t he

p r i v a t e Agreement an~ t h i s Memorandum of U n d e r s t a n d i n g .

- The p a r t i e s u n d e r s t a n d t h a t t he f a i l u r e o f a bank c u s -

tomer t o provAde i n f o r m a t i o n which may demons t r a t e t h a t

t h e t r a n s a c t i o n in q u e s t i o n was n o t made in v i o l a t i o n o f

t h e Uni t ed S t a t e s s e c u r i t i e s lawsw as p rov ided f o r by the

p r i v a t e Agreement, s h a l l n o t r e s u l t i n any p resumpt ion of

g u i l t ,

. The p a r t i e s u n d e r s t a n d t h a t £ n f o ~ a t i o n o b t a i n e d t h r o u g h

t h e ~echanism e s t a b l i s h e d by t h i s memorandum and the p r i v a t e

& g r e ~ e n t w i l l be used o r i n t r o d u c e d as ev idence o n l y i n o ~ • b q

- 1 1 -

t h a t a r e p o r t s u b m i t t e d by a bank p u r s u a n t t o the te rms of

the p r i v a t e Agreement may n o t be t r a n s m i t t e d . t o t he SEC

v i t h o u t c o n s i d e r a b l e h a t - n e i t h e r t o the e s s e n t i a l I n t e r e s t s

o f S v i t z e r l a n d o r t o t h i r d p e r s o n s who a p p e a r t o have no

r e l a t i o n s h i p t o t h e o f f e n s e which gave r i s e t o t h e r e q u e s t

f o r a s s i s t a n c e . I n such c a s e s t I t i s unde r s tood t h a t t he

F e d e r a l O f f i c e f o r P o l i c e M a t t e r s v i i i use i t s b e a t e f f o r t s o

t o a d a p t t he r e p o r t so t h a t u s e f u l I n f o r m a t i o n may be

p r o v i d e d to t he SEC w i t h o u t c a u s i n g such harm to t he i n t e r e s t s

o f t h i r d p e r a o n a o r t o S w i t z e r l a n d . In the same s p l r i t t I t

I s unde r s tood t h a t t h e S~C v i i i ~udge t h i s o p i n i o n as one

ma~e £n good f a i t h an~ use m o d e r a t i o n vhen c o n s i d e r I ~

a l t e r n a t i v e measu re s .

• C o n s u l t a t i o n s IV. F u r t h e r . . . . . . .

1. In o r d e r t o c o n t i n u e and improve i n t e r n a t i o n a l law

en fo rcemen t c o o p e r a t i o n i n a manner c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e

i n t e r e s t s o f bo th na t ionsw the p a r t i e s u n d e r s t a n d t h a t t h e

SEC and t h e F e d e r a l O f f i c e f o r P o l i c e M a t t e r s w i l l u n d e r -

t a k e f u r t h e r c o n t a c t s o r c o n s u l t a t i o n s i n the f u t u r e when

the need t o do so i s r e c o g n i z e d m u t u a l l y .

2~ There w i l l be c o n t ~ . ~ o r c o n s u l t a t i o n s between t h e

P a r t i e s conce rn ing t h e fo~xoving m a t t e r s s

- 1 3 - .

C .

unaer t h e p r i v a t e Agreement and t h e 1977 T r e a t y

as w e l l a s t h e e f f e c t o f such t e r m i n a t i o n on

t h i s memorandum.

The P a r t i e s a g r e e t h a t any q u e s t i o n s o r d i s -

p u t e s between then ~ w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e i n t e r -

p r e t a t i o n o r a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h i s Memorandum o f

Un4ers tandlngw the exchange o f o p i n i o n s Inc luded

h e r e i n p u r s u a n t t o A r t i c l e 39w p a r a g r a p h 1. o f

t h e 1977 T r e a t y o r t he o p e r a t i o n o f the p r i v a t e

Agreement s h a l l , be s e t t l e d by means o f con-

s u l t a t i o n s .

• V. O t h e r .

I . N o t w i t h s t a n d i n g any o t h e r p r o v i s i o n hereinw t h e

p a r t i e s ag ree t h a t t h i s Memorandum does n o t modi fy o r supe r sede

any laws o r r e g u l a t i o n s in f o r c e i n t h e Un i t ed S t a t e s o r

S w i t z e r l a n d .

2. The p a r t i e s ag ree t h a t t h e y do n o t i n t e n d t o c o n f e r

any r i g h t on any cus tomer o f a bank which i s a s i g n a t o r y o f

t h e p r i v a t e Agreement t o J u d i c i a l r ev i ew i n t h e c o u r t s o f the

t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s w i t h r e s p e c t to any d e c i s i o n to d i s c l o s e

i n f o r m a t i o n t o Un i t ed S t a t e s ' a u t h o r i t i e s under t he te rms o f

t h e p r i v a t e Agreement .

14th July, 1982

A G R E E M E H T X V Z

o f the Swiss Bar~ers ~ A s s o c i a t i o n v l t h regard t o the hand l i ng o f reques ts f o r £ n f o r ~ a t l o n from t h e $ecu r£ t l es a n d Exchange Connlss£on o f t h e Un£ted S t a t e s on t h e sub:Sect o f m i s u s e o f :Lns£de l n f o r n a t £ o n

" I n c o n s i d e r a t i o n Of t h e I n ~ u l r ~ e s from t h e 5 e c ~ r l t ~ e s ~ I

Exchange C o m £ s s l o n ( h e r e a f t e r 8 SEC) o f t h e Un£ted S t a t e s

on t h e n£suse o f £ns£de £ n f o r n a t ~ o n and so f a r a s t h e banks

c a n n o t be o b l i g e d t o f u r n i s h £ n f o r m a t i o n t o t h e a p p r o p r £ a t e

Sw£ss a u t h o r £ t £ e 8 f o r submiss£.on, t o "the $EC i n a l e g a l a s s £ s t - • %

a n t e p r o c e d u r e , t h e me~ber banks o f t h e " p r e s e n t Agreement

( h e r e a f t e r 8 t h e banks) u n d e r t a k e t o r e s p e c t t h e f o l l o w i n g

s t l p u l a t £ o n s 8 •

e ~

k r ~ i c l e 2

1 . The Board o f D i r e c t o r s o f t h e Swi s s B a n k e r s e

& s s o c L a t i o n s h a l l appoLn t a CommissLon o f £nquLry

( t h e mCommiss£onU) composed o f t h r e e members and •

t h r e e d e p u t i e s . N e i t h e r t h e memberw o f t h e

Commission n o r t h e i r d e p u t i e s n a y exercLse an

e x e c u t i v e f u n c t i o n £n a company v h l c h i s s u b j e c t

t o t h e F e d e r a l Law on Banks and S a v i n g s Banks , - .

2 . ~s s e l e c t e d r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f t h e b a n k s

i n a c c o r d a n c e w l t h A r t i c l e 47, p a r a g r a p h 1 , o f t h e

F e d e r a l Law on Banks and S a v i n g s Banksw t h e members

Of t h e Commlssionw t h e i r d e p u t i e s and s t a f f a r e

bound by t h e r u l e o f b a n k i n g s e c r e c y fo~ a l l t h e

f a c t s o f w h i c h them a r e a p p r i s e d I n t h e c o u r s e o f

t h e p r o c e d u r e s e t o u t by t h e p r e s e n t K g r e e m e n t .

° .

3. The Commission s h a l l be domic i led a t the o f f i c e s

o f the Swlss Bankers ' &ssoc la t l on .

4. The Commission s h a l l o rganize i t s own s e c r e t a r i a t .

( l l ) £ t has o t h e r m a t e r i a l i n d i c a t i o n s t h a t t, he

t r a n s a c t i o n s r e f e r r e d t o i n B o above were made

£n v i o l a t i o n o f U.S. i n s i d e r t r a d i n g l a w s . The

Commission s h a l l be s a t i s f i e d £n a l l c a s e s £n

which t h e d a l l y t r a d i n g volume o~ such s e c u r i t i e s

i n c r e a s e d 50 I o r more a t any t i m e d u r i n g t h e

,25 t r a d i n g days p r i o r t o such announcement above

t h e a v e r a g e d a i l y t r a d i n g volume o f such s e c u -

r i t i e s d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d from t h e gOth t r a d i n g

day t o t h e BOth t r a d i n g day p r i o r t o s u c h

announcement o r t h e p r i c e o f such s e c u r i t i e s

v a r i e d a t l e a s t 50 ~ o r more d u r i n g t h e 25 t r a d i n g

d a y s p r i o r t o such announcement . I n a l l o t h e r c a s e s ,

t h e Commission s h a l l r e v i e w t h e i n f o r m a t i o n s u b -

m i t r e d by t h e SEC t o d e c i d e whe the r i t i s r e a s o n a b l y

s a t i s f i e d t h a t t h e SEC has r e a s o n a b l e g rounds

t o make t h e Znqu£ry~

5 . t h e I n q u i r y i s accompanied by an" u n d e r t a k i n g by

t h e SEC n o t t o d i s c l o s e t h e i n f o r m a t i o n t o be

p r o v i d e d p u r s u a n t t o A r t i c l e 4 . 3 . t o any p e r ~ n

e x c e p t i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h an SEC i n v e s t i g a t i o n o r

a law e n f o r c e m e n t a c t i o n i n i t i a t e d by t h e SL~ .

a g a i n s t a l l e g e d p u r c h a s e r p o r s e l l e r s o f t h e - e F e ~ ° r ~:omp~y s s e c u r i t i e s o ~ © a l l o p t i o n s t h e r e f o r Q f o r

v i o l a t i o n s - o f U.S . £ n s i d e z t r a d i n g laws i n c o n n e c t i o n

w i t h t h e A c q u i s i t i o n o r B u s i n e s s Combina t ion .

4 . T o g e t h e r w i t h t h e r e p o r t , t h e bank s h a l l f l l e w i t h

t h e Commission a l l m a t e r i a l s r e c e i v e d f rom t h e

customer.

5 . I f t h e Commission n e e d s f u r t h e r l n f o r m a t £ o n f o r

t h e s a k e o f t h e I n q u i r y , £ t w i l l a p p r o a c h t h e SEC

t h r o u g h t h e F e d e r a l O f f £ c e f o r P o l £ e e M a t t e r s .

~ r t i c l e $ i i i

The cus tomerp . w i t h i n t h e n e a n i n g o f ~ r t i e l e s 2 t o S

he reo£e ~ n c l u d e s t h e b e n e f i c i a l o ~ e r o f t h e a s s e t s

£ d e n t l f £ e d i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e ~ r t i c l e s $ t o $ o f

t h e Agreement d a t e d Oul¥ lw 1982 on t h e o b s e r v a n c e o f

c a r e i n a c c e p t £ n g f u n d s and on t h e p r a c t i c i n g o f

bank£ng s e c r e c y .

A r t i c l e 8

Q

In t h e c a s e o f any d o u b t a r i s i n g a s t o t h e m a t e r i a l

a c c u r a c y o f t h e r e p o r t f u r n i s h e d by t h e bank , t h e

C o m i s s i o n by i t s e l f o r t h e SEC, t h r o u g h t h e a p p r o -

p r i a t e c h a n n e l s , may r e q u e = t t h e F e d e r a l Banking COm-

m i s s i o n t o e x a m i n e w h e t h e r t h e r e p o r t g i v e n conforms

tO t h e f a c t s and tO t h e p r e s e n t J~greement. The bank

s h a l l p r o v i d e a l l i n f o r m a t i o n needed f o r e x a m i n a t i o n . •

I f any m a t e r i a l i n a c c u r a c y l s d i s c o v e r e d e an amended-

r e p o r t showing t h e c o r r e c t i n f o r m a t i o n s h a l l be

fo rwarded t o t h e F e d e r a l O f f i c e f o r P o l i c e M a t t e r s .

tO be fo rwarded t o t h e SEC. Any o t h e r a p p r o p r i a t e measu re s

o f t h e F e d e r a l Banking Commission Ln acco rdance wit.h

" t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f t h e F e d e r a l Law on Banks and Sav ings

Banks a r e r e s e r v e d .

- - 6 m l , - -

( i i )

t o t h e SEC t h e Connniss ion ' s r e p o r t p u r s u a n t

t o A r t i c l e ?, o r

a r e q u e s t f o r r e v i e w p u r s u a n t t o A r t i c l e 8

h e r e o f i s r e c e i v e d , o n . t h e s i x t i e t h day a f t e r

t h e d a t e o f r e c e i p t o f such i n q u i r y where no

amended r e p o r t p u r s u a n t t o A r t i c l e 8 h e r e o f

has been i s s u e d , o r on t h e t e n t h d a y a f t e r

t h e d a t e a n y amended r e p o r t under A r t i c l e ?

which has been i s s u e d i s fo rwarded t o t h e $EC,

w h i c h e v e r i s e a r l i e r # oE

B Q

b) t h e p r o c e e d i n g s i n a U.$ . c o u r t have t e r m i n a t e d

i n a f i n a l Judgement , by c o n s e n t o r o t h e r w i s e , n o t

a d v e r s e to t h e c u s t o m e r , o r

C) t h e S E C ' c o n s e n t s i n w r i t i n g .

4 . The e v l d e n t i a r y p r o o f c o n c e r n i n g t h e c o n d i t i o n s l i s t e d

unde r 2 a ) , b) and c) and 3 a ) , b ) ' a n d c) h e r e o f s h a l l

be communicated t h r o u g h t h e F e d e r a l O f f i c e f o r P o l i c e

Katterm.

!

A r t i c l e 11 • m

The Agreement i s £n f o r c e f o r a f i x e d p e r i o d o f t h r e e

y e a r s a s f rom . o . o ° . . . ° . . . ° . ° Zt s h a l l be t h e r e a f t e r

r enewed on a y e a r t o y e a r b a s i s i f n o t t e r m i n a t e d b y one

o f I t s members b y g i v i n g a d v a n c e n o t i c e o f a t l e a s t

s i x months a d d r e s s e d t o t h e S w i s s B a n k e r s e A s s o c i a t i o n .

Zn t h e c a s e o f I t s b e i n g t e r m l n a t e d , a l l p a r t i e s t o

t h e Agreement u u s t be i n f o r m e d t h e r e o f w £ t h o u t d e l a y s

t h e y t h e n have t h e r i g h t , w i t h i n a month f rom t h a t , d a t e , _

t o become a p a r t y to s u c h t e r m i n a t i o n e v e n v h e n t h e r e £s

no l o n g e r s i x months to r u n up t o t h e e x p i r a t i o n o f t h e

t e r m i n a t i o n t e r m . The A g r e ~ e n t s h a l l r e m a i n £n f o r c e and

. e f f e c t f o r t h o s e members v l ~ h a v e n o t t e r m i n a t e d I t .

The Agreement w i l l be a b r o g a t e d I n t h e c a s e o f t h e Swis s

l e g i s l a t u r e e n a c t i n g l e g i s l a t i o n on t h e m i s u s e o f i n s i d e

£ n f o r m a t £ o n .

° :

Z n t h e c a s e o f t h e Agreement b e i n g a b r o g a t e d , p r o -

c e e d i n g s a l r e a d y I n s t £ t u t e d w i t h t h e F e d e r a l O f f i c e

f o r P o l i c e H a t t e r s r i l l be c a r r i e d t h r o u g h t o s e t t l e m e n t .

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF SWITZERLAND ON MUTUAL ASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS AND

ANCILLARY ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS

I. Introduction

• ° _ _

i. This Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is a statement

of intent setting forth the understandings reached by the

delegations of the United States and Switzerland acting on

behalf of their respective executive authorities (the Parties)

to improve their cooperation in the field of international law

enforcement. These understandings continue a long tradition of

law enforcement cooperation between Switzerland and the United

States and were reached in the course of consultations between

representatives of Switzerland and the United States.

On the basis of the foregoing consultations, the Parties

reaffirmed the two countries' interest in mutual assistance in

criminal matters and ancillary administrative proceedings under

Article 1 of the Treaty between the Government of the United

States of America and the Government of Switzerland on Mutual

or tax fraud as defined under Swiss law. Such cooperation may

include assistance in locating and hearing witnesses, producing

and authenticating judicial or business records and serving

judicial or administrative documents.

2. The Treaty, in particular, has been used on numerous

occasions by the law enforcement authorities of both countries.

The Parties understand that the procedures provided by the

instruments should be used as a first resort whenever available

and to the extent applicable. The Parties will use their best

efforts to interpret and apply the instruments to provide

assistance when requested by the Central Authority of the other

Party and to streamline the implementation process of the

instruments in order to improve their practical availability

and effectiveness.

III. Early Warning/Consultations

1. In o r d e r to continue and improve international law

enforcement cooperation in a manner consistent with the

interests of both countries, the Parties understand that the

appropriate authorities will undertake contacts or

consultations in the future when the need to do so is

recognized mutually.

may prejudice the successful completion of a n investigation

or proceeding; and

(c) the Central Authorities have had 30 days, or other

mutually agreed perio~ of time, within which to consult in

an effort to resolve the matter to their mutual

satisfaction.

Even where the above conditions have been met, the Parties will

continue to exercise moderation and restraint in undertaking to

enforce unilateral compulsory measures to which the other

objects or to block enforcement Df such measures.

4. The Parties understand further that they will use their

best efforts to insure that the information obtained in such

communications is handled with appropriate care to prevent it

from becoming public and, in particular, will not be disclosed

to any person except officials dealing with the case concerned

and, once an official request has been presented, parties

having a right of appeal in connection with the handling of the

request.

IV. Moderation and Restraint

Where the above-mentioned mechanisms are not available to

obtain evidence in areas covered by this MOU the Central

Authorities will, with a view to avoiding or minimizing

counterfeiting, extortion, robbery or terrorism (which may also

involve money laundering) can be circumstantial evidence of the

existence of organized crime.

In view of these considerations, the Parties understand

that the Central Authorities will continue their practice of

using their best efforts to interpret and apply the

instruments, in particular, such provisions that deal with

organized crime and drug trafficking, in such a way as to

provide assistance to the widest extent possible.

VI. Legal Status

This MOU is not intended to create legal obligations. It

embodies statements of intent of the two Parties. The Parties

further understand that this MOU does not modify or supersede

any laws or regulations in force in Switzerland or in the

United States. This MOU is not intended to create any rights

enforceable by private parties and does not impose any

obligations on the legislative and judicial branches of the

Parties.

DEPARTHENT OF STAT~ WASHINGTON

l | ove~ber 10, 1987

E x c e l l e n c y ,

" X have t h e honor t o r e f e ~ t o t he Tcea ty be tveen t h e

U n i t e d S t a t e s o f -Amer i ca and t h e Swiss C o n f e d e r a t i o n on

Nu tua l A s s i s t a n c e i n C c l B l n a l K a t t e r s , . v h i c h vas s i g n e d on

Kay 25e 1973e and became e f f e c t i v e on J a n u a r y 23, 1977

( ' T c e a t y ' } , and i n p a r t i c u l a ~ t o Pa ragzaph .3 o f

A r t i c l e 1 . T h a t p r o v i s i o n p r o v i d e s t h a t " t h e competent

a u t h o r i t i e s o f t h e C o n t r a c t i n g P a r t i e s may a g r e e t h a t

a s s i s t a n c e asprovided by t h i s T r e a t y w i l l a l s o b e g r a n t e d

i n c e r t a i n a n c i l l a r y administrative p r o c e e d i n g s ~n r e s p e c t !

Of m e a s u r e s wh ich may be t a k e n a g a i n s t t h e p e r p e t r a t o r o£

an o f f e n s e f a l l i n g v i t h i n t h e p u r v i e v o f t h i s T r e a t y . a o o

In c a s e s i n v o l v i n g , t r a d i n g of s e c u r i t i e s by p e r s o n s £n

p o s s e s s i o n o f m a t e r i a l n o n - p u b l i c i n f o r m a t i o n r t he

o f f e n d e r s n a y n o t o n l y be . f o u n d / g u i l t y and s e n t e n c e d i n a 4

" c r i m i n a l p r o c e e d i n g b u t a l s o may be s u b j e c t t o o t h e r

s a n c t i o n s i n o r d e r t h a t . t he . h a m caused by t h e o f f e n s e i s

- r e p a i r e d o r t h a i ' t h e . o f f e n d e r s a r e d e t e r r e d from s£m£1ar- .

-conduct i n t h e f u t u c e . I t i s t h e r e f o r e - t h e u n d e c s t a n d i n g

o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s Govermnent t h a t r i f a s s i s t a n c e under

H i s E x c e l l e n c Y ~ . , .--~: .- :..

Klaus J a c o b i ,

J~nbassador o f S w i t z e r ~ a n d .

p r o v i s i o n s of t he Uni ted S t a t e s s e c u r i t i e s laws or t he

r u l e s and r e g u l a t i o n s p romulga ted t h e r e u n d e r ~ and

(5) Enforcement p r o c e e d i n g s conduc ted b e f o r e t he SEC or

an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e law Judge i n which t h e r e v o c a t i o n o~

s u s p e n s i o n o f the. r e g i s t r a t i o n o f a r e g u l a t e d e n t i t y e or a

s u s p e n s i o n Or bar o f a p e r s o n from b e i n g a s s o c i a t e d w i t h

such an e n t i t y , as a r e s u l t o f v i o l a t i v e conduc t i s s o u g h t .

I t iS agreed t h a t t h e T r e a t y p r o v i d e s an i m p o r t a n t

means o f o b t a i n i n g i n f o r m a t i o n needed t o e n f o r c e t h e

C r i m i n a l or p e n a l laws o f t h e Uni ted S t a t e s and t h a t t he

T r e a t y s h o u l d be used t o t h e e x t e n t f e a s i b l e . I t i s

f u r t h e r unde r s tood t h a t an i n v e s t i g a t i o n by t h e SEC i s t o

be c o n s i d e r e d an i n v e s t f g a t i o n f o r which a s s i s t a n c e can be

f u r n i s h e d ( i f the o t h e r r e q u i r e m e n t s o f t h e T rea t~ a t e

m e t ) . a s l ong as the i n v e s t i g a t i o n r e l a t e s t o conduc t which

migh t be d e a l t w i th by t h e c r i m i n a l c o u r t s o f t he Un i t ed

S t a t e s .

I have t h e f u r t h e r honor t o s t a t e , on b e h a l f o f t h e

U n i t e d S t a t e s Goverrmente t h a t : i / f a s s i s t a n c e under t h e • . . . ~

T r e a t y c o u l d be g r a n t e d w i t h a v iew ~ o p o s s i b l e c r i m i n a l

p r o c e e d i n g s ~n Swl tzer landw a s s i s t a n c e w i l l a l s o be

g r a n t e d i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e f o l l o w i n g i n v e s t i g a t i o n s

and p r o c e e d i n g s , i n c l u d i n g i n v e s t i g a t i o n s t h a t may l e a d t o

such p r o c e e d i n g s e t h a t ace conduc t ed by competen t Swiss

- 5 -

. .

a r t i c l e l e P a r a g r a p h 3 o f t h e T rea tya wh ich 6 h a l l e n t e r

i n t o f o r c e on t h e d a t e o f Your E x c e l l e n c y e s n o t e i n r e p l y .

&ccep te E x c e l l e n c y t t h e r enewed a s s u r a n c e s o f my

h i g h e s t c o n s i d e r a t i o n .

~ o r t h e ~ e c r e t a r y o f 8 t a t e z



Exhibit E

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT O F NEW YORK .................................................................. X

NEIL F. KEENAN, Individually and as Agent for 1 1-CV-8500 (RJH) THE DRAGON FAMILY, citizens of foreign states,

Plaintiff,

-against-

DANIELE DAL BOSCO, a citizen of a foreign state, E t al.

Defendants.

................................................................ X

Affidavit of Eric Jon Phelps in esse as Expert in support of

Christopher-Earl Strunk in esse Motion to Intervene

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA ) ) SS

COUNTY OF BERKS )

I, Eric-Jon: PhelpsO in esse, Affirmant, being duly sworn, depose and state under

penalty of perjury:

1. Am a natural born citizen of the Republic of California residing in the

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, am over 18 years of age and not a party to

this instant action

2. Affirmant's residence for service of process is 203 South Fort Zellers Road,

Apt. D, Newmanstown, PA, 17073; Email: [email protected]; home phone

: 610-589-5300.

3. Affirmant makes this affidavit in support of Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse

("Petitioner") motion to intervene in the above captioned case in the United States

Eric-Jon: Phelps Affidavit Page 1 of 19

District Court for the Southern District of New York, and with due notice am

available to testify accordingly.

4. That Petitioner has requested that Affirmant testify herein and or related

proceedings as an expert witness on the Jesuit Order and related organizations in

the following matters:

a. The history of the Bible-based, Protestant Reformation as relates to

the hstory of the Jesuit Aragon Templars, a.k.a. the Society of Jesus

b. The Aragon Templar history in Asia from 1540 to the present

including the events associated with the Open Door Policy in China

leading to the over throw of the Emperor, Versailles treaty after World

War I, and the rise of Mao Zedong to power on the Mainland against

the Chnese Nationalist movement on Taiwan.

c. Jesuit control inter alia over the Sovereign Military Order of Malta,

New York Council on Foreign Relations and Federal Reserve Bank of

New York.

d. The Strategic outlook of the coming events involving the Jesuits.

5. Affirmant, author of Vatican Assassins: "Wounded In The House OfMv

Friends, " Third Edition (2006), solemnly states the following historical

points of interest with regard to topics above a-d:

6. During the Dark Ages, when the pope of Rome was virtual master of Europe


and the Far East, the Knights of the Temple of Solomon (Knights Templars

hereafter) were created to conduct the pope's Crusades for the purpose of

taking Jerusalem from the Islamic Saracens after which the Temple of

Solomon was to be rebuilt upon Jerusalem's holy Temple Mount. To effect

this design, the Knights Templars would conduct ceaseless warslcrusades

financed with an income tax upon European nobles as well as with an

international commerce, including shipping and banking, squarely under the

direction of the Order's Grand Master.

7. In 1291 the Templars were driven from Acre by the Islamic Egyptian

Mamluks, the pope's Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem (revived today under the

name of "Israel") ceasing to exist. Weakened, the Knights vowed to return,

re-establish the kingdom (accomplished in 1948) and rebuild the temple.

8. But by the turn of the Fourteenth Century, the Order of the Knights

Templars had become the virtual masters of all European finance and thus

the real directors of Europe's divine right monarchs.

9. In putting an end to this magnificent monopoly, King Philip IV "the Fair" of

France and Pope Clement V set out to suppress the Templars. This

providential act in restraining Satan's "mystery of iniquity" (I1

Thessalonians 2:7), was Pope Clement V issuing his famous bull, Vox in

Excelsis, in 13 12, suppressing the Order, confiscating all its wealth to be


given over to the Sovereign Military Order of Malta (Knights of Malta,

hereinafter).

10.The Knights Templars fled to several countries, primarily Scotland, where

they devised their war on the papacy to ensue for over 200 years. Agents of

the Order divided the papacy, resulting in the Babylonian Captivity of the

Church (1309-1 377) and the reign of two simultaneous popes, shattering the

Spiritual and Temporal Power of "the Vicar of Christ." Agents of the Order

released the bubonic plague across Europe, killing one thrd of the

population most of which was loyal to the Roman Catholic papacy and

despised the Knights. Agents of the Order incited the Peasants' War in

England (1 381) due to famine, plague and excessive taxation financing

foreign wars, killing the Grand Master of the Knights of Malta thereby

beginning the chastisement of the rival crusading Order of Malta, holder of

all wealth of the Knights Templars.

11. With the dawn of the printing press (1450) followed by the beginning of

Luther's Protestant Reformation (1 517), the power of the papacy was shaken

to its very core. Europeans were reading the Bible resulting in the loss of

the pope's Spiritual and Temporal powers. People began to understand there

is only one mediator between God and men, the man Chnst Jesus (I Timothy

2:4-6). Whole nations broke away from the politicalltemporal power of the


"Holy See." The commerce of Rome was suffering tremendous loss, De

Medici Pope Leo X leaving a nearly bankrupt papacy at his death in 1521.

12.It was now time for the suppressed Templars to "strike while the iron is hot."

Rome was in peril of Sunni Islam at the gates of Vienna, and now the

Protestant Reformation further threatened her existence. Ignatius Loyola, an

Aragon Knights Templar came to the rescue. A Spanish noble and soldier of

dauntless courage coupled with fanatic devotion to the Virgin Mary, Loyola

would revive the Knights Templars founding an even more diabolical and

dangerous Order of warrior priests.

13.After a 1523 pilgrimage to Jerusalem in the attempt to establish the Jesuit

headquarters of his future New World Order, Loyola created the Society of

Jesus in Paris, France, in 1534. In 1540 his New Order of the Knights of the

Virgin Maryhights Templars was brought under the protection of the

papacy, Farnese Pope Paul I11 issuing the bull of its establishment.

14.Created to first take Jerusalem from the Islamic Saracens and then to stop

Martin Luther and William Tyndale's Protestant Reformation in Germany

and England, the Order oversaw its "Counter Reformation" Council of Trent

(1 545-1 563). Therein contained all the doctrines to champion during the

Order's military "Counter Reformation." Ending the council with the

unified cry "Accursed be all heretics," Jesuit Wars began in earnest against


all Protestants and Bible-believing Christians across Europe. These wars

would also be directed against all religions and nationalists refusing to

submit to the Spiritual and Temporal Power of the pope.

15.The Company specifically sought to overthrow the Protestant Reformation

in England under Queen Elizabeth I and in Great Britain under King James

I. Failing, due to rise of the Protectorate of Oliver Cromwell resulting from

the Puritan Civil Wars initiated by the Scottish Presbyterian Covenaters, the

Order plotted to restore the Roman Catholic Stuart dynasty. Succeeding in

1660, the Company ruled over Great Britain with its anti-Christian tyranny

for twenty-eight years, when, in 1688, the bloodless Glorious Revolution

drove James I1 from the throne into France. But all was not lost. Upon

William I11 of Orange ascending the throne in London, the Order secretly

gained control of "King Billy." For William refused to capture James I1

after the Battle of the Boyne (1 690), enabling his father-in-law to again

escape to France then to plot the overthrow of Protestant Great Britain

directed by the Jesuits overseeing the Jacobites.

16.The Order, in seeking to use the developing British Protestant Empire to

wage war on its enemies, needed a national bank for financing. In 1694

Scottish Freemason and Jesuit Temporal Coadjutor William Paterson

founded the Bank of England. This national bank would be the great lender


to the British Crown extending credit and issuing notes of credit to wage

British crusades of subjugation for the benefit of the Jesuit General. One of

those crusades was its war on the White Protestant and Baptist American

colonies having declared their independence in 1776.

17.The Society of Jesus, also called the Military Company of Jesus, plotted to

conquer all the nations of the Far East. Francis Xavier set out for India and

Japan while Matteo Ricci set out for China. The military design was to first

conquer Japan, and then, using the superior military prowess of the

Japanese, to conquer China. This design would never change for over four

hundred years.

18.The Company of Jesus (after which "the Company" of the CIA is modeled)

engaged in massive international commerce. Establishing 57 "reductions" in

Paraguay, these were the first socialist-communist experiments of the Order

spanning one hundred and fifty years (1 609-1 759). Over 200,000 native

Guarani Indians were enslaved to produce a host of goods then to be placed

in commerce and taken to European ports with the Order's massive fleet of

"Blackships" overseen by the Jesuit General. The Order became so

magnificently wealthy that it established banks throughout the world to

facilitate its commerce. These revived Knights Templars were faithfully

following in the footsteps of their forebears. War and Commerce conducted


by the Ignatians would be the keys to a total restoration of the pope's

Spiritual and Temporal Power over every nation on earth---including Japan

and China. For as Cicero declared, "Money is the sinew of war." This, the

Jesuits have proven and perpetually practice especially now in Red Chna.

19.The Jesuits were in need of supportive warriors in Protestant lands to further

the Counter ReformationlWorld government design of the Jesuit Superior

General. Hence, Scottish-Rite Freemasonry was created by the Jesuits in

their College of Clermont, Paris, in 1754. Therein, the first 25 rites of this

new Masonic order were authored by the Jesuits. Its purpose was to be the

tool to restore the Roman Catholic Stuart dynasty to the throne of England

while making a slain and risen Roman Papal Caesar of Jesuit rule "the

universal monarch of the world." After this design, the Masonic rite of the

slain and revived Hiram Abif was conceived.

20.By 1750 the Society of Jesus had nearly complete control of the world.

Every Roman Catholic European monarch was possessed of a Jesuit

confessor. Many Protestant monarchs were secretly "under the influence" of

the sons of Loyola. Japan had expelled the Order in 1614, later finalized and

termed "the Christian Ban." But the Jesuits were beloved in the court of

China's emperor, they being the masters of Peking. Bringing a vast array of

European science to the Chinese court, Loyola's Ignatians became the


foremost and favorite astronomers of the Ming Emperor. Matteo Ricci and

Adam Schall were two of several.

21.But God would set back the power of the Knights Templars (now the

Society of Jesus) once again. Portugal expelled the Jesuits in 1759; France

in 1764, Spain in 1767 and the Grand Master of the Knights of Malta

expelled the Order from Malta in 1768. This led to the Bourbon dynasties of

Spain and France demanding the pope's suppression of this most dangerous,

murdering and thieving Military Order of the Society of Jesus.

22.h 1773 Pope Clement XIV issued his infamous bull Dominus ac Redemptor

Noster, forever suppressing and extinguishing the Society of Jesus. As did

Pope Clement V with the crusading Order of the Knights Templars, so did

Pope Clement XIV with the crusading Order of the Society of Jesus---the

New Knights Templars. At about this time, the Manchu dynasty (1 644-

191 2) expelled the Company from China. In the future, the Manchus would

pay dearly for this, Jesuit vengeance to result in the termination of the

dynasty and the destruction of patriotic Chinese nationalism.

23.The Order fled for protection to non-Catholic nations. Embraced by

Catherine I1 "the Great" of "heretic" Orthodox Russia, by Frederick I1 "the

Great" of "heretic" Lutheran Prussia and by George I11 of "heretic" Anglican

England, the sons of Loyola launched their war on the Vatican. Founding


the Illuminati in 1776, they ignited the French Revolution leading to the

Napoleonic Wars and the secret killing of Pope Pius VI while punishing the

papacy and the Roman Catholic monarchs of Europe for suppressing the

Society of Jesus. Roman Catholic Freemason Napoleon Bonaparte I was the

Company's "Great Avenger."

24.h 1798 Napoleon invaded Malta. Advised by Jesuit Abby Sieyes, he

confiscated all the weapons and treasures of the Knights of Malta to be used

for his invasion of Egypt in the punishment of the Mamluks for driving the

Knights Templars from Acre in 1291. Napoleon then drove the Knights of

Malta to Russia, there to submit to terms of the acting Jesuit General. From

then on, the Knights of Malta would never again resist the Society of Jesus.

Today, the Knights of Malta control the central banks of the world along

with the cartel-capitalist private banks, such as Bank of America,

JPMorganlChase and Citibank.

25.During the Suppression of the Company of Jesus, the Order gained control

of Pope Pius VII. In 1801 the Jesuit Order was formally restored in

Orthodox Russia and in 1805 the same occurred in Protestant America,

President Thomas Jefferson never raising an objection.

26.Upon the Order's international restoration in 1814 by Pope Pius VII, the

Company began to regain its lost power. Directing the British Crown and


influencing the American presidency, the Jesuits sought to create a united

Anglo-American alliance to be used to conquer first Japan and then China.

At this time both Japan and Chna had expelled the Company and vowed

never to readmit their traitorous oppressors.

27.h 1841, via British influence of the First Opium War (1 839-1 842), the

Chinese Manchus were forced to readmit the Jesuits into the Empire. In

1854 the Jesuits used the American Navy with Commodore Perry to finally

open up Japan to the White Protestant nations of the West---especially

Jesuit-ruled Great Britain. The Jesuit General's old plan was still

inexistence: Conquer China through Japan using her Emperor and military

power now to be backed by the British Crown under Jesuit rule.

28.The Jesuits were legally readmitted into Japan in 1865. Emperor Komei

stoutly resisted lifting "the Christian Ban" for which he was poisoned in

1867 at the young age of thirty-six. That same year Tokugawa Shogon

Yoshinobu resigned, giving his office to the new Emperor Meiji then only

fourteen years of age. Meiji "the Great" would serve his Jesuit masters for

over forty-five years, centralizing all power in Tokyo and creating the

Japanese Imperial Empire---for the use of the Jesuit Order. Japanese

samurai nationalists opposing the Meiji regime would be finally defeated in

battle, massacred with American gatling guns in 1877.


29.After fomenting the American Civil War, rightly termed by Southerners the

War of Northern Aggression (1 861 -1 865), the Order would establish an

American Empire through the declared ratification of the Fourteenth

Amendment. All power would be centralized in Washington, D.C., the

Order's Radical Red Republicans having created the Jesuit American

Empire on the ruins of the Calvinist Federal Republic of these United

Sovereign States of America. By 1888 the Jesuit Superior General ("the

Black Pope") now had five empires under his control: the Protestant British

Empire (under Queen Victoria), the Japanese Imperial Empire (under

Emperor Meiji), the Orthodox Russian Empire (under Czar Alexander 111),

the Protestant American Empire (under President Grover Cleveland) and the

Protestant Second German Reich (under Kaiser Wilhelm 11). These powers

would be used in tandem against China during her "century of humiliation"

leading to the overthrow of the Manchu dynasty.

30.The Society of Jesus began to use its "Japanese Sword of the Church

against the QingManchu dynasty of China also ruling Korea. In 1894

Japan launched and, in 1895, won the first Sino-Japanese War taking Korea

and Taiwan away from China while forcing the QingManchu government to

pay 13,600 tons of silver to Japan for war reparations. That same year

Japanese agents of Jesuit-ruled Emperor Meiji brutally assassinated anti-


Japanese, pro-Chinese Korean Empress Myeongseong. The surviving crown

prince sought and received protection from the Russian legation in Soul, an

act for which Russia would pay dearly.

31.As a result of these loses of the QingManchu Empress Dowager Cixi along

with the continued invasion of foreigners, desperate Chinese nationalists

began to resist. Therefore, the Jesuits incited and led the Boxer Rebellion in

1901 (during which many Protestant missionaries were murdered in

according with the Jesuit Oath of the Fourth Vow). But the nationalists were

betrayed, meeting the armies of eight nations, under Jesuit rule or influence,

in battle. Five of those nations were Japan, America, Germany, Russia and

Great Britain. With the foremost Chinese nationalists exterminated and the

population weakened with opium addiction, the end of the hated , anti-Jesuit

QingManchu dynasty was approaching.

32.In 1904 Japan attacked Orthodox Russia ultimately destroying two of its

three fleets. Termed "the first great war of the 2oth century," Japan was

victorious, furthering the Order's building of its Japanese Imperial Empire.

Conversely, the loss of Russia fueled unrest in Russia leading to the Order's

first Russian Revolution against the Romanov dynasty in 1905. For the

Jesuits had been formally expelled from Russia by Czar Alexander I in 1820,

only to legally re-enter in 1922 after their successful Bolshevik Revolution


financed and promoted by Rome's Anglo-American, Apostate Protestant,

International White Power Structure centered in Washington, D.C., and

London.

33.h 1912 the QingManchu dynasty was finally overthrown. China would

undergo a series of socialist upheavals and would yet suffer a Second Sino-

Japanese War beginning in 1937 to end in 1945. During this time

Freemason Emperor Hirohito would do the bidding of his masters residing at

Jesuit Sophia University in Tokyo, the Japanese invading twelve Asian

countries for three reasons: to kill the nationalists, to kill all Protestant

missionaries and to plunder the gold of the region much of it then buried in

175 "imperial" treasure vaults in the Philippines. After World War I1 (the

second act of the Black Pope's Second Thirty Years' War, 191 4-1 945),

much of that gold would find its way to American banks in New York, one

of them being Citibank ruled by the Knights of Malta. Other knights

facilitating the movement of the gold were OSS chief William Donovan and

CIA chief Allen Dulles, a co-conspirator in the Kennedy Assassination.

34.China, now divided into pro-communist and anti-communist camps, would

finally be conquered by the Jesuit Order. Suffering the loss of its gold to the

Japanese and the loss of its honor via the Japanese Rape of Nanking, the

Chinese people, driven to desperation, were ready for the "solution" to their


"chaos." In 1949 the Order, using its Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)

member Secretary of State Dean Acheson, facilitated the successful

subjugation of China to socialist-communism perfected by the Order on its

socialist-communist "reductions" in Paraguay as per above. All the

nationalist, anti-communists fled to Taiwan under the leadership of

Freemason Chang kai-shek loyal to Francis Cardinal Spellman, the

mastermind behind the Kennedy assassination. Meanwhile, Communist

China was under the dictatorshp of Freemason Mao Zedong. Rome

controlled both factions via Freemasonry, her open-but-false policy being to

support the Nationalist Chinese having fled to Taiwan. But her secret-but-

true policy was to back the Communist Chinese on the mainland. It is for

this reason the US Seventh Fleet blocked Taiwan's planned invasion of

Communist Chna in 1950 with the excuse that the Fleet was to keep China

from invading Taiwan. This blockade enabled Communist China to send

one million troops into North Korea to kill American servicemen.

35.Hence, the Jesuit Order via its high-level Freemasons within its International

Anglo-American White Power Structure, controls the governments of both

Taiwan and Chna. The peace-meal policy of betrayal towards Taiwan by

the Jesuit-directed, CFR-ruled American government is intended to end with

the martial unity of Taiwan with China. This secret policy of unification,


including the re-uniting of Korea and the uniting of Japan with China, is to

create a Far Eastern coalition of Asian nations for the future invasion of

North America. Japan has been used to conquer Chna, Japan now to be

used both commercially and militarily with its Red Chnese ally in the future

subjugation of the entire Far East (including Australia and New Zealand) to

culminate in a massive Oriental Asian invasion of North America having

been occupied with millions of "fifth column," Red Chinese loyalists

including the spy, nuclear scientist, CIA operative Wen Ho Lee.

36.The Knights of Malta rule the pope's Federal Reserve Bank through such

men as Peter G. Peterson, former president of the Federal Reserve Bank of

New York City, the bank holding both title and possession of America's

gold in the form of 660,000 gold bars. The Jesuits employ the Knights of

Malta in various academic positions, CFR-member and Knight of Malta

John J. DeGoia serving as president of Jesuit Georgetown University, it

overseeing the policies of the White House through the Vatican's Vaginal

Oval Office of the Virgin Mary.

37.The Jesuit Order, in complete control of London, Moscow, Washngton,

D.C., Bejing, Baghdad, Cairo, Istanbul, Paris, Rome, Berlin, Brussels,

Tehran, etc., is therefore in total control of the pope's International

Intelligence Community, including all sixteen American intelligence


agencies, Britain's MI5M6, Germany's BND, Israel's Mossad, China's

CSIS, Russia's FSBISVR, and all other lesser intelligence services. These

intelligence services control the governments of their host nations and thus

the military complexes of those nations for the benefit of the Jesuit Papacy

waging war to make the pope of Rome the universal monarch of the world.

38.The Jesuit Order, in complete control of all central banks, including the

Federal Reserve Bank and Bank of England, rules all stock exchanges and

dictates the value of all paper currencies for the benefit of the Jesuit Papacy,

the pope presently calling for the establishment of a World Bank---under h s

secret rule via his Knights of Malta subject to the Jesuit Superior General.

39.Thus, the Jesuit Order, in seeking to destroy the last bastion of the Protestant

Reformation here in the United States of America, is now pulling out its

manufacturing base relocating it into Red China, Mexico and Europe. This

is in preparation for the Sino-Soviet-Muslim-Hispanic invasion of the

American Empire after US forces are betrayed by the Joint Chefs of Staff

and defeated on at least two war fronts. Further, the secret Japanese imperial

gold horde has contributed to the financing of America's plotted demise.

40.Thus, the Jesuit Order has used its unified American military intelligence

community to cause the 91 1 Crisis and subsequent invasion of Afghanistan,

Iraq, Pakistan, and soon-to-be Shia Iran. This is a papal crusade against the


Shia Muslims, the enemies of Sunni Islam originally created by the Vatican

having authored the Koran inciting Arab Muslims to kill true Chnstians and

Jews. Upon the destruction of the Shia Muslims, the Sunni World can then

be united against America for our coming invasion, the Muslims to be

transported from West African ports in Senegal and Mauritania to Cuba to

North America by the Chinese Overseas Shipping Company (COSCO).

41.To facilitate this "Final solution to the Protestant Question," the Order, via

its Knights of Malta controlling international banking and commerce, has

used its Japanese and Nazi secret gold horde to conduct the pope's Cold War

in covertly building Far Eastern communist nations while weakening the

Western free enterprise nations of America and Canada in preparation for

the Sino-Soviet-Muslim-Hispanic invasion of North America.

42.This design of using massive amounts of gold is in accordance with the

Black Pope's statement at the secret meeting in Chieri, Italy, in 1825:

"For these purposes, it is not enough to have at our disposal men of talent

and men of action---we must have gold to keep them fast to their work. Aye,

give me gold---plenty of gold; and then, with such able heads and such

resources as the church commands, I will undertake not only to master the

whole world, but to reconstruct it entirely."*

*Abbate Leone, The Jesuit Cons~iracv. The Secret Plan ofthe Order, (London: Chapman and

Hall, 1848), p. 134.




Exhibit F

i

Case 1:lI-cv-08500-RJH Document 2 Filed Oll13/12 Page I of 9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTMERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK - - - - - - - C - - - - r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . " - - - - - - - - - - - X \

Neil F. Keenan Individually artd as Agent for The Dragon Family, citizens of foreign states 5

Daniele Dal Bosco, et d, a citizen of a foreign stare

Initial Scheduling Conference Notice md Order This action has been assigned to Judge Richard J. Holwell for dl purposes.

It is hereby ORDERED as follows:

1. Counsel receiving this Order shall promptly mail or fax copies hereof 20 aU other counsel of m r d or, in the case of parties for which no appearance has been made, to such parties. Counsel for all parties should note their appearance as counsel in this matter by lettet immediately.

2. Counsel for a11 parties are directed to confer regarding an agreed scheduling order pursuant to Fed. R Civ. P. 2661). If counsel are able to agree on a schedule and the ag*reed schedule calls far Plling.of the pretrial order not more than nine (9) months from the date of this order, counsel shall sign and email a PDF of the proposed schedule to the Orders md Judgment Clerk w i h fourteen (1 4) days h r n the date hereof, following the scheduling order requirements attached hereto. Counsd should note, in submitting their consent scheduling order, that the otherwise scheduled conference should be adjourned.

3, If such a consent order is not filed within the time provided, an initial scheduling conference will be held in this matter on March 9,201 2 at 10:30 a.m. in Courtroom 17B at the U.S. Courthouse, 500 Pear1 Street, New York, New Yark 10007. A proposed scheduling order, following the scheduling order requirements attached hereto, should be submifled to Chambers three days before the initial scheduling conference. '

Case 1 : I1 -cv-08500-RJH Document 2 Filed 0111 311 2 Page 2 of 9

4. Amy requests for adjournments must be made in writing and must be received in Chambers not later than 43 hours before the scheduled time. Alternative dates that are mutually agreeable to all parties must be suggested when requrhng to reschedule the initial scheduling conference. Parties should consult the Individual Practices of Judge Holwell with respect to communications with Chambers and r e l M matters.

5. This case has been designated an electronic case. The parties are advised that all orders will be Issued via the Electronfc Case 1;Tling PECF') system and parties wilI not be sent copies by mail or facsimile. It is the responsibilily of counsel to become familiar with and fallow ECF procedures. Judge HoIwell's individual practices may be found at - http:Jfwww.nysd.usc0~1rts.g0vflndiVidnaI~Practi~es/H01~eLpdf~ Parties ~hould direct questions regarding ECF to the ECF Ndp Desk at 212-805-0800.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: New Yo&, New York January @ ,2012,

Richard J. Holwell United States District Judge

Case 1:IA-a-08500-RJH Document 2 Filed 01113112 Page 3 of 9 .

Scheduling Order Reqairemen ts

1. D d p t i o l r of the Case a. Identify the attorneys of record for each party, including ltad trial attorney; b. State the basis for federal jurisdiction; c. Briefly describe the claim asserted in the complaint and any counterclaims; d. S tafe the majo~legal and factual issues in the case; and e. Describe the relief sought.

2. ' Proposed Case Management Pian a Identify all pending motions; b. Psopose a cutoff date for joinder of additional parties; c. Propose a cutoff date for amendments to pleadings; d. Propose a schedule for completion of di&vay, including:

i. A date for Rule 26(a){l) disclosures, if not previously completed; ii. A fact discovery completion date; iii. A date for Rule 26(a)(2) disclosures; and iv. An expert discovery completion date, including dates for delivery of expert reports;

e. Propose a date for filing dispositive motions; . f. Propose a date for filing a ha1 pretrial order; and g. Propose a trial schedule, indicating;

i. Whetherajurybidisrequd, ii. The probable length of trial; and iii. When the case wif 1 be ready for trial.

3. Consent to Pmceed Before a Magispie Judge: Indicak whether the parties consent umnimously to proceed before a Magistrate Judge.

4. Status af Settlement Discussions a. Indicate whether any settlement discussions have occurred, b. Describe the status of any settlement discussions; and c. Whether parties regucst a settlement conference.

Case 111 1 -cv-08500-RJH Document 2 Filed 0111 3112 Page 5 of 9

2. Schedulmg Order Requirements

A. Description of the Case i. Identify the attorneys of record far each party, including lead trial attorney; ii. State the basis for federal jurisdiction; iii. Briefly describe the c f i m asserted in the complaint and any counterclaims; iv. State the major legal and factual issues in the case; and v. Describe the relief sought.

B. Proposed Case Management Plan i. Identify all pending motions; ii. Propose a cutoff date for joinder of additional parties;

, iii. Propose a cutoff date for amendments to p l d i g s ; iv. Propose a schedule for compbion of discovery, including:

a A date for Rule 26(a)(1) disclosures, if not previously completed; b. A fact discovery completion date; c. A date for Rule 26fa)Q) disclosures; and d. An expert d t scovery completion date, including dates for delivery of expert

reports; v. Propose a date for fiIing dispositive motions; vim Propose a date for filing a final pretrial order; and vii. Propose a trial schedule, indicating:

a Whether a jury trial is requested; b. Theprobable length oftrial; and c. When the m e will be ready for trial.

C. Consent to P m w d Before a Magistmte Judge. Indicate whetha the pasties consent unanimously to proceed before a Magistrate Judge.

D. Status of Settlement Diseumions i. Indicate whether any settlement discussions have occurred;

. ii. Describe the status of any settlement discussions; and iii. Whether parties request a settlement conference.

3. Motions

A. R ~ M n t i a n Conferences in Civil Cases. For discovery motions, follow h l Civil Rule 37.2. A pre-motion conference with the Court is required before making a motion for summv judgment or dismissal, including motions to dismiss filed in lieu of answer. To arrange a pre-motion conference, the moving party shall submit a letter not to exceed three pages in length setting forth the basis for the msicipated motion. Pre-motion conferences are not requid for other motions. Service of a pre-motion conference letter within the time provided by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a) constitutes timely service of a motion made pursuant to F e d 4 Rule of Civil Procedure 1 2(b).

Page 2 of 6

t

Case 1 :11 -cv-08500-RJH Document 2 Filed 01 I1 311 2 Page 6 of 9

B. Courtesy Copies. Two courtesy cupits of all motion papers, marked as such, shali be submitted to Charnbers at the time the papers are served. For motions for admission pro hac vice, only one &esy copy shall be suhitted, together with a proposed order form and the necessary supporting documents.

C. Memoranda of Law. Unless prior permission has been granted, memoranda of law in support of and in opposition to motions are limited to 25 pages, and reply rnemomda are limited to I0 pages. Memoranda of 10 pages or more shall contain a table of contents. The .memoranda shall be double-spaced and use 1 Zpoint font for text and footnotes. Citations to authority not available in Westlaw or LexisNexis ahauld be accompanied by copies of the cited miterials.

D. Exhibits. If deposition testimony is submind, four pages of testimony should, if possible, appear on a single page.

E. Rling of Motion Papers, Motion papeft shall be filed promptly after service. For ECF filings, the Court prefers, but does not require, that parties upload text-searchable PDF documents.

F. Oral Arguments en Motions. Parties may request oral Wgument by letter at the time their moving or opposing or reply papers are filed. The Court will determine whether argument will be heard and, if so, w i H advise counsel of the argument date,

G. Effect of a Motion on Notice of Appeal. Paragraph A above does not app'ly to any of the motions described in Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4)(A). A pre-motion conference is not required before making such motions, which should be filed when served.

4. Pretrial f rocedures

A. Final Pretrial Orders in Civil Casea Unless otherwise ordered by the Court, within 30 days from the date of the completion of discovery in a civil case, the. parties shall submit to the Court for its approval a joint final pretrial order that includes the information required by Fed. R Civ. P. 26(a)(3), and the following:

i. The names, addresses (including firm names), and teIephone and fax numbers of trial counsel.

5. A brief statement by plaintiff as to the basis of subject matter jurisdiction, and a brief statement by each other party as to the presence or absence of subject matter jurisdiction. Such statements shall include citations to all statutes relied on and relevant facts as to citizenship and juridctiod amount.

iii. A brief summary by each party of the claims and defenses that party has asserted which remain to he tied, without recital of evidentiary matter but including citations to dl statutes relied on. Such summaries shall identify all claims and defenses previously asserted which are not to be tried,

Page 3 of 6

Case 1:l t-w-Q86~-WH Document 2 Filed Q 1E13112 Page 7 of 9

iv. A statement by each plaintiff setting fbtth and calculating with specificity each . element of damages sought with respect to each claim that fermfermns to be fried,

v. A statement by each party iu to whether the case is to be tried with or without a jury, and the number of trial days needsd.

vi. A statement as to whether or not all parties have consented to trial of the case by a magistrate judge (without identifying which parties have or have not so.consented).

vii. Any stipulations or agreed statements of fact or law, which have been agreed to by all parties. -

viii. A list of all w i t n e s , with a brief summary of the substance of each witness's testimony and an indication whether such witnesses will testify in person or by deposition. No witness not identified herein shall be permitted to testify in either party's case in chief absent good cause shown.

ix. A designation by each party of deposition testimony ts be offered in its case in chief, with any crossdesignations by any other party. Each party shall set forth any objections it bas to deposition testimony designated by the other and the basis therefore. If deposition testimony is submitted, four pages of testimony should, if possible appear on a single page.

x. A list by each party of exhibits to be offered in its case in chief, with one star indicating exhibits to which no party objects on grounds of authenticity, and two stars indicating exhibits to whichno party objects on any ground. The list shall include a description of each exhibit. The grounds for the objection to the admissibility of any exhibit shalt be- stated in summary form. Any objections not sel forth in lhe iinal pretrial order shall be considered waived absent good cause shown.

B. Faings Prior to Trial in CiwP Cases. Unless otherwise ordered by the Court, each party shall file the following at the time of the filing of the final pretrial order:.

i. In jury cases, requests to charge and proposed voir dire questions. Joint proposed jury charges should also be submitted on a CD-ROM in Micmsofi Word f m t , with a table of contents;

ii. En all casx, motions addressing any evidentiary or other issues which should be resolved in limine;

iii. In any case where such party believes it would be useful, a pretrial memorandum; and

iv. In non-jury cases, Proposed Findings of Fact and Con~lusions of Law. The Proposed Findings of Fact should be derailed; there may be no opportunity for post-trial '

Page 4 of 6

Case 1 : 1 1 -cv48500-RJH Document 2 Filed 0111 311 2 Page 8 of 9

submissions. The Proposed Findings shall address with specificity each element of damages claimed.

C. Filings in Opposition. Any party may file the following documents within one week of the filing of the final pretrial order, but in no went less than three days before the scheduled trial date: ,

i. Objections to another party's requests to charge or proposed voir dire questions;

ii. Opposition to any motion in limine;

iii. Opposition to any legal argument in a pretrial memorandum. *

D. Courtesy Copiea Two courtesy copies of the final pretrial order and all documents filed or served with the final pretrial order should be submitted to Chambers on the date of filing or service.

5. Conferences

A. Plincipal Trial Counsel. The attorney who will serve a principal trial counseI must appear at 9111: conferences with the Colrrt.

B. Initial Scheduling Conference. The Initial Scheduling Conference Notice and Order will be mailed to plaintiffs counsel, who will be responsible for distributing copies to all parties. If all counsel are able to agree on a schedule and the agreed schedule calk for filing of the final pretrial order not more than six (6) months from the date of the Initial Scheduling Conference Notice and Order;& such consent scheduling order is filed with the Orders and Judgment Clerk within fourteen (14) days from the date of the Initial Scheduling Conference Notice and Order, no initial scheduling conference shall be necessary. The scheduling order should conform to the requirements set forth in paragraph 2 above. Otherwise, the pmies" report pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(0 and two courtesy covies of the pleadings shodd be delivered by plaintiffs counsel to Chambers three days prior to the conference date.

Page 5, of 6

Case 1:l la-08500-RJH Document 2 Filed 01/13/12 Page 9 of 9

Attachment 1

DEFAULT JUDGMENT PROCEDURE

Applications. Applications for defdt judgments must comply with Local Civil Rule 55.1 and 55.2 and must ~rovide reasonable notice to the party against whom default shall be entered by:

i. First-class mail or courier, if the party is domestic; ii. Courier, if the party is international; or iii. Any method authorized by Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Applications will not be accepted absent the folloMhg: i . An affidavit setting fortk

a, A description of the nature of the claim; b. The basis for subject matter jurisdiction over the action; c. The basis for personal jurisdiction over the defendant; d. A representation that defendant is not an infant or an incompetent; and e. A representation that notice has been provided in accordance with the

requirements set forth ahove; ii . A certificate of defad t stating that the defendant was properly sewed with

the complaint and faiied to answerlappear, signed and stamped by the Clerk of the Court. (If the defendant did appear in the action, xhe plaintiff must submit an affidavit representing that the defendant has notice of the application for default);

iii. An afidavit setting forth reasonable attorneyss fees and showing that attorneys' fees are recoverible;

iv. A copy of the complaint; and Y. A proposed form of default judgment.

Damages. V the plaintiff seeks an award of damages in the motion for default judgment, the plaintiff must also include:

i. A requed for an mount equal to or las than the principal amount demanded in the Complaint; .

ii. Definitive information and documentation such that the mount provided for in the proposed judgment can k calculated. (If Chis requirement cannot be satisfied, a default judgment may be granted as to liability, and damages wil I be determined by an inquest);

iii. An affidavit representing hat no pact of the judgment sought has been paid, other than as indicated in the motion;

iv. A q u e s t for interest on the principal amount not to exceed 9?h, if interest is sought; and

v. The calculations made in h v i n g at the proposed judgment amount,

UNITED STATES DIWRICT COURT SOUTHERN DTSTl?IC=T OF NEW YOFX

NEIL F. KEENAN, ~d~ and as Agent for f I-cv-S~MT (RIM) m DRAGON F ~ Y , citizeh~ of foreign states,

- . PlainW,

~ ~ t -

DAMELE DAL BOSCO, a citizen of a foreign slate, Et al.

Defendants. -------h---------h--h----dh-------------=-------------------- - X

Christopher-Earl Strlznk in esse Memorandum of Law in support of the t

Motion to Intervene

1) ~&titioner, Christopher Strunk, is self-represented without being & attorney,

has a supporting &davit with exhibits and a proposed supplement annexed; and as a

non-parQ seeks to i n m e as a Intervener-PlaintH herein with both Federal Rules of

Civil M u r e (FRCvP) RuIe 24(4 as an Americafl Chinese hisboric Bond holder, and

or as an alternative with permission with FRCvP Rule 24 0) (1) (B] (2) (A) (B], in that

FEDERAL RESERVE BAM< OF NEW YORK p m ~ r u ) by LEE C . BOLLWGER, its

Cv . and President as well as the FOREIGN BONDHOLDERS PROTECTIVE

COUNCIL INC (FBPC) by its principal JOHN R. PElTY are required supplemen-tal

Defendants that have been. leR out from the Complaint

BACKGROUIID

d 1. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

That Fhhtiffs' complaint fled November 23, 20 1 1 has multiple allegations of

wrongdoing in a conspiracy by fo& defendants including Italy its governmental

Petitioner's Memorandum of Law Page 1 of 6

agencies, the United Nations General Secretary, quasi public entities and persons

some of whom are transacting business here in SDNY. That Plaintiffs seek as a

replevin stolen property as well as damages and other relief, in which Petitioners

supports as a matter of protecting his personal property rights along with those of a

class similarly situated however insufficiently represented by Plaintiffs.

The PACER Electronic docketing system reports that the proof of service of the

summons and complaint has not been fded yet, and no Defendants have made an

appearance yet. Further, the Court has set a preliminary conference date of March 15,

20 12 as shown by Petitioner in his affidavit exhibit F.

2. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Petitioner personal property rights along with those of a class similarly situated

however insufficiently represented by Plaintiffs in that the property held by Defendants

comprises all or part of a sinking fund set in reserve to repay Petitioner when the

Historic bonds are presented for redemption upon a reunited Mainland and Taiwan,

and that Petitioner contends that the theft and conversion of the securities

undermines and or wastes the reserves necessary for repayment.

To the extend that Plaintiffs have claim on property that was issued as a

contractual agreement with the Government of Taiwan and Mainland China and the

Federal Reserve Bank of New York and it was not named as an interested party,

Petitioners does so along with the quasi government entity formed under the Foreign

Bondholders Act of 1933 (15 USC 577bb through 577hh with law) at the request of the

United States Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury and the Chairman of

the Federal Trade Commission under President Franklin Roosevelt as a private, non-

profit corporation to protect the rights and interests of American holders of foreign

defaulted bonds applies herein to determine the status of the sinking fund. In addition


as a more convoluted wrinkle on whatever accounting is done requires any member of

the Sovereign Military Order of Malta (SMOM), of which several of the Defendants are

members, and or it associated organization including the New York Council on Foreign

Relations are to be restrained from performing the accounting with appointment of a

mutually acceptable special master by the Court paid by the funds associated with the

responsibility and duty of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and Foreign

Bondholder Protective Council.

ARGUMENT

I. STANDARD FOR INTERVENTION

Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 24, a non-party may be allowed to intervene as a party in

an existing lawsuit, either as of right or by permission. Intervention as of right is

governed by Rule 24(a), which provides that, unless a right to intervene is

unconditionally granted by federal statute, a non-party has no right to intervene in a

case as a plaintiff or defendant unless it shows that (1) its motion to intervene was

timely fded, which this motion is; (2) it has an interest relating to the property or

transaction that is the subject of the action, which is satisfied; (3) it is so situated that

without intervention the disposition of the action may as a practical matter impair or

impede its ability to protect its interest, which is satisfactorily explained by Petitioner ;

and (4) its interest is not adequately represented by existing parties, in that necessary

parties have not been joined and in the case of the alleged two-side market platform

to be established in Switzerland would fall subject to the joint agreement between the

US and Switzerland as shown by Petitioner in the affidavit Exhibit C. See Fed. R. Civ.

P. 24(a); Butler, Fitzgerald & Potter u. Sequa C o p , 250 F.3d 171, 176 (2d Cir. 2001).

"All four parts of the test must be satisfied to quahfy for intervention as of right."

Washington Elec. Coop., Inc. u. Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Elec. Co., 922 F.2d


92, 96 (2d Cir. 1990); accord D'Amato u. Deutsche Bank, 236 F.3d 78, 84 (2d Cir.

200 1) ("Denial of the motion to intervene is proper if any of these requirements is not

met"); United States u. New York, 820 F.2d 554, 556 (2d Cir. 1987). "The moving party

has the burden of demonstrating its entitlement to intervene." Seils u. Rochester City

Sch. Dist., 199 F.R.D. 506, 509 (W.D.N.Y. 2001).

As for Permissive intervention is governed by Rule 24(b), which provides that,

unless a right to intervene is conditionally granted by federal statute, a court may not

exercise its discretion to permit a non-party to intervene in an action unless the non-

party shows that its "claim or defense . . . shares with the main action a common

question of law or fact." Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(b)(l)(B). "The district court has broad

discretion to deny an applicant's motion for intervention under Rule 24(b)." Seils, 199

F.R.D. at 5 12 (citation omitted). In exercising this discretion, "the court shall consider

whether the intervention will unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication of the rights

of the original parties." Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(b)(3) - all of which Petitioner has done. The

Court also may consider "the nature and extent of the intervener's interests, whether

the intervener's participation will contribute to a just and equitable adjudication of the

issues, and whether the intervener's [interests] are adequately represented by the

parties of record." Shariu. Nau York State Educ. Dep't, 709 F. Supp. 365, 369

(S.D.N.Y. 1989) (citation omitted); Seils, 199 F.R.D. at 5 13.

The Supreme Court has not resolved the question 31 whether a party seeking to

intervene under Rule 24(a) must satistj the requirements of Article I11 of the

Constitution. See Diamond u. Charles, 476 U.S. 54, 68-69 (1986) (citing cases from

Courts of Appeals for the Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, and District of Columbia

Circuits). And the Second Circuit has held that a prospective intervener need not

satisij Article I11 standing requirements merely to participate in district court


proceedings. United States Postal Sew. u. Brennan, 579 F.2d 188, 190 (2d Cir. 1978).

Nevertheless, a n intervener's interest must "be direct, substantial, and legally

protectable." New York News, Inc. u. Kheel, 972 F.2d 482, 486 (2d Cir. 1992) (citation

and quotation omitted). Petitioner has satisfied this requirement because he has more

than a generalized interest in this matter that could be shared by any citizen. Cf:

Schlesinger u. Reservists Comm. to Stop the War, 418 U.S. 208, 220-21 (1974).

11. STRUNK MAY INTERVENE AS OF RIGHT.

Petitioner has satisfied the f ~ s t , second, third, or fourth requirements of Rule

24(a) for of right intervention. Because he must satistj all four requirements to prevail,

his motion must not be so denied. See D'Amato, 236 F.3d a t 84; United States u. New

York, 820 F.2d a t 556.

111. STRUNK PERMISSIVE INTERVENTION SHOULD NOT BE DENIED.

A court may not exercise its discretion to permit a non-party to intervene in a n

action unless the non-party shows that its "claim or defense . . . shares with the main

action a common question of law or fact." Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(b)(l)(B). A s elaborated in

Part I1 and that Petitioner has articulated a legitimate, individualized claim of

Defendants, and shares a common question of law or fact with this case. On this

ground alone, his claim for permissive intervention must be granted

Moreover, in exercising its broad discretion under Rule 24(b), a court considers

"the nature and extent of the intervener's interests, . . . and whether the intervener's

[interests] are adequately represented by the parties of record." Shariiu. New York

State Educ. Dep't, 709 F. Supp. 365, 369 (S.D.N.Y. 1989) (citation omitted); Seils, 199

F.R.D. a t 513. The arguments set forth in Part I1 with respect to why intervention as of

right should be granted apply with equal force to permissive intervention: Petitioner's


interests, are neither vague nor generalized, and collateral, and he has a specijic .

basis to argue that those interests are not adequately represented by record parties.

P d s s i v e intervention also implicates uwhether the intentention will unduly

delay or prejudice the adjudication of the rights of the original parties," Fed. R. Civ. P.

24(b) (3), or, put otherwise, %het.her the intewener's participation will contribute to a

just and equitable adjudication ~f the issues.* Shan'f; 709 F. Supp. at 369. Setting

aside the arguments already made see, Petitioner3 submission demonstrates why

perrPissiGe intervention is conducive to a just and equitable adjudication of the

important issues in this case. Petitioner's &davit contains a good deal-of material,

pertinent matter that under the usual circumstances of the facts associated with this

complaint is not scandalous or even out of the mainstream of current understanding

of the record parties herein that under any other circumstance rnny be stricken under

Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f), as many of the factual allegations in the complaint taken as true

support the Petitioner's affidavit, and in addition render inclusion wholly relevant and

necessary issues before the Court, As for the role of the Sovereign Military Order of

Malta and the Aragon Templam Petilioner possesses factuat evidence and expert

testimony that would aid the Court in its disposition of the legal issues before it. 4

COHCLu8fOa

For the foregoh~g reasons, Petitioner's motion to intervene as a PlaintBin the case,

whether a~ of right or by permission, should be granted along with other relief.

23,012 Dated: January-, Brooklyn New York

Christopher-Earl: ,Strunk in esse self-represented without an attorney 593 Vanderbilt Avenue - 28 1 Brooklyn, New York 11238 . Phone - 845-90 1-6767 Email: chris@;strwrk.ws


SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

NEIL F. KEENAN, Individually and as Agent for THE DRAGON FAMILY, citizens of foreign staks,

Christopher-Ehrk Shmk, in esse as a bondholder VERIFIED SWPPLEMEIVT 593 Vaaderbilt Avenue-28 1 Brooklyn New York 1.1238 Phone: 845-90 1-6767 and Email: [email protected] TO THE COMPLAlIQT

D ~ L E DAL BOSCO, a citizen of a foreign state, w

THE OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL TREASURY 4

- . - * % -

CONTROL, a foreign corporation ("OTTC'?, RAY C. ' DAM ('DAM'), individually, and as President of OPC, - --A\\ UI

DAVID A. SALE ("SALE'?, indMdualEy, and as Depuly '1 Chief of the Council for the Cabinet of O r C , the UNITED ' NATIONS, BAN KI-moon, individually, and as Secretary General of the UN, H.E. Ambassador CESARE MARLA RAGAGLINI, Individually, and as Permanent -- -4 - -- Representative of the Italian Mission to the UN ixl New York, H.E. Ambassador LAURA MIRACHIAN, Individually, and as Permanent Representathe of the 1- - Mission to the UN in Geneva, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC, the ITALMN FINANCIAL POUCE, Former Prime Minister of I*, S E W 0 BERLUSCOM, THE W032LD I

e

ECONOMIC FORUM CWEF") a foreign corporation, WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM U . S. A,, INC., GIANCAFUI BRUNO, individually, and as H a d of the Banking Industry of WEF, and various unknown individual co-conspirabrs, JOHN DOES A-2,

I

Defendants. I 11

.kmener-Plaintiff, Christopher-Earl: Strut&, in esse ~ ~ r , '5-7, divid-, and as an American Chinese Bond holder, selfsepresexlkd without an terney for his Supplement to the Complaint fled 1 1/23/ 1 1 here& alleges of rpplement defendants and defendants as follows:

FED- RESERVE B m OF HEW YORK, 33 Liberiy St '

New York, NY 10045 by LEE C. EOLLEHGER, Chairman; - -

Strunk's Supplement to the Cornplaint Page 1 of 24

- I

3REIGIV BONDHOLDERS PROTECTIVE COUNCIL SNC, I

P Broad Street New York, W 10004-2205 by 3- R PETTY principal; JOHN and JANE DOES and <Z ENTTTIES.

Supplement Defendants --------------- *------- --------- X

I

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1) Jurisdiction exists for Intervention as of right pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure (FRCvP) Rule 24(a) (2) and or FRCvP Rule 24 (b) (l)(B) (2) (A) (B), 28 U.S.C.

§1605(a)(2) (3) and (3) 22 USC 51643 (1). The matter of the Supplement in controversy

concerns the commercial activity of the Defendant in the United States, and the

amount in controversy, exclusive of interest and costs, exceeds $75,000.00.

2) Venue is proper in this District because Defendants are doing business in this

District and are subject to the jurisdiction of this District; and Assignment of this

action to the White Plains Division is appropriate because Defendants are doing

business in Westchester County and PlainWs attorneys are located in Westchester

County; and that Supplemental Defendants to respond are located for service and do

business in Southern District of New York.

SUPPLEMENTAL PARTIES

3) Intervener-Plaintiff Christopher-Earl: Strunk, in esse, (herein after known as

"Strunk", "Intervener-PlainW) is self-represented without being an attorney, and is

an American bondholder of "Historic" Chinese Bonds; with place for service located at

593 Vanderbilt Avenue-281 Brooklyn New York 11238 Phone: 845-901-6767 and

22 USC 51643 - It is the purpose of this subchapter to provide for the determination of the amount and validity of claims against . . . the Chinese Communist regime, which have arisen since January 1, 1959, . . . since October 1, 1949, in the case of claims against the Chinese Communist regime, out of nationalization, expropriation, intervention, or other takings of, or special measures directed against, property of nationals of the United States, and claims for disability or death of nationals of the United States arising out of violations of international law by . . . the Chinese Communist regime, in order to obtain information concerning the total amount of such claims against . . . the Chinese Communist regime, on behalf of nationals of the United States. This subchapter shall not be construed a s authorizing a n appropriation or a s any intention to authorize a n appropriation for the purpose of paying such claims.


4) That Strunk is the bearer of unredeemed "Historic" Chinese Bond property

effected by the failure of the Mainland Peoples Republic of China (PRC ) to re-unite

with the Republic of China (ROC) also known as Taiwan; and that Strunk owns ONE

(1) S20 CHINESE GOVERNMENT FlVE PER CENT REORGANIZATION GOLD LOAN OF

191 3 FOR S25,000,000 STERLING with serial number 41 1339 (see Exhibit 1) (herein

after known as "S20 Bond), and ONE (1) $20 NATIONAL GOVERNMENT OF THE

REPUBLIC OF CHINA ALLIED VICIDRY U S DOLLAR LOAN of 1942 with serial number

0064833 payable in accordance with the regulation of October 31, 1953 with semi-

annual interest at 4% per annum (see Exhibit 2) (herein after known as "$20 Bond);

and that as a point of valuation reference the combined accrued current $932,848.36

value of the obligations is estimated to be for:

a) the $20 Bond equal to 4.705882 troy ounces of gold or $97.27 in 19 13 Bond

now valued at say 561.2966 boy ounces of gold or based upon the 11 101 12

London PM Gold Price Fixing of $1637 per ounce say $918,842.46; and then

b) the $20 Bond equal to 0.5714 troy ounces of gold or$20.00 in 1942 Bond now

valued at say 8.5558 boy ounces of gold or based upon the 11 101 12 London

PM Gold Price Fixing of $1637 per ounce say $14,005.90.

5) Supplemental Defendant Federal Reserve Bank of New York (FRBNY)

(herein after known a "Defendant FRBNY") is a private entity located at 33 Liberty

Street New York, NY 10045 Phone Tel: (212) 720-5000.

6) Defendant FRBNY is one of 12 Federal Reserve Banks (the Fed), and that each

Reserve Bank is headed by a president appointed by the Bank's nine-member board of

directors. Three of the directors are elected by the commercial banks in the Bank's

region that are members of the Federal Reserve System. The other directors are

selected to represent the public with due consideration to the interests of agriculture,


commerce, industry, services, labor and consumers. Three of these six directors are

elected by member banks and the other three are chosen by the Board of Governors.

7) The 12 Federal Reserve Banks are the operating arms of the Federal Reserve

System. They supervise and regulate bank holding companies, as well as state

chartered banks in their district that are members of the Federal Reserve System.

Each Reserve Bank provides services to depository institutions in its respective district

and functions as a fiscal agent of the U.S. government.

8) The Defendant FRBNY conducts on-site and off-site examinations of member

depository institutions, and branches and agencies of foreign banks in the Second

District. The Fed's responsibilities extend to all state-chartered banks that are

members of the Federal Reserve System, all U.S. bank holding companies and many of

the U.S. operations of foreign banking organizations. In addition, the Fed stands ready

to provide temporary or long-term liquidity to any depository institution that meets its

criteria for discount window borrowing.

9) International Operations of the Defendant FRBNY represents the Federal

Reserve System and the U.S. Treasury, also is responsible for intervening in foreign

exchange markets to achieve dollar exchange rate policy objectives and to counter

disorderly conditions in foreign exchange markets. Such transactions are made in

close coordination with the U.S. Treasury and Board of Governors, and most often are

coordinated with the foreign exchange operations of other central banks. Dollars are

sold in exchange for foreign currency if the goal is to counter upward pressure on the

dollar. If the objective is to counter downward pressure, dollars are purchased through

the sale of foreign currency.

10) Another responsibility of the Defendant FRBNY is to serve as fiscal agent in the

United States for foreign central banks and official international fmancial


organizations. It acts as the primary contact with other foreign central banks. The

services provided for these institutions include the receipt and payment of funds in

U.S. dollars; purchase and sale of foreign exchange and Treasury securities; and the

storage of monetary gold.

11) Supplemental Defendant Lee C. Bollinger (herein after known "President.

Bollinger" "Defendant Bollinger") is a natural person appointed Chairman and

President of the Board of the FRBNY through 20 12 with place of business located at

Federal Reserve Bank of New York 33 Liberty Street New York, NY 10045.

12) Defendant Bollinger is president of Columbia University in New York City and a

member of the faculty of the Law School. He became the 19th president of Columbia

University in 2002. He is a graduate of the University of Oregon and Columbia Law

School, where he was an articles editor of the Law Review.

13) Defendant Bollinger is a Knight of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta

(SMOM)(2) and a member of the New York based Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

SMOM "Sovereign Military Order of Malta'- a s a member of the Knights of Malta, and by virtue of a blood oath of obedience to the Pope, you are required to support to the death the desires of the head of the Order of the Knights of Malta-in this case, Pope Benedict XVI -over and above any other allegiance you may feel or pretend to feel toward any other loyalty such as a loyalty to the Constitution for the united States of America.

Those who are presently members of the Knights of Malta must on penalty of death support those policies advocated by the Vatican. It is not hard for them to do this. They BELIEVE in these policies and principles. The polices which are espoused and proclaimed by the office of the Pope and Jesuit General a t the Church of GESU are a s follows:

1. End of sovereignty for the United States and other countries. 2. End of absolute property rights. 3 . End of all gun rights. 4. The new international economic Order (world government) 5. The redistribution of wealth and jobs. 6. Calls for nations to trust the United Nations. 7. Total disarmament. 8. Promote the United Nations a s the hope for peace. 9 . Promote UNESCO, the deadly educational and cultural arm of the United Nations. 10. Promote interdependence. 11. Support sanctions honoring Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin-the New Age Humanist Priest. 12. Support the belief that the economic principle of traditional Christian or Catholic social doctrine is the economic principle of communism. 13. Promote the Pope as the acting go-between for the United States and the Soviet Union.


14) Both the SMOM and CFR are under the Aragon Templar General Nicholas

15) Defendant Bollinger, as with Michael I. Sovern past president of the university

(1980-1993), is currently the university's Chancellor Kent Professor of Law and are

CFR members. Mr. Sovern is most recently the subject of an important investigation of

Columbia University student records under seal, as he was president of the institution

during the years of Barack Hussein Obama 11, a.k.a. Barry Soetoro, a.k.a. Soebarkah

was in attendance (1981-1983) at the School of Foreign Affairs under Professor

Zbigniew K. Brzezinski, also a Knight of the SMOM and inter alia National Security

Advisor to the Carter Administration among others including that of Mr. Obama.

16) Supplemental Defendant FOREIGN BONDHOLDERS PROTECTIVE

COUNCIL, INC. (herein after known as "FBPC" "Defendant FBPC") with New York

Secretary of State f h g number 32709 is an active Foreign Business Corporation

originally formed in the State of Maryland with Dept ID#: DO0103044 and

incorporated in New York on February 19, 1934 with place for New York service at 90

Broad Street New York, NY 10004-2205 with the principal John R. Petty.

17) Defendant FBPC is without stock operating as a not for profit that is the

surviving trade name of the forfeited (4 parent domestic corporation UNITED STATES

CORPORATION not in good standing (4 of 1123 North Eutaw Street Baltimore, MD

2 120 1 formed on 121 181 1933 with the Maryland Secretary of State.

Forfeited means for a Maryland entity, its existence has been ended by the State for some delinquency. For a non-Maryland entity it means its authority to do business and legal presence here has been terminated. For a trade name it means the filing has lapsed after 5 years and not been renewed.

4 Good Standing means a n entity is deemed to be in good standing if all reports, filings and penalties due THIS DEPARTMENT of the Maryland Secretary of State are u p to date and paid and the entity has a valid, active resident agent. An entity may be bankrupt, under indictment, and owe taxes to state, local and federal government and yet be in good standing with this Department.


18) Further, the Defendant FBPC uses Federal I.D, Number 13-5080630 with the

contact person listed as John R. Petty that also has an office located at 1402 Langley

Place Mc Lean, VA 22101-3010 and 1953 Gallows Rd Ste 220 Vienna, VA 22182-3934

with telephone number 703-744-8400; and in addition has a PO BOX 2283 SEATTLE,

WA 98 11 1-2283 located in King County Washington State.

19) Furthermore, Defendant FBPC was formed under the Foreign Bondholders Act

of 1933 (15 USC 77bb through 77hh with related law) (5) at the request of the United

States Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury and the Chairman of the

Federal Trade Commission under President Franklin Roosevelt as a private, non-profit

corporation to protect the rights and interests of American holders of foreign defaulted

bonds. The FBPC has been involved in over 40 settlements between American

bondholders and defaulted foreign governments, the most recent being Poland (1975),

5 Source: Encyclopedia of Banking & Finance (9h Edition) by Charles J Woelfel:

Under Title Ii of the Securities Act of 1933, provision was made for the creation of a Corporation of Foreign Security Holders, to be effective when the President of the United States "finds that its taking effect is in the public interest, and by proclamation so declares." It was contemplated that the activities of the new corporation would be similar to those of the British Corporation of Foreign Bondholders, which has an official status in negotiating with foreign issuers.

The act states that the corporation shall be created "for the purpose of protecting, conserving and advancing the interests of the holders of foreign securities in default."

The secretary of State, however, advised the President that some of the foreign nations whose bonds were in default would regard the creation of such an official corporation a s an unfriendly act. In fact, Title I1 was not contained in the original administration draft of the Securities Act and was added on the floor of the Senate at the insistence of the late Senator Hiram Johnson of California, who had been responsible for the Senate Finance Committee's investigation of sale of foreign bonds in the United States.

Instead of the official corporation provided by the act, the unofficial FOREIGN BONDHOLDERS' PROTECTIVE COUNCIL, INC. was organized in 1933.


Hungary (1975), Bulgaria (1978), and Czechoslovakia (1984). The FBPC records are

maintained in the Library Archives of Stanford University.

20) Supplemental Defendant John R. Petty (herein after known as "Principal of

FBPC" "Mr. Petty" "FBPC Respondents" "Defendant Petty") is a natural person with

place for New York service at 90 Broad Street New York, NY 10004-2205.

2 1) Defendant Petty serves as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of TECSEC,

Incorporated, a data security company. Mr. Petty served as the Chairman of Marine

Midland Bank, a Partner of Lehman Brothers, and as Assistant Secretary of the U.S.

Treasury. Mr. Petty is a Founder at Federal National Payables, Inc. Mr. Petty has been

the Chairman of the Board of Federal National Payables, Inc., Federal National

Commercial, Inc., and Federal National Services, Inc., a factoring company, since

1992. Mr. Petty has been a Director of Arris Group Inc. since 1993 and serves as its

Lead Independent Director. He served as a Director of Anixter International Inc. since

1988. He served as a Member of Board of Trustees at American University of Sharjah

until June 2009.

22) Defendant Petty according to http:/ /www.namebase.or~/main2/John-R-

Pettv.htm1 served with the U.S. Department of State in Chile ti-om 1970-1973 during

and after the over throw of the Allende Government and in Czechoslovakia from 199 1-

1995 as an employee in consultation with the U.S. Treasury Department having

served as an undersecretary for foreign affairs along with Peter G. Peterson starting

with the Johnson Administration onward in other Administrations. Mr. Petty as with

Mr. Peterson are current members of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), Knights

of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta (SMOM), and are associated with the Bretton

Woods Committee among other organizations with undue influence on U.S. Finance,

foreign and monetary policy including the International Bilderberg Group members.


23) As relevant background as to Defendant Petty, on January 1, 1976, all

previously independent Marine Banks were merged into a single Marine Midland Bank

with headquarters in Buffalo. The new bank was divided into regions, with Marine

Midland Bank-Western Region based in Buffalo. Marine Midland Bank became a

national-chartered bank in early 1980. As it entered the 1980s, assets were close to

$20 billion. In 1980 The Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation acquired a

5 1% shareholding in Marine Midland Bank, which it extended to full ownership in

1987. In 1994, Marine Midland acquired Spectrum Home Mortgage, which operated in

eight states. Then in 1995, Marine acquired United Northern Federal Savings Bank,

with branches in Watertown and Lowville, New York. Marine Midland also acquired

The Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation's six New York City retail

branches, and the next year Hang Seng Bank's two branches in New York City. That

same year, Marine Midland acquired 11 branches ti-om the East River Savings Bank in

the New York Metropolitan area. Marine also acquired the US dollar clearing business

of J P Morgan. At the same time, HSBC transferred two branches in the northwestern

United States to HSBC Bank Canada. The next year, Marine completed its acquisition

of First Federal Savings and Loan from Toronto-based CT Financial Services, for $620

million. First Federal Savings, headquartered in Rochester, had $7.2 billion in assets,

1,600 employees, 79 retail branches in New York State and 15 mortgage origination

offices in nine states.

24) For those with the stomach to know history and what is playing out in light of

the January 14, 20 12 elections in Taiwan now resolved, the Jesuit General of the

Aragon Templars (Society of Jesus) at his website

http: / /www. siweb.in€o/news/index.cfm?Tab=2&publan~= 1 stated the importance of

this Chinese New Year as the 'Year of the Dragon" :


"Father General will visit Sydney, Australia, for a week, beginning 17 January, the week of Chinese "New Year of the Dragon," to attend the Assembly of Major Superiors for the Asia Pacific Jesuit Conference (JCAP). He will be accompanied by the Assistant for Asia Pacific, Fr Danny Huang, and Fr Francisco Javier ~ lvarez , the Secretary for Social Justice and Ecology. The Provincials will consider the recent document on the "Renewal of Province Structures" and its application to Asia Pacific. "Our Provincials have already commented that this document is relevant and useful for us. They are eager to begin using the criteria it proposes in order to explore new governance arrangements in Asia Pacific," said JCAP President, Fr Mark Raper. An important question for JCAP is how to give appropriate governance support to the missions and regions. JCAP has seven Provinces and 6 Regions and its territory includes some 16 countries, and more than that number of main languages, although the normal language for Conference communications is English. Several of the Provinces are newly created in the last few years and several Regions, notably Myanmar and Timor Leste, have a growing number of young Jesuit members and are now engaged in important institution building. Yet the overall number of Jesuits in the Conference has remained the same for about 25 years. Jesuit formation is high on the agenda for the assembly, as also are the two Conference priority engagements of Migration and the Environment. In Sydney, Fr General will spend a day with members of the Australian Province, first with the Jesuits, and later will be joined by several hundred close collaborators in mission."

Commemoration of 7 August 1814. Father General's letter to all the Jesuit Superiors on January 1, requests that the whole Society recall the document of Pope Pius VII, Sollicitudo omnium ecclesiarum, of August 7, 18 14, by which the Society of Jesus was restored all over the world. " I am bringing this event to your attention now because I am convinced that commemorating it can help u s enter more deeply into the continuing renewal of the Society that takes place in each generation." After speaking about the committee created for this purpose and its tasks, Father General continues, "...during meetings with the Presidents of the Conferences and the Major Superiors in all the Assistancies I have asked that new studies be undertaken, especially in the regions where the Society was active at the time of the Suppression. We all need to know more about the main apostolates of the Society in the last half of the 18th century; the impact of the Suppression on Jesuits and their contemporaries as they experienced the event; what happened in the late 18th and early 19th century to the institutions and ministries that Jesuits had to leave; when and how Jesuits returned to places where the Society had previously served; and what new initiatives the Restored Society undertook, especially in the many places where it began to serve for the first time." The letter then explains the purpose of all this: "Prayerful reflection based on the historical knowledge that is or will become available can enable u s to learn from the lights and shadows of our past so that we might see more clearly and embrace more generously what the Lord calls u s to do in our own times."

25) Members of the SMOM and CFR are guided daily by the Aragon Templar

General Nicholas


BACKGROUND FOR THE SUPPLEMENT TO THE COMPLAINT

26) Intervener - Plaintiffrepeats and re-alleges each and every allegation contained

in paragraphs 1 through 25 above as though set forth fully and at length herein and

contends the supplemental parties and Strunk's intervention as of right with FRCvP

Rule 24 (a) is done on timely motion in, in which the court must permit anyone to

intervene who claims an interest relating to the property or transaction that is the

subject of the action, and is so situated that disposing of the action may as a practical

matter impair or impede Strunk's ability to protect its interest, unless existing parties

adequately represent that interest.; and furthermore, even were FRCvP Rule 24 (b) for

PERMISSIVE INTERVENTION to apply instead then also Strunk is here by a timely motion,

that the court may permit anyone to intervene who: (B) has a claim or defense that

shares with the main action a common question of law or fact; and as with the legal

duty of the Defendant FBPC and it agents under the Foreign Bondholders Act of 1933

requires it as a quasi governmental Agency to act on such timely motion, as the court

may permit a federal or state governmental officer or agency to intervene if a party's

claim or defense is based on: (A) a statute or executive order administered by the

officer or agency; or (B) any regulation, order, requirement, or agreement issued or

made under the statute or executive order; and furthermore, were Delay or Prejudice.

In exercising its discretion, the court must consider whether the Strunk intervention

will unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication of the original parties' rights or in fact

assist the court in the litigation.

27) That Plaintiffs Complaint of 11 1 pages fded November 23, 201 1 on its face is

taken as true by Intervener Plaintiff and the transactions and disposition of Plaintiffs'

subject property "Dragon Family Financial Instruments" or the "DFFI" as described at

"The Nature of the Action and Jurisdiction" starting at page 2 with paragraph 1


through the description in paragraph 2 ending at page 9, is then discussed in detail as

further effects Strunk's property as related to the named parties ti-om page 9

paragraph 3 through paragraph 36 on page 25.

28) The stolen DFFI asset entrusted to Plaintiff Keenan in early 2009 by the Dragon

Family, are comprised of the following quote:

"(i) Two-Hundred ForQ-Nine (249) United States 1934 Series Federal Reserve

(b) Upon information and belief, between 1927 and 1938, as a result of arrangements made between China and the United States, the United States purchased some 50 million ounces of silver and leased vast amounts of gold ti-om the Nationalist Chinese Government, known as Kuomintang. During this period, China was partly occupied by Japanese troops and there was a fear of China being overrun by the Japanese.

(c) Upon information and belief, in return for the precious metals delivered by the Chinese, ceficates were given pursuant. to private agreement made between China and the United States. These certificates became the underlying funds of the Kuomintang.

(d) Upon information and belief, following the promulgation in 1934 of the Gold Reserve Act, the law required all bullion gold and gold coin to be surrendered to the Federal Reserve, a private corporation that is chartered to operate as the Central Bank of the United States and the issuer of the United States Dollar.

(e) Upon information and belief, domestically owned gold was purchased. Foreign Gold held by the Treasury was also surrendered to and thus leased to the Federal Reserve, which resulted in the issuance of the series of 1934 Notes by the Federal Reserve. These Dragon Family FRNs have never been redeemed and, upon information and belief, the accrued interest was met by the subsequent issue of certain 1968 series of Kennedy Bonds (see Paragraph 2 (iii), infra) and later further issues of the 1934 series FRNs which, upon information and belief, were issued through the period of the Chinese civil war to assist Kuomintang operations in China and later in Burma. These 1934 FRNs guarantee the lease payments and helped to allow the Chinese Government to continue fmancially. KEENAN has no personal knowledge as to whether the FRN s with which he was entrusted were original or subsequently issued Notes.

(f) Upon information and belief, this gold was documented into accounts through the Union Bank of Switzerland, placed under protection of the Swiss Attorney General, registered through the


Swiss National Bank: into the Bank for International Settlements ("BIS") International Collateral Combined accounts and then ti-om within the BIS, blocked to form the Institutional Parent Registration Accounts of the Federal Reserve System.

(g) Upon information and belief, and in accordance with procedures that would be expected to occur in the event the Note Holder of record wished to redeem it, the Holder would do so by f ~ s t remitting the number of the Note to the Federal Reserve with a major project or a list of projects for approval. Once the projects have been approved, the Note would be recognized and the Fed system would then make arrangements for the Note to be deposited into a bank which would provide a specific credit line, perhaps o f 3 m up to 800/0 of the face value. The Fed system would then provide immunity to the Holder to present the Note at a specific Bank where a Credit Line has been pre-arranged. Attempting to present these Notes outside this system will see the note arbitrarily denied and the illegal presenter incarcerated.

(h) Upon information and belief, in order to effectuate this process, the Notes were printed to appear as ifthey were not produced from official origin and bear obvious imperfections, therefore easily deniable. However, when proper procedures are followed, the number of the Note and other linking identic data allows ultimate authentication and verification through the Federal Reserve System screening process and the presenting of the Note under the immunity shield allows effective use.

(i) As of April 20, 2009, the Dragon Family had calculated the total value of these FRNs alone, with interest accrued since 1934, as approximately Nine-Hundred Sixty-Eight Billion United States Dollars ($968,000,000,000.00).

(ii) Two (2) 57th Series Japanese Government Bearer Bonds, Nos. A 1306 (construction bond) and A 1310 (the "Japanese Bonds"), which were issued on April 30, 1983 by the Ministry of Finance, Government of Japan, each having a face value of Japanese Yen Five Hundred (500) Billion, which is equivalent to an amount in excess of Nine and One-Half (9.5) Billion United States Dollars. Upon information and belief, these Japanese Bonds are but two (2) of Five Hundred (500) such Bonds owned by the Dragon Family, each having the same face value, according to a statement of Yamaguchi dated April 20, 2009 concerning the Bond History relating to these specific Japanese Bonds.

(iii) One (1) United States Kennedy Bond with a face value of One (1) Billion United States Dollars, bearing registration number APII 024068 A.

(a) As with the FRNs, KEENAN has no personal knowledge of the circumstances which gave rise to the issuance of the 'Kennedy Bond bearing registration number APII 024068 A, issued in 1998


and which had been entrusted to him by Yamaguchi on May 5, 2009. The knowledge he has obtained is based largely upon his communications with Yamaguchi including the representations made by Yamaguchi in various documents he has executed over the years in connection with his attempts on behalf of the Dragon Family to place various Kennedy Bonds into legitimate PPPs in furtherance of their objective to provide humanitarian global assistance when and where needed.

(b) In a sworn statement by Yamaguchi, dated August 4,2010, entitled "Kennedy Bond History," and which relates to the details of ten (10) other Kennedy Bonds, virtually identical to that entrusted to KEENAN in May 2009 except for the registration numbers, Yamaguchi stated that the "US government borrowed huge amount funds from the Dragon Family many years ago. The base of the lent funds ti-om the Dragon Family to the US Government were the Gold and Silver. Therefore the US government was able to issue huge USD as currencies via FRB then." Yamaguchi proceeded to state: 'We, the Dragon Family, requested some interest to the US Government on 1998 by use of some securities/certificates got expired as same as the 57th Series Japanese Government Bonds. And, we have received the Kennedy Bonds, issued in 1998, as one of the interest payments ti-om the US Government. I recognize as my position that the Kennedy Bonds were issued by the US Government as the interest only for the Dragon Family."

( c) Upon information and belief, the Kennedy Bonds represent a series of notes printed for the purpose of creating a settlement fund for the gold and other precious metals transferred to the United States under the terms of the Green Hilton Memorial Agreement (GHMA), November 11, 1963 which was executed by, among others, President John F. Kennedy and President Soekarno, the f ~ s t President of Indonesia, who had previously been entrusted with the care of the gold. Upon information and belief, these Bonds were originally issued in 1968 by way of specially denominated 1968 Kennedy Bonds, " 2 series. These bonds were not commercially negotiable, or cashable, but were redeemable through the Federal Reserve System in what was intended to be an effective, beneficial, and well-aimed program that was intended for better global development. President Soekarno was deposed in 1967 by General Suharto, thus disrupting the entire program causing a failure to institute the planned development program intended for Indonesia and the Asian region.

(d) Upon information and belief, few, ifany, of the 1968 Kennedy Bonds had been used within the original 30 year period, a fact to which Yamaguchi may have been referring in his above statement. Thus, theoretically, the gold that had been lent by the Dragon Family had not been paid for and therefore had not fully transferred to the Federal


System. Upon information and belief, this resulted in a situation where the gold was no longer being purchased at the gold price of 1963 but at the increased 1998 price. Thus, a new "A" series of bonds, which Yamaguchi may also have been describing in his statement above, were issued in 1998 reflecting that price and the old " 2 series became defunct and worthless."

29) That Strunk notes based upon review by an expert in reference to methods

used above as materially germane herein that this same principle is clearly

demonstrated concerning Japan's secret, post-WWII "M-Fund". The fund was a

Japanese political slush fund for the benefit right-wing, "anti-communist" Japanese

politicians. It was derived from the "Black Eagle Trust," backed by looted Nazi gold and

established by Skull and Bonesman Secretary of War Henry Stimson and his

assistant, Knight of Malta John J. McCloy, for use during the pope's Cold War Hoax

We read in Gold Warriors: America's Secret Recovery of Yamachita's Gold by Sterling

and Peggy Seagrave (New York: VERSO, 2003), p. 9:

"A related legal battle was that of former U.S. Deputy Attorney General Norbert Schlei, who had to fight for his survival after being stung by the U.S. Treasury Department for asking too many questions about Japan's secret M-Fund. While Schlei was indicted, prosecuted, bankrupted, and professionally ruined for trying to negotiate a fmancial certificate based on the M-Fund, former Secretary of State Alexander Haig - according to eyewitnesses -went to Japan and negotiated a similar certificate successfully, with the help of a personal letter from President George H. W. Bush. Why one man succeeded while the other was destroyed is a chilling story of fmancial collusion between Washington and Tokyo."

As a fact to support restraint of any SMOM member ti-om shaping relief, the reason is

clear: Alexander Haig was a Knight of Malta and his brother Francis, a powerful Jesuit

priest; and that Haig's superior was another Knight of Malta, George H. W. Bush

30) That according to Plaintiff Keenan as the Disclosed Principal of the Dragon

Family at Complaint paragraph 13, he states quote:

"Upon information and belief, the 1934 FRNs described, supra, at paragraph 2 (i), came under the control of the Kuomintang from whom the gold was received in return for the lease payments, and allowed the Chinese Nationalist Government in Taiwan to continue fmancially. Many of the FRNs were left in


Communist China when the Kuomintang had to flee to Taiwan. Further, upon information and belief, the Gold had been nationalized by the Kuomintang who moved much of the FRNs (but not all) to Taiwan, which allowed for the development of and served as the basis for the underlying wealth of Taiwan. The FRNs were good for value as they were backed by the gold and other precious metals purchased and leased by the United States government."

3 1) That according to Plaintiff Keenan as the Disclosed Principal of the Dragon

Family at Complaint paragraph 14, he states quote:

"Upon information and belief, the Kuomintang appointed guardians of this Gold and the securities issued by the United States who came to be known euphemistically as the Dragon Family. The Dragon Family is, in fact, a highly secretive and informal organization that operates between old families within China and Taiwan, above the political divide of the two independent Chinese Governments. The Dragon Family abstains ti-om public view and knowledge, but, upon information and belief, acts for the good and better benefit of the World in constant coordination with higher levels of Global Financial Organizations, in particular, the Federal Reserve System. During the course of its existence over the last century, the Dragon Family has accumulated great wealth by having provided the Federal Reserve Bank and the United States Government with asset assignments of gold and silver via certain accounts held in Switzerland, for which it has received consideration in the form of a variety of Notes, Bonds and Ceficates such as those described in - 2 that are an Obligation of the Federal Reserve System .Upon information and belief, these Bonds have values ranging in the many Thousands of Trillions of United States Dollars, a relatively small portion of which is involved in the claims giving rise to this action. Each of these currencies, such as the DFFI involved in this action, was and remains duly registered within the Federal Reserve System and are directly verifiable by the Federal Reserve through its efficient verification system and screening process."

32) That although Plaintiffs' DFFI property does not coincide with any S20 Bond or

$20 Bond similar to Strunk's property, based upon information and belief the DFFI is

nevertheless part of the sinking fund or reserve created to re-pay the S20 Bond or $20

Bond denomination similar to Sbunk's property when the PRC and ROC re-unite; and

therefore, the disposition of the DFFI is germane and of a direct interest to Sbunk.

AS AND FOR A FIRST SUPPLEMENTAL CAUSE OF ACTION

(Defendants FRBNY and Lee C. Bollinger are parties to the Expropriation and

Conversion under Federal Common Law and International Law)


33) Intervener-plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in

Paragraphs 1 through 32 and the Compliant fded November 23, 20 11 and paragraphs

1 through 174 as if set forth herein at length omits same for brevity, in that Defendant

FRBNY and Defendant Lee C. Bollinger with named Defendants are parties to the

Expropriation and Conversion under Federal Common Law and international law.

34) That Defendants FRBNY and Defendant Bollinger duties and responsibilities

are in part to safeguard the use of the Federal Reserve Notes (FRNs) issued as a result

of the transfer of the Gold ti-om the ROC; and

35) That the Defendant FRBNY and its agents are active interveners into the

fmancial matters of the European Union (EU) and the European Central Bank (ECB)

in that Defendants have expropriated and attempt to convert the DFFI and FRNs

thereby effecting both the degree of fmancial intervention by Defendant FRBNY and

the safety of Strunk's direct interest in the disposition of the sinking fund and or

reserve ti-om which to re-pay the historical bonds.

36) That Strunk's historical bonds involve lawful money previously recorded and

presently discoverable as part of a sinking fund under a double-bookkeeping regimen

used by the Defendant FRBNY and auditable by the FBPC with fiduciary duties.

37) That according to a mutually acceptable Federal Reserve Bank expert on

double bookkeeping standards and procedures of the Defendant FRBNY quote:

a) "Banks are required to adhere to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), GAAP follows an accounting convention that lies at the heart of the double-entry bookkeeping system called Matching Principle. This principle works as follows: When a bank accepts bullion, coin, currency, checks, drafts, promissory notes, or any other similar instruments (hereinafter "instruments") from customers and deposits or records the instrument as assets, it must record offsetting liabilities that match the assets that it accepted ti-om customers. The liabilities represent the amounts that the bank owes the customers, funds accepted from customers. In a ti-actional reserve banking system like the United States banking system, most of the funds advanced to borrowers (assets of the banks) are created by the banks themselves and are not merely transferred ti-om one set of depositors to another set of borrowers."


b) "In classical economic theory, once economic exchange has moved beyond the barter stage, there are two types of money: money of exchange and money of account.. . With exception of customary stores of value like gold and silver, the monetary base of the economy largely consists of credit instruments.. Against this background, I conclude that the Note, despite some language about "lawful money" explained below, clearly contemplates both disbursement of funds and eventual repayment or settlement in money or account (that is, money of exchange would be welcome but is not required to repay or settle the Note)."

c) "Lawful money was the form of money of exchange that the federal government (or any state) could be required by statute to received in payment of taxes or other debts. Traditionally, as defmed by Congress, lawful money only included gold, silver, and currency notes redeemable for gold or silver on demand. In a banking law context, lawful money was only those forms of money or exchange that constituted the reserves of a national bank prior to 1913."

d) "According to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, money is anythmg that has value that banks and people accept as money.. . money does not have to be issued by the government or in any special form. .".

e) "The bookkeeping entries tend to prove that banks accept cash, checks, drafts, and promissory notelcredit agreements (assets) as money deposited to create credit or checkbook money that are bank liabilities, which shows that, absent any right of setoff, banks owe money to persons who deposit money. Cash (money of exchange) is money, and credit or promissory notes (money on account) become money when banks deposit promissory notes with intent of treating them like deposits of cash. See 12 U.S.C. Section 1813 (1)(1) (defmition of "deposit" under Federal Deposit Insurance Act). . . the newly issued credit or money is similar or equivalent to a promissory note, which may be treated as a deposit of money.. .that explains that when banks grant loans, they create new money. The new money is created because a new "loan becomes a deposit, just like a paycheck does.. .What banks do when they make loans is to accept promissory notes in exchange for credits to the borrowers' transaction accounts.. . . Explains that the banks' assets and liabilities increase by the amount of the loans."

38) That Strunk contends that in light of the facts associated with the DFFI and

FRN as well as FRBNY policy and procedures, Plaintiffs' claim against Defendants

involve money of exchange not credit involving money of account means that lawful

money was and is or probably would be disbursed by either side in a covered

transaction even using a platform of a two-side market transactions to monetize the

DFFI / FRN would be a covered transaction to be accounted for to preserve Strunk's

historic Bond sinking fund as the reserve for re-payment.


39) That during the course of its existence over the last century, the Dragon Family

has accumulated great wealth by having provided the Federal Reserve Bank and the

United States Government with asset assignments of gold and silver via certain

accounts held in Switzerland, for which it has received consideration in the form of a

variety of Notes, Bonds and Certificates such as those described in Complaint

paragraph 2 that are an Obligation of Defendant FRBNY and Federal Reserve System.

40) Upon information and belief, these Bonds have values ranging in the many

Thousands of Trillions of United States Dollars, a relatively small portion of which is

involved in the claims giving rise to this action. Each of these currencies, such as the

DFFI / FRN involved in this action, was and remains duly registered within the

Federal Reserve System and are directly verifiable by the Federal Reserve through its

efficient verification system and screening process.

41) That Defendant FRBNY and Defendant Lee C. Bollinger by mis-administration

and neglect have placed Sbunk's repayment at risk.

42) That Strunk has a direct interest in the DFFI, FRN and related funds.

AS AND FOR A SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL CAUSE OF ACTION

(Defendants FRBNY, Lee C. Bollinger, FBPC and John R. Petty with fiduciary

duties are in breach of the quasi contract with Strunk a s a n American Historical

Bondholder with Plaintiffs interest to maintain the sinking fund for re-payment)



1 through 249 as to conspiracy, fraud, breach of contract and replevin action as if set

forth herein at length omits same for brevity, in that Defendants FRBNY, Lee C.

Bollinger, FBPC and John R. Petty with fiduciary duties are in breach of the quasi

contract with Strunk as an American Historical Bondholder with Plaintiffs interest to

maintain the sinking fund for re-payment


44) That according to the Chinese - US Historical Bond Expert CHENG CHUNG

MO(61, as would apply to the fiduciary duties of the Defendant FBPC and Defendant

FRBNY, being familiar with Article 63 of the Act Governing Relations Between Peoples

Of The Taiwan Area And The Mainland Area which states quote:

"To the extent not contrary to the public order or good morals of the Taiwan Area, it shall be upheld the legal effects of any civil matter together with any right or obligation thereof created in the Mainland Area, prior to the coming into force of this Act, between any people of the Taiwan Area and Mainland Area, or between any two or more of the people of the Mainland Area, or between any of the people of the Mainland Area and any foreign national. The provisions of the preceding paragraph shall not apply provided that there had been laws or regulations in effect, prior to the coming into force of this Act, restricting the exercise or transfer of the rights referred to therein.

The following debts shall not be repaid prior to national unification:

i) Outstanding foreign currency bonds issued in the mainland prior to 1949 and the short-term Gold Bonds of 1949.

ii) Various debts owed by any government bank as well as any other fmancial institution accepting deposits before their retreat ti-om the Mainland."

45)That according to the Chinese - US Historical Bond Expert CHENG CHUNG-MO

regarding to Article 63 of the Act Governing Relations Between Peoples Of The Taiwan

Area And The Mainland Area:

"This act was promulgated and amended as stated above by Presidential Order on October 29, 2003 and implemented from March 1, 2004 by the Order of the Executive Yuan during my term of office as Vice President of the Republic of China Judicial Yuan."

"The intent of this Act in regards to pre- 1950 Chinese bonds was to reaffirm their Existence as defaulted foreign debt obligations of the Republic of China owed in the United States and elsewhere and to defer their resolution until national unification, "

Grand Justice and Vice President of the Republic of China Judicial Yuan 1999-2006, Minister of Justice of the Republic of China 1998-1999, and as a law professor in Taiwan and as a visiting professor at the University of Vienna and Wisconsin. Judicial Yuan is the Republic of China's highest judicial organ tasked with interpreting the Constitution of the Republic of China. Holds LL.D. from the University of Vienna and worked many years as a Law Professor including the position of Chairman of the Law Department of National Chung-Hsing University.


"These bonds referred to in Article 63 were all issued by the former Kuomintang Government of the Republic of China or were ratified by the Kuomintang government."

"Kuomintang business holdings are worth billions of US dollars as part of the "black gold system of Kuomintang nepotism corruption and cronyism.

"The issue of defaulted pre 1950 bonds is inexorably tied to the Kuomintang and its Assets in that the Kuomintang has been the main beneficiary of that default."

"Until approximately I99 1, the Kuomintang and the Government of the Republic of China were one and the same entity. With the election o f Chen Shui-bian as President of the republic of China in 2000, for the first time the Republic of China was governed by a party other than the Kuomintang and the Kuomintang entirely ceased to be an organ or agent of the state. However, the Kuomintang apparatus typified by the Kuomintang Business Management Committee retained billions of dollars of assets accumulated while the Kuomintang was an organ of the Republic of China from 1926 to 1991. It is entirely plausible that the proceeds, sinking funds, and other benefits of the pre- 1950 defaulted bonds referenced in Article 63 have been retained by the Kuomintang Business Management Committee to this day. "

'While Article 63 defers overall settlement of the bonds until the issue of Mainland China is dealt with, it does not preclude legal actions for unjust enrichment against the Kuomintang which is now a non sovereign juridical entity."

46) That Strunk contends that in light of the facts associated with the DFFI and

FRN, FRBNY policy and procedure as well as the Foreign Securities Act of 1933 and

Article 63 of the Act Governing Relations Between Peoples Of The Taiwan Area And The

Mainland Area, the S20 Bond or $20 Bond denomination similarly include Strunk's

property and are part of the assets secured by Plaintiffs' claim against Defendants that

involve money of exchange also involve "theproceeds, sinking funds, and other benefits

of thepre 1950 defaulted bonds referenced in Article 63 have been retained by the

Kuomintang Business Management Committee to this d a g that reasonably would

include Plaintiffs as well in such private transaction(s) with subject securities to form

a two-sided market platform to monetize debt in Switzerland as a transaction defmed

Strunk's Supplement to the Complaint Page 2 1 of 24

under what would be a pendant action with New York State's "Blue Sky L a f l in New

York as well as effecting eventual repayment and or the guarantee here in New York.

47) Defendants FRBNY and Defendant Lee C. Bollinger, FBPC and John R. Petty by

nonfeasance are parties to fraud, breach of contract and replevin action in that the

Expropriation and Conversion under Federal Common Law and international law are

under there auspice.

48)That failure of Defendants FRBNY and Defendant Lee C. Bollinger, FBPC and

John R. Petty to perform duties and obligations would take Strunk's property.

AS AND FOR A THIRD SUPPLEMENTAL CAUSE OF ACTION

(Defendants FRBNY, Lee C. Bollinger, FBPC and John R. Petty with fiduciary

duties to Strunk a s an American Historical Bondholder with Plaintiffs interest to

maintain the sinking fund for re-payment are wasting Plaintiffs assets)



1 through 249 as to fraud, breach of contract and replevin action as if set forth herein

at length omitting same for brevity, in that Defendants FRBNY, Lee C. Bollinger, FBPC

and John R. Petty and or their agents with fiduciary duties to Strunk as an American

Historical Bondholder with Plaintiffs interest to maintain the sinking fund for re-

payment are wasting Plaintiffs assets.

50) Plaintiff Keenan as Disclosed Principal of the Dragon Family admit that their

relationship is identical with the Kuomintang Business Management Committee as

"the Kuomintang appointed guardians of this Gold and the securities issued by the United States who came to be known euphemistically as the Dragon Family. The Dragon Family is, in fact, a highly secretive and informal organization that operates between old families within China and Taiwan, above the political divide of the two independent Chinese Governments."


5 1) Based upon information and belief, 'She Dragon Family and Defendants seek a

Two-side Market Platform in Switzrland to monetize debt obligations in association

with interests of SMOM, CFF? and Vatimm that effects Strunk's historic bond assets.

52) That Defendants are atkplmg tm c o m e DFFI and FRN in a Two-side

market platform in Switzerland to monetize EU ECB obligations with Strunk's assets.

53) B a d upon information and belief the= is a M e m m m h m qf Undetstanding of

August 31, 1982 between the Securities Exchange IOommksion of the United Stat&

and the Swiss Government regarding non-public securities trading that would

investigate a Two-side market platform in EMzerland to monetize EU ECB debt I

obligations and or transact risk based invesbnents eff- S W s assets.

54) T b t m e d Defendants have proffered ap effort to ut&x Plaintiffs' D m / FRN

asset by such action involve supplement Defendants thereby ef%cling StmnPs assets.

-s Inkmmer-Plaintiff Strunk wishes a decision of the Court to:

A. Assign a m u m acceptable special masbr for an acoounting of the DFFI-FRN;

B. Assign the special master the task of an accounting of the sinlung fund;

C. Assign the special master the task to scrutjnize arry or all Two-sided Market Platformts) that would effect the smking fund;

D. Restrain any member of the SMOM and or CFR h m inkrfkhg with the accounting including Lee 6. BoUinger, John R. Petty and or their agents;

E. Such other and different relief the Court deems necessary h&

Date& January /4,2012 B m k l p New York

Christopher-Earl: Slrunk in esse Self-represented without an attorney 593 Vanderbdt Avenue - 28 1 Brooklyn, New York 1 1238 Phone - 845-90 1-6767 Em& c ~ s . t r u n k . w s


STATE OF'- YORK ) 1 ss.

C O m OF lams 3

Accordingly, T, Chistopher Earl Strunk, being duly sworn, depose and say under

penalw of perjury:

I have read the foregoing Supplement to the Complaint fled November 23,

20 1 1, and as applies to the Supplemental Parties and Three Supplement Causes of - action as against Defendants in their official capacity and or individually, and In which

Intemner- Plaintiff requests a preliminary Injunction with restraint of Defendants and I

its agents as to the accounting of the sinking fund to safeguard the guaranteed reserve'

to repay Stmnk's American Chinese historical Bends; and know the contents thereof

apply to me by misapplication and administration of laws as a continuing injury

caused by the scheme to defraud with unjust enrichment that affects Plaintiffs' and

Intervener-Plaintiff along with those M a r 1 p situated; the same is m e to m y own

knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and

belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true. The grounds of my beliefs as to all

matters not stated upon information and belief are as follows: 3d parties, books and L

records, and personal knowledge. A

Sworn to before me This day of January 2012

Commissioner of Deeds City of New Yo& - bI0.5-883

Cgrtificate Filed in Richmond C o ~ n \ y - Commission Expies June 30,20 +If

S W s Supplement to the Complaint Page 24 of 24


SUPPLEMENT TO THE COMPLAINT

Exhibit 1


SUPPLEMENT TO THE COMPLAINT

Exhibit 2

AO 440 (Rev. 12/09) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the

Southern District of New York

Neil F. Keenan, Individually and as Agent for The Dragon Family, citizens of foreign states,

Plaintiff

v. See Attached Schedule A

Defendant

) ) ) ) ) ) )

Civil Action No.

JUDGE HOlWEll SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant's name and address) SEE ATTACHED SCHEDULE A

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) - or 60 days if you are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) - you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff's attorney, whose name and address are: William H. Mulligan, Jr.

Bleakley Platt & Schmidt, LLP One North Lexington Avenue White Plains, NY 10601 (914) 949-2700

You entered complaint.

Date: 1 f/22/2011 -------------------

Case 1:11-cv-08500-JFK Document 1 Filed 11/23/11 Page 1 of 114

AO 440 (Rev. 12/09) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE (This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date)

o I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

-------------------------------------------------on (date)

o I left the summons at the individual's residence or usual place of abode with (name)

;or

, a person of suitable age and discretion who res ides there,

Date:

----------------------------------on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual's last known address; or

----------------o I served the summons on (name of individual)

designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

on (date) -------------------------------------------------o I returned the summons unexecuted because

o Other (specify):

My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $


Server's signature

Printed name and title

Server's address


,who is

; or

; or

0.00


SCHEDULE A - DEFENDANTS

1. DANIELE DAL BOSCO

2. THE OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL TREASURY CONTROL

3. RAY C. DAM, individually, and as President ofOITC

4. DAVID A. SALE, individually, and as Deputy Chief of the Council for the Cabinet of OITC

6. THE UNITED NATIONS

7. BAN KI-moon, individually, and as Secretary General of the UN

8. H.E. Ambassador CESARE MARIA RAGAGLINI, Individually, and as Permanent Representative of the Italian Mission to the UN in New York

9. H.E. Ambassador LAURA MlRACHIAN, Individually, and as Permanent Representative of the Italian Mission to the UN in Geneva

11. ITALIAN REPUBLIC

12. ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE

13. SILVIO BERLUSCONI, Former Prime Minister of Italy

14. THE WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM

15. WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM U.S.A., INC.

16. GIANCARLO BRUNO, individually, and as Head of the Banking Industry of WEF


William H. Mulligan, Jr. (WM 2945) Justin M. Gardner (1M 6169) BLEAKLEY PLATT & SCHMIDT LLP One North Lexington Avenue White Plains, New York 10601 (914) 949-2700 Tel. (914) 683-5956 Fax [email protected] Attorneys for Plaintiff

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

NEIL F. KEENAN, Individually and as Agent for THE DRAGON FAMILY, citizens of foreign states,

Plaintiff,

-against-

DANIELE DAL BOSCO, a citizen of a foreign state, THE OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL TREASURY CONTROL, a foreign corporation ("OITC"), RAY C. DAM ("DAM"), individually, and as President of OITC, DAVID A. SALE ("SALE"), individually, and as Deputy Chief of the Council for the Cabinet of OITC, the UNITED NATIONS, BAN KI-moon, individually, and as Secretary General of the UN, H.E. Ambassador CESARE MARIA RAGAGLINI, Individually, and as Permanent Representative of the Italian Mission to the UN in New York, H.E. Ambassador LAURA MIRACHIAN, Individually, and as Permanent Representative of the Italian Mission to the UN in Geneva, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, Former Prime Minister of Italy, SILVIO BERLUSCONI, THE WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM ("WEF") a foreign corporation, WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM U.S.A., INC., GIANCARLO BRUNO, individually, and as Head of the Banking Industry of WEF, and various unknown individual co-conspirators, JOHN DOES A-Z,

Defendants.

JUDGE HOLWELL

Index No. 11 Civ. _ ( )

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff Demands Trial By Jury for All Applicable Claims


Plaintiff, NEIL F. KEENAN (hereinafter, "KEENAN"), individually, and as agent and

assignee of THE DRAGON F AMIL Y, citizens of various foreign states, by and through his

attorneys, Bleakley Platt & Schmidt, LLP, as and for his complaint herein, alleges as follows:

NATURE OF THE ACTION AND JURISDICTION

1. This is a civil claim arising out of the concerted, knowing, malicious scheme and

international conspiracy engaged in by the Defendants for the designed purpose of defrauding

plaintiff KEENAN, the designated Agent of his Principal, the "Dragon Family," for the express

purpose of expropriating, stealing and converting certain negotiable financial instruments

lawfully owned by the Dragon Family and entrusted to KEENAN in early 2009. These assets

(hereinafter referred to as the "Dragon Family Financial Instruments" or the "DFFI") had been

intended for participation in select, registered and authorized Private Placement Investment

Programs (or "PPPs") for the benefit of a wide range of global humanitarian purposes. At the

time of the criminal and deceitful acts of the Defendants, the approximate face value of the

stolen DFFI was One Hundred Forty-Five and One Half Billion ($145,500,000,000.00) United

States Dollars with an approximate accrued interest value of One Trillion

($1,000,000,000,000.00) United States Dollars.

2. The stolen DFFI, which had been entrusted to KEENAN in early 2009 by the

Dragon Family, are comprised of the following:

(i) Two-Hundred Forty-Nine (249) United States 1934 Series Federal

Reserve Notes (or "FRNs") which, according to a Federal Reserve System

Inventory List (SC1226-71-DOO4-D45184101 A) prepared at the time of

issuance, were contained in "Box No. D 45184101 A" bearing Bond Nos.

"D 45184101 A- D 45184350 A" (one sheet No. D 45184349 A missing) 2


each with a face value of $500 Million ($500,000,000.00) United States

Dollars in the total amount of One Hundred Twenty-Four Billion Five-

Hundred Million United States Dollars ($124,500,000,000.00).

(a) KEENAN does not have personal knowledge of the

circumstances which gave rise to the original issuance of any of

the DFFI. The knowledge he has obtained is based largely upon

the representations made by Mr. Akihiko Yamaguchi (hereinafter,

"Yamaguchi"), Signatory of the Dragon Family, in various

documents Yamaguchi has executed over the years in connection

with his attempts to place the DFFI into legitimate PPPs in

furtherance of the Dragon Family's objectives to provide

humanitarian global assistance when and where needed.

(b) Upon information and belief, between 1927 and 1938, as a

result of arrangements made between China and the United States,

the United States purchased some 50 million ounces of silver and

leased vast amounts of gold from the Nationalist Chinese

Government, known as Kuomintang. During this period, China

was partly occupied by Japanese troops and there was a fear of

China being overrun by the Japanese.

(c) Upon information and belief, in return for the precious

metals delivered by the Chinese, certificates were given pursuant .

to private agreement made between China and the United States.

These certificates became the underlying funds of the Kuomintang. 3


(d) Upon information and belief, following the promulgation in

1934 of the Gold Reserve Act, the law required all bullion gold

and gold coin to be surrendered to the Federal Reserve, a private

corporation that is chartered to operate as the Central Bank of the

United States and the issuer of the United States Dollar.

( e) Upon information and belief, domestically owned gold was

purchased. Foreign Gold held by the Treasury was also

surrendered to and thus leased to the Federal Reserve, which

resulted in the issuance of the series of 1934 Notes by the Federal

Reserve. These Dragon Family FRNs have never been redeemed

and, upon information and belief, the accrued interest was met by

the subsequent issue of certain 1968 series of Kennedy Bonds (see

2 (iii), infra) and later further issues of the 1934 series FRNs

which, upon information and belief, were issued through the period

of the Chinese civil war to assist Kuomintang operations in China

and later in Burma. These 1934 FRNs guarantee the lease

payments and helped to allow the Chinese Government to continue

financially. KEENAN has no personal knowledge as to whether

the FRN s with which he was entrusted were original or

subsequently issued Notes.

(f) Upon information and belief, this gold was documented

into accounts through the Union Bank of Switzerland, placed under

protection of the Swiss Attorney General, registered through the 4


Swiss National Bank:into the Bank for International Settlements

("BIS") International Collateral Combined accounts and then from

within the BIS, blocked to form the Institutional Parent

Registration Accounts of the Federal Reserve System.

(g) Upon information and belief, and in accordance with

procedures that would be expected to occur in the event the Note

Holder of record wished to redeem it, the Holder would do so by

first remitting the number of the Note to the Federal Reserve with a

major project or a list of projects for approval. Once the projects

have been approved, the Note would be recognized and the

F edsystem would then make arrangements for the Note to be

deposited into a bank which would provide a specific credit line,

perhaps of30% up to 80% of the face value. The Fedsystem

would then provide immunity to the Holder to present the Note at a

specific Bank where a Credit Line has been pre-arranged.

Attempting to present these Notes outside this system will see the

note arbitrarily denied and the illegal presenter incarcerated.

(h) Upon information and belief, in order to effectuate this

process, the Notes were printed to appear as if they were not

produced from official origin and bear obvious imperfections,

therefore easily deniable. However, when proper procedures are

followed, the number of the Note and other linking identic data

allows ultimate authentication and verification through the Federal 5


Reserve System screening process and the presenting of the Note

under the immunity shield allows effective use.

(i) As of April 20, 2009, the Dragon Family had calculated the

total value of these FRNs alone, with interest accrued since 1934,

as approximately Nine-Hundred Sixty-Eight Billion United States

Dollars ($968,000,000,000.00).

(ii) Two (2) 57th Series Japanese Government Bearer Bonds, Nos. A

1306 (construction bond) and A 1310 (the "Japanese Bonds"), which were

issued on April 30, 1983 by the Ministry of Finance, Government of

Japan, each having a face value of Japanese Yen Five Hundred (500)

Billion, which is equivalent to an amount in excess of Nine and One-Half

(9.5) Billion United States Dollars. Upon information and belief, these

Japanese Bonds are but two (2) of Five Hundred (500) such Bonds owned

by the Dragon Family, each having the same face value, according to a

statement of Yamaguchi dated April 20, 2009 concerning the Bond

History relating to these specific Japanese Bonds.

(iii) One (1) United States Kennedy Bond with a face value of One (1)

Billion United States Dollars, bearing registration number APII 024068 A.

(a) As with the FRNs, KEENAN has no personal knowledge of

the circumstances which gave rise to the issuance of the 'Kennedy

Bond bearing registration number APII 024068 A, issued in 1998

and which had been entrusted to him by Yamaguchi on May 5,

2009. The knowledge he has obtained is based largely upon his 6


communications witIi Yamaguchi including the representations

made by Yamaguchi in various documents he has executed over

the years in connection with his attempts on behalf of the Dragon

Family to place various Kennedy Bonds into legitimate PPPs in

furtherance of their objective to provide humanitarian global

assistance when and where needed.

(b) In a sworn statement by Yamaguchi, dated August 4,2010,

entitled "Kennedy Bond History," and which relates to the details

of ten (l0) other Kennedy Bonds, virtually identical to that

entrusted to KEENAN in May 2009 except for the registration

numbers, Yamaguchi stated that the "US government borrowed

huge amount funds from the Dragon Family many years ago. The

base of the lent funds from the Dragon Family to the US

Government were the Gold and Silver. Therefore the US

government was able to issue huge USD as currencies via FRB

then." Yamaguchi proceeded to state: "We, the Dragon Family,

requested some interest to the US Government on 1998 by use of

some securities/certificates got expired as same as the 57th Series

Japanese Government Bonds. And, we have received the Kennedy

Bonds, issued in 1998, as one of the interest payments from the US

Government. I recognize as my position that the Kennedy Bonds

were issued by the US Government as the interest only for the

Dragon Family." 7


( c) Upon information and belief, the Kennedy Bonds represent

a series of notes printed for the purpose of creating a settlement

fund for the gold and other precious metals transferred to the

United States under the terms of the Green Hilton Memorial

Agreement (GHMA), November 11, 1963 which was executed by,

among others, President John F. Kennedy and President Soekarno,

the first President of Indonesia, who had previously been entrusted

with the care of the gold. Upon information and belief, these

Bonds were originally issued in 1968 by way of specially

denominated 1968 Kennedy Bonds, "Z" series. These bonds were

not commercially negotiable, or cashable, but were redeemable

through the Federal Reserve System in what was intended to be an

effective, beneficial, and well-aimed program that was intended for

better global development. President Soekarno was deposed in

1967 by General Suharto, thus disrupting the entire program

causing a failure to institute the planned development program

intended for Indonesia and the Asian region.

(d) Upon information and belief, few, if any, of the 1968

Kennedy Bonds had been used within the original 30 year period, a

fact to which Yamaguchi may have been referring in his above

statement. Thus, theoretically, the gold that had been lent by the

Dragon Family had not been paid for and therefore had not fully

transferred to the Federal System. Upon information and belief, 8


this resulted in a situation where the gold was no longer being

purchased at the gold price of 1963 but at the increased 1998 price.

Thus, a new "A" series of bonds, which Yamaguchi may also have

been describing in his statement above, were issued in 1998

reflecting that price and the old "Z" series became defunct and

worthless.

3. As referenced above, and discussed in more detail below, the DFFI had been

entrusted to KEENAN in early 2009 by the Dragon Family. Months thereafter, in September

2009, KEENAN was fraudulently induced through the conspiratorial actions and schemes of the

Defendants to transfer and entrust the DFFI for temporary safekeeping and custodianship to

defendant Daniele DAL BOSCO (hereinafter, "DAL BOSCO").

4. Thereafter, unbeknownst to KEENAN, DAL BOSCO, in a malevolent, conscious

and concerted scheme and enterprise of staggering proportions, plotted and conspired with the

other Defendants in a variety of ways to defraud KEENAN and to convert the DFFI for their

own personal financial gain and to the complete financial detriment of KEENAN and the Dragon

Family, as described in more detail throughout the Complaint below.

5. In summary, this conspiracy included: (a) the expropriation, stealth and

conversion by DAL BOSCO of the very same DFFI with which he had been temporarily

entrusted; (b) the repeated and unsuccessful attempts to bribe KEENAN in the total amount of

One Hundred Million ($100,000,000.00) Dollars (half of which was to be kept by DAL

BOSCO), in an effort to obtain KEENAN's consent to release the DFFI to others without

disclosing such theft to the rightful owners of the DFFI, the Dragon Family; (c) a plan whereby

the DFFI would be converted and placed into a so-called "UN Sovereign Program" wholly under 9


the auspices, protection and umbrella of the: "sovereign immunity" allegedly accorded to the

defendants by the actions of certain of the defendants, including the UNITED NATIONS and the

ITALIAN REPUBLIC; (d) the execution of a written agreement between DAL BOSCO and

defendants OITC and SALE, with the full knowledge and authority of DAM, whereby DAL

BOSCO openly repudiated his duties as custodian of the DFFI; (e) the issuance of an illegal and

utterly baseless Cease and Desist Order under which OITC asserted the thoroughly and

knowingly false proposition that the DFFI was, in fact, in the lawful possession of OITC, which

has acted for decades with impunity and under the asserted umbrella of protection allegedly

accorded by the UNITED NATIONS; (f) the longstanding and unlawful complicity of the

UNITED NATIONS in allowing the blatantly false, but to date, unremedied representation to the

world at large by OITC that it was organized under a non-confirmable and apparently non-

existent UN Charter Code provision; (g) the unlawful, concerted and malicious attempt, through

the actions of various of the defendants to utilize not only the stolen DFFI, which are the focal

point of this matter, but also numerous various other financial instruments either stolen or seized

under color of police authority of the ITALIAN FINANCIAL. POLICE or obtained by others, to

purchase Banca Commerciale di Lugano, Lugano CH (Switzerland), or some other Swiss

registered bank into which they could deposit stolen assets, and to capitalize the bank's assets

with profits obtained from such actions. Upon information and belief, such bank capitalization

was to include yet another approximately One-Hundred Thirty-Four Billion, Five-Hundred

Million Dollars ($134,500,000,000.00) Dollars of financial instruments also owned by the

Dragon Family, including FRNs and Kennedy Bonds virtually identical to the DFFI, which were

seized on the Italian/Swiss border in June 2009. (See 63-69 supra, "The Chiasso Incident").

10


Subject Matter Jurisdiction:

6. This Court has "original jurisdiction without regard to amount in controversy"

over this action brought against a foreign state as defined in the Foreign Sovereign Immunities

Act (hereinafter "FSIA"), 28 U.S.C. § 1603(a), namely defendants the ITALIAN REPUBLIC

and the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, which defendants are not entitled to immunity either

under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1605-1607 or under any applicable international agreement. Specifically,

defendants the ITALIAN REPUBLIC and the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE and their agents

acting on their behalf with actual authority, while actively participating in the conspiracy to

defraud KEENAN and convert the DFFI, engaged in inherently commercial activities when said

defendants and their agents attempted to bribe KEENAN in the total amount of One Hundred

Million ($100,000,000.00) Dollars for the purpose of obtaining the DFFI, from KEENAN, for

their own personal profit by and through the investment of the DFFI in a United Nations

Sovereign Program largely through actions taken in New York, New York. Said commercial

activity further has a direct effect in the United States in that a significant portion of the DFFI,

namely the 249 FRNs and the Kennedy Bond, are an of the U.S. Federal Reserve

System, and in order to negotiate said financial instruments, the holder of these instruments must

work directly with the U.S. Federal Reserve System to have the instruments verified before

anticipated placement into an approved PPP. Additionally, and upon information and belief, the

actions of the said defendants and their agents, as described in more detail below, constitute an

expropriation of the DFFI in clear violation of international law, and said DFFI are currently held

by said defendants in New York for investment in a UN Sovereign Program.

7. This Court also has original jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

1331 as federal common law is applicable to the claims asserted herein, which claims involve 11


uniquely federal interests. Specifically, this action involves an international conspiracy to

defraud KEENAN and convert (i) Two-Hundred Forty-nine (249) United States 1934 Series

Federal Reserve Notes each with a face value of $500 Million ($500,000,000.00) United States

Dollars in the total amount of One Hundred Twenty-Four Billion Five-Hundred Million United

States Dollars and (ii) One (1) United States Kennedy Bond with a face value of One (1) Billion

United States Dollars, bearing registration number APII 024068 A issued by the U.S. Federal

Reserve and/or the U.S. Treasury Department to the Dragon Family in exchange for the Dragon

Family's extensive gold and other precious metal deposits, which were then placed in the U.S.

Federal Reserve System for the benefit and underwriting support of the United States Dollar,

which was to become and currently remains the global reserve currency. This international

criminal conspiracy involving a sovereign nation and international organizations as co-

conspirators, including the ITALIAN REPUBLIC, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE,

BERLUSCONI, BRUNO, the UNITED NATIONS and the WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM,

implicates the Dragon Family's right to be compensated for the gold and precious metal deposits

it made into the Federal Reserve System pursuant to the original agreements between the United

States and the Dragon Family, as well as KEENAN's rights as Agent of the Dragon Family to

place the DFFI into the PPPS intended and to be compensated in accordance with his own rights

as such Agent. Alternatively, the conspiracy implicates the Dragon Family and its Agent

KEENAN's right to the return of the gold and precious metal deposits with interest-a right

which clearly implicates the uniquely federal interest of the United States in the U.S. Federal

Reserve System, the federally chartered central banking system of the United States. Because

this action involves issues that are of such a peculiarly federal concern, namely the obligations of

the federally chartered central banking system of the United States, the underwriting support of 12


the U.S. Dollar and its continued viability as the global reserve currency, this action is governed

by federal common law.

8. The Court also has jurisdiction over any remaining claims under principles of

supplemental jurisdiction as such claims "are so related to claims in the action within such

original jurisdiction that they form part of the same case or controversy" pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

1367.

VENUE

9. Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 (b) (2) as a substantial part

of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims occurred, or, upon information and belief, a

substantial part of the property that is the subject of the action is situated in this district, and

under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 (b) (3) as certain defendants, namely the UNITED NATIONS

(hereinafter, the "UN"), BAN KI-moon, H.E. Ambassador CESARE MARIA RAGAGLINI

(hereinafter, "RAGAGLINI"), GIANCARLO BRUNO, (hereinafter, "BRUNO"), and the

WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM USA, INC. (hereinafter "WEF USA") are in the district. Venue

is also proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 (d) as certain defendants are foreign aliens,

namely DANIELE DAL BOSCO, THE OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL TREASURY

CONTROL (hereinafter, "OITC"), RAY C. DAM (hereinafter "DAM"), DAVID A. SALE

(hereinafter "SALE"), the WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM (hereinafter "WEF") and SILVIO

BERLUSCONI (hereinafter "BERLUSCONI"), the former Prime Minister of Italy, and as such

may be sued in any district. Lastly, venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 (f) (1)

as this action is against a foreign state and a political subdivision or agency thereof, namGly

defendants the ITALIAN REPUBLIC (hereinafter "ITALY") and the ITALIAN FINANCIAL

POLICE, and a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims occurred, or, 13


upon infonnation and belief, a substantial of property that is the subj ect of the action is

situated in this district.

PARTIES

The Plaintiff Neil Francis Keenan

10. At all relevant times, plaintiff KEENAN was an individual citizen of the United

States, who currently is a resident of Bulgaria. KEENAN was introduced to Yamaguchi and the

Dragon Family in or about August 2008 in connection with their efforts to place certain Japanese

Bonds and Kennedy Bonds into a PPP after proper Bank verification. KEENAN acted as an

intennediary in introducing the Dragon Family to Alpha Bank, located in Cyprus, for which

Yamaguchi expressed great appreciation. On account of the assistance and political connections

KEENAN provided at that time, Yamaguchi persistently sought out KEENAN to provide direct

services on his behalf related to international banking and trading transactions in furtherance of

Dragon Family humanitarian programs. KEENAN eventually agreed to accept the

responsibilities attendant to representing the Dragon Family in numerous transactions in the

world of private financing, international banking, and governmental trading.

11. As a result of the actions of the defendants which gave rise to this action,

described in greater detail in the succeeding paragraphs, on October 28,2010, Yamaguchi

executed a certain Special Power of Attorney by which he, with the approval of General Haan,

the Head of the Dragon Family, authorized KEENAN to act on his behalf and that of the Dragon

Family, for the private placement of or legal return of the DFFI "which were stolen by Daniele

Dal Bosco (and others) from you," effectively assigning any cause of action which the Dragon

Family might possess as the legal holder of the DFFI. Any such causes of action would be in

addition to KEENAN's personal and representative claims as the Dragon Family's designated 14


Agent under his Special Powers of Attorney, as the victim of the theft and conversion of the

DFFI by DAL BOSCO and the various and sundry other conspiratorial and illegal actions of the

other defendants.

12. This Special Power of Attorney explicitly superseded and extended prior Powers

of Attorney granted to KEENAN by which KEENAN was authorized to coordinate with the

appropriate programs in the United States, Asia and Europe for investment purposes utilizing the

DFFI as collateral. In addition to the wide range of responsibilities granted to KEENAN

regarding the negotiation of the DFFI and their investment in proper PPPs in a fully secured

investment facility, KEENAN, "and only" KEENAN, was specifically authorized to determine

what legal proceedings should be initiated in order to recover the stolen DFFI, how to finance it,

and seek all damages arising therefrom. KEENAN was authorized to coordinate all aspects of

the litigation and determine "what to do with any proceeds from any outcome" as "the bonds

were stolen from you and you are financing their retrieval and you are taking all the risks." In

effect, Yamaguchi assigned to KEENAN any and all causes of action he or the Dragon Family

may have in seeking the recovery of the DFFI or damages arising from their theft "as the legal

holder" of the DFFI. KEENAN was placed "solely in control over the legal recovery of said

bonds and all aspects of it."

Keenan's Disclosed Principal- the Dragon Family

13. Upon information and belief, the 1934 FRNs described, supra, at 2 (i), came

under the control of the Kuomintang from whom the gold was received in return for the lease

payments, and allowed the Chinese Nationalist Government in Taiwan to continue financially.

Many of the FRNs were left in Communist China when the Kuomintang had to flee to Taiwan.

Further, upon information and belief, the Gold had been nationalized by the Kuomintang who 15


moved much of the FRNs (but not all) to Taiwan, which allowed for the development of and

served as the basis for the underlying wealth of Taiwan. The FRNs were good for value as they

were backed by the gold and other precious metals purchased and leased by the United States

government.

14. Upon information and belief, the Kuomintang appointed guardians of this Gold

and the securities issued by the United States who came to be known euphemistically as the

Dragon Family. The Dragon Family is, in fact, a highly secretive and informal organization that

operates between old families within China and Taiwan, above the political divide of the two

independent Chinese Governments. The Dragon Family abstains from public view and

knowledge, but, upon information and belief, acts for the good and better benefit of the World in

constant coordination with higher levels of Global Financial Organizations, in particular, the

Federal Reserve System. During the course of its existence over the last century, the Dragon

Family has accumulated great wealth by having provided the Federal Reserve Bank and the

United States Government with asset assignments of gold and silver via certain accounts held in

Switzerland, for which it has received consideration in the form of a variety of Notes, Bonds and

Certificates such as those described in 2 that are an Obligation of the Federal Reserve System.

Upon information and belief, these Bonds have values ranging in the many Thousands of

Trillions of United States Dollars, a relatively small portion of which is involved in the claims

giving rise to this action. Each of these currencies, such as the DFFI involved in this action, was

and remains duly registered within the Federal Reserve System and are directly verifiable by the

Federal Reserve through its efficient verification system and screening process.

16


THE DEFENDANTS

Daniele Dal Bosco

15. Defendant DAL BOSCO is an individual who, upon information and belief, has

multiple residences in Divonne-Ies-Bain, France, London, United Kingdom and Rome, Italy,

although he at all relevant times represented to KEENAN that he resided in Geneva, Switzerland.

His actions, which give rise to this action, were acted upon in various locations in Europe,

including Switzerland and Italy, and involved the direct use of international telephone

communication between Europe and N ew York City.

The Office of International Treasury Control ("OITC") and Individual OITC Defendants

16. Defendant DAL BOSCO, at the relevant times described more fully below, has

acted in concert and conspired with Defendant THE OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL

TREASURY CONTROL (hereinafter "OITC"). Upon information and belief, OITC has its

principal offices in Singapore and Cambodia, although according to a document OITC produced

in March 2006, it has offices in Malaysia, the Netherlands, the United States, Australia and

Ecuador. According to its own website, [www.unoitc.orgJ, OITC has a "Due Diligence Division

Only" office located in Washington D.C., and claims to be "an International Financial Institution

Chartered under the United Nations Charter Control No: 10-60847."

17. Further, OITC identifies itself as a "Sovereign Entity in its own right, as instituted

by the Nations of the World and as provided for under The Treaty of Paris 1886." It claims to

have "substantial assets in its control." OITC spokesmen have claimed that the organization has

been chartered by the United Nations under a secret protocol and that it was established as the

17


Office of His Excellency Dr. Ray C. Dam, changing its name to the Office of International

Treasury Control in 2003.

18. In the "General Overview" of its History, provided on the website, OITC traces

its roots to The Trilateral Trillenium Tripartite Gold Commission ("TTTGC") purportedly

organized in 1944/5 for a term of fifty (50) years. OITC represents that during this term, the

TTTGC held the "Mandate, Rights and Authorities over the Combined International Collateral

Accounts of the Global Debt Facility." At the expiration of the term of 50 years, the so-called

"Nations of the World," disappointed with the biased way The Combined International Collateral

Accounts had been utilized within the 50 Years, agreed not to extend the term of the TTTGC, but

instead appointed a single independent person to the position of International Treasury Controller

with full rights, authority, and legal ownership of the Combined International Collateral

Accounts.

19. Further, according to the OITC website, on January 20, 1995, defendant Dr. Ray

C. Dam (hereinafter, "DAM") was "appointed International Treasury Controller, and Legal Heir

and Owner of the Combined International Collateral Accounts of the Global Debt Facility, with

full authority and dispositional control of same, under Legal Decadency RCD 1088, executed by

the Nations of the World." Also purportedly established on January 20, 1995, was "The Office

of International Treasury Control, as the management, administrative and operations

organization for His Excellency, Dr. Ray C. Dam," who claimed to be the authorized

International Treasury Controller.

20. Defendant DAM is an individual and, upon information and belief, is generally

believed to be a native of Cambodia, although he is also a United States citizen bearing United

States passport number 467832299. Upon information and belief, DAM's real name is Amijan 18


Khali Abdeb and was born in Kyrgyzstan of a mother who was a Cambodian princess.

According to the OITC website, His Excellency Ray C. Dam is a "certified and indemnified

International Central Banking financial institution operating as The Office of International

Treasury Control." Further, as reported on the website, following the confirmation of his Powers

and Authorities by the so-called "Washington Panel" in 1998, the establishment of the Institution

- The Office of International Treasury Control- was completed on January 20, 2003, whereby

"based upon the content and requirements of numerous International Treaties," the OITC was

granted "Sovereign Entity Status under the United Nations Charter Control No: 10-160847."

DAM reportedly also claims to have earned a degree from UC Berkeley but, upon information

and belief, the University has no record of conferring a degree upon DAM.

21. Defendant David A. Sale (hereinafter, "SALE") is an individual citizen of the

United Kingdom who holds himself out as "Deputy Chief of the Council of the Cabinet" of

OITC and signs pertinent correspondence (more fully discussed below) as "D.A. Sale, F. LLA,

Special Global Envoy, Senior Commercial Advisor to His Excellency, The Chairman, The

Office of International Treasury Control, UN Charter Contro1.No: 10-60847." Upon information

and belief, SALE lived and worked from a small apartment in a low cost community in

Kumpawapi, Udon Thani Province in Thailand and is not known to have ever met with DAM

personally, in their entire eight years of association.

22. According to its website, OITC "though not generally or publicly known ... is

the largest International Institution of its kind" and "the largest single owner of gold and

platinum bullion in the World, in addition to being a major owner of Bank Debenture Securities,

International Treasuries, cash and other forms of securities, all of which are recorded as assets of

the Combined International Collateral Accounts of the Global Debt Facility, whose accounts are 19


held within the Federal Reserve, The Bank for International Settlements, The US Treasury,

Swiss National Bank, Swiss Federal Finance Administration." Further, as represented on its

website, since being established, the OITC has become the largest single owner of Home

Mortgage Securities in the World today, and "Original assets in the form of gold have been

wisely and well utilized to create wealth that creates future wealth."

23. Upon information and belief, contrary to the representations of OITC, the United

States Government has stated that "within the Federal Reserve, there exists no organization or

department with the initials OITC, nor anything similar to this." Additionally, the aforesaid

Bank for International Settlements ("BIS") - an international organization representing central

banks - has also denied any knowledge of the OITC. The BIS was established in 1930, and has

its principal office located in Basel, Switzerland with two representative offices in the Hong

Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China and in Mexico City. The

BIS is reportedly tl1e world's oldest international financial organization whose customers are

central banks and international organizations. BIS does not accept deposits from, nor provide

financial services to, private individuals or corporate entities .. According to its website, BIS

exists to "foster international monetary and financial cooperation and serves as a bank for central

banks." Further, according to OITC's website, OITC claims sovereignty over the Institutional

Parent Registration Accounts 984 52700845-34-18 within the Federal Reserve System.

24. Upon information and belief, the OITC has declined to publish any independent

verification of its status, claiming that only individuals with a "level 3" to "level 5" security

classification can see "its protocol for verification," which in tum, "can only be undertaken by a

senior member of the Government or the Reserve Bank." Further, the UN is allegedly "legally

bound to respond to a verification request on the condition that the requisite controls and 20


procedures are followed or no response will be received from the United Nations." Further, the

only way a verification request can be made is "through the UN headquarters in New York or

Geneva, not via, or by, any sub-office of the UN."

25. Upon information and belief, the UN has been complicit in the nefarious activities

of OITC in that it has never formally denounced or disassociated itself from OITC, and has

allowed OITC to hold itself out to the world community as protected by its umbrella of

legitimacy and chartered by the UN itself. It was reported as recently as August 10, 2010 on the

internet site of Benj amin Fulford ("Fulford"), a journalist of Canadian descent and citizenship,

who currently resides in Japan, and who served as the Asian Bureau Chief for Forbes Magazine

from 1998 until 2005, that "The UN never, until the current investigation! began, denied its

affiliation with the OITC."

26. On or about December 18, 2010, the Cambodian Phnom Penh Post (the "Post")

reported the arrest of "four employees of a shadowy organisation that has been implicated in a

series of bizarre scandals in multiple countries, holding the men on suspicion of large-scale fraud

and forgery." Included in the group was "Ray C. Dam, the chairman of ARP-OITC Group Co

Ltd." This followed an October report in the same newspaper that examined the "Office of

International Treasury Control," of which ARP-OITC is a subsidiary, and questioned the group's

alleged associations with the United States government, the United Nations and HSBC Bank.

DAM was accused of "forging documents and using forged documents to claim he has roughly

1 See discussion of "The Chiasso Incident", infra, at 63-69.

21


$500 million." Subsequent news reports confirmed the charges by the Phnom Penh Municipal

Court on December 20, 2010 and noted the prior Post reports that OITC officials had "previously

been implicated in financial scandals in Ecuador, Fiji and the United Kingdom."

The United Nations and Individual Defendants

27. Defendant UNITED NATIONS is an international organization whose stated aims

are facilitating cooperation in international law, international security, economic development,

social progress, human rights, and achievement of world peace. It was founded in 1945 after

World War II to replace the League of Nations, and its main headquarters are located on

international territory in New York, New York. Upon information and belief, at all relevant

times referenced in this complaint, defendant UN and others, including any officials acting on its

behalf, were acting outside the scope of their official capacities and are accorded no immunity

for such actions.

28. Defendant BAN KI-moon is a native of South Korea, was the Foreign Minister of

the Republic of Korea from January 2004 to November 2006 and was elected in October 2006 to

be, and currently is the eighth Secretary-General of the United Nations.

29. Defendant H.E. Ambassador Cesare Maria RAGAGLINI is the Permanent

Representative of the Italian Mission to the UN in New York, New York, and maintains a

residence in New York, New York.

30. Defendant H.E. Ambassador Laura MIRACHIAN is the Permanent

Representative of the Italian Mission to the UN in Geneva, Switzerland.

The Italian Republic, Prime Minister and Related Defendants

31. Defendant the ITALIAN REPUBLIC is a democratic nation and is a founding

member of what is now known as the European Union. It is a member of NATO and is a 22


member state of defendant UNITED NATIONS. Defendant SILVIO BERLUSCONI has

recently resigned as the Prime Minister of the ITALIAN REPUBLIC. Upon information and

belief, BERLUSCONI has been a central figure in the plot and scheme to utilize seized or stolen

financial instruments belonging to the Dragon Family for his own personal financial gain and

profit in collusion with various other defendants, as more fully described herein.

32. Defendant, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, or Guardia di Finanza, meaning

"Financial Guard" ("GdF") is a militarized Italian police force under the authority of the Minister

of Economy and Finance of the ITALIAN REPUBLIC and ultimately, at all relevant times

herein, acted under the authority of defendant BERLUSCONI. It is a part of the Italian Armed

Forces and is essentially responsible for dealing with financial crime and smuggling. Its

activities are financial, economic, judiciary and public safety and, among other things under its

jurisdiction are smuggling, money laundering, customs and border checks, and political and

military defense of the Italian borders.

Giancarlo Bruno and the World Economic Forum Defendants

33. Upon information and belief, defendant the World Economic Forum (hereinafter,

"WEF") is a Swiss registered non-profit foundation best known for its annual meeting in Davos,

Switzerland, which brings together top business leaders, international political leaders, selected

intellectuals and journalists to discuss the most pressing issues facing the world, including health

and the environment. The WEF was founded in 1971 by Klaus Martin Schwab, a German-born

business professor at the University of Geneva. It was originally named the European

Management Forum, but changed to its present name in 1987 and sought to broaden its vision

further to include providing a platform for resolving international conflicts.

23


34. The WEF is headquartered it Cologny, Switzerland, near Geneva. In 2006 it

opened affiliate offices in Beijing, China and New York, New York. The WEF purports to strive

to be impartial, and is not tied to any political, partisan or national interests. In 2009, it opened

an office in Tokyo, Japan. It is committed to improving the State of the World and has observer

status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council, and is under the supervision of the

Swiss Federal Government.

35. Upon information and belief, defendant Giancarlo Bruno (hereinafter, "BRUNO")

is an individual who maintains residences in New York, New York, Geneva, Switzerland and

Italy and at all pertinent times has served as Director responsible for the Financial Services

Industry Group of the WEF in its New York City offices at the WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM

USA, Inc. (hereinafter "WEF USA"), which is the WEF affiliate incorporated in Delaware, a

foreign not for profit corporation authorized to do business in the State of New York overseeing

the development and content and the relationships with the WEF's partner companies in the

Banking, Insurance and Asset Management sectors. Prior to joining the WEF, BRUNO had

extensive experience in banking and corporate finance. He also had working experience with

defendant UN, at the United Nations Industrial Development Organization ("UNIDO"), where

he carried out research responsibilities in the field of comparative development with the

Governments Funds Unit of the Mobilization and Management of Financial Resources Division.

BRUNO is also a member of the Democratic Party Constituent Assembly, Italy. BRUNO has

acted as a central figure in concert with other defendants, including principally DAL BOSCO,

the UNITED NATIONS, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE and

BERLUSCONI in seeking to bribe KEENAN to release the DFFI with which DAL BOSCO had

been entrusted, in order that defendants, including BRUNO, could profit illegally from both the 24


possession and illegal marketing of the DFFI. Upon information and belief, BRUNO's actions

took place principally in New York, New York, and involved the use of international telephone

communications.

36. Defendants JOHN DOES are individuals or organizations who may have acted in

concert with any or all of the named defendants herein and may be liable to plaintiff for the

damages suffered by him.

PERTINENT FACTUAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION COMMON TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION

A. Keenan and the Dragon Family

37. The aforesaid Akihiko Yamaguchi is a Japanese citizen who was born in

December 1954 and who, in approximately 1986, at the age of thirty-two (32), through his

international trade business in Taiwan, was introduced to Mr. Sei Sasaki, who had devoted

almost forty (40) years of his life and enjoyed a brotherly relationship with a person at the

highest levels of the Dragon Family. Yamaguchi was considered a "son" by Mr. Sasaki, and he

was ultimately introduced to the Head of the Dragon Family, General Haan, who, together with

other high level members of the Dragon Family, educated him over the years about the

accumulation and ownership of the assets held and controlled by the Dragon Family. Upon their

meeting, Yamaguchi was appointed a formal member of the Dragon Family by the top person in

the Organization, and thereafter began to devote his entire professional career to the Dragon

Family from the time he was 35 years old until the present. Mr. Sasaki died when Yamaguchi

was 40 years old.

38. Eventually, Yamaguchi became a legal signatory and Controller of the Dragon

Family Organization, with full signing authority to enter into all transactions relating to Dragon

25


Family Assets and Financial Instruments, irlcluding cash, Private TradinglInvestment Programs

with the leading financial institutions throughout the world such as UBS, Bank of Japan and the

Federal Reserve Bank. As stated, he was introduced to KEENAN in or about August 2008.

39. Upon information and belief, after decades of inactivity by agreement among the

several factions or sects of the Dragon Family, in the last decade the Organization has

undertaken to attempt to contribute significant Billions of United States Dollars for the purpose

of aiding numerous global humanitarian purposes, such as relief aid during natural disasters to

countries throughout the world, including Hurricane Katrina in the United States, earthquakes in

Haiti, China and Indonesia, the Grenoble nuclear disaster, rebuilding the Republic of Georgia's

infrastructure, water and energy supply for the Cayman Islands, Bangladesh and more.

B. The Grant and Execution of Plaintiff Keenan's Special Powers of Attorney Relating to the DFFI

40. Ultimately, KEENAN was authorized to negotiate the final details and execute

and enter into a cash enhancement andlor project funding transaction relating to the Private

Placement of the DFFI. This was to be accomplished, in the case of the Federal Reserve Notes

and Kennedy Bond, after verification by the United States Federal Reserve Bank or Treasury

Department, or in the case of the Japanese Bonds, after verification by the Bank of Japan.

KEENAN was authorized to invest the DFFI into a fully secured Investment Facility and, in fact,

was "empowered with all of my powers" by Yamaguchi. It was the intent of the Dragon Family

to utilize the assets placed in the various Programs for global humanitarian purposes.

1. The 1934 United States Federal Reserve Notes

41. Among the assets accumulated by the Dragon Family are the above-described

Federal Reserve Notes ("the Federal Reserve Notes" or "FRNs") which were collected by

26


Yamaguchi from Mr. Sasaki and the Dragort Family for use for any world economic aid and

humanitarian projects. On October 5, 2008, Yamaguchi declared in writing that he desired to use

the Notes for any appropriate humanitarian investment program immediately by use of his

written authority and power as signatory of the Dragon Family.

42. KEENAN was authorized by Yamaguchi to coordinate the investment of249 of

these United States 1934 Federal Reserve Notes, each with a face value of Five Hundred (500)

Million Dollars, with a total face value of One-Hundred Twenty-Four (124) Billion 500 Million

United States Dollars, and each bearing an interest coupon of 4% per annum since 1934.

43. For the services he was to provide in connection with the placement of the Federal

Reserve Notes, KEENAN was to receive at least 30 % of any profit sharing from the particular

PPP, such profits to be invested into infrastructural and economic development projects.

2. The "Japanese Bonds"

44. On or about February 25,2010, replacing a similar instrument executed on

February 20, 2009, which had a six month term, KEENAN was granted a Special Power of

Attorney in a writing executed by Yamaguchi to act on Yamaguchi's behalf for the coordination

of investing certain assets of the Dragon Family, to wit, the above-referenced two (2) 57 Series

Japanese Government Bonds Nos. A 1306 and A 1310 (the above-described "Japanese Bonds")

The Special Power of Attorney was unlimited as to time.

45. Upon information and belief, in or about 1997, Ex-Japanese Finance Minister,

Mr. Hiroshi Mitsuzaka, and Ex-Japanese Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi, had delivered to their

Japanese Trustee Five-Hundred (500) 5ih Series Japanese Government Bonds which had been

issued largely based upon Dragon Family Funds for future use in world economic aid and

humanitarian projects. After the deaths of Messrs Mitsuzaka and Obuchi, the Trustee delivered 27


many of these Japanese Bonds, including thb aforesaid two (2) Japanese Bonds, to one of

Yamaguchi's foundation associates, who was well aware of their history. Thereafter, many of

these Japanese Bonds were returned to Yamaguchi to be utilized for any appropriate

humanitarian investment program under his authority and power as authorized signatory of the

Dragon Family. Yamaguchi had been in possession of these Bonds since at least October 18,

2006. The person who was designated to handle the bonds by Yamaguchi was instructed to

obtain validation of the bonds from the Bank of Japan or Mizuho Bank, as attested to by

Yamaguchi on or about February 20,2009.

46. By the explicit terms of the Power of Attorney, Yamaguchi appointed KEENAN

to act on his behalf for the coordination of the Japanese Bonds for investment with the

appropriate parties in the United States, Asia and Europe in legally registered and chartered

trading Programs, known as PPPs or for other funding purposes by use of the Bonds as collateral.

KEENAN was further empowered to coordinate and proceed on any material conditions and

terms he deemed proper and was further authorized to utilize Yamaguchi's bank account in his

own designating banks and to sign any Private Program contract as Yamaguchi's agent.

KEENAN was authorized as attorney-in-fact for authentication and due-diligence of the

Japanese Bonds through KEENAN's bank to the Bank of Japan by using the two certified copy

Japanese Bonds including any and all of the documents showing Yamaguchi's endorsements on

the reverse side of those Bonds.

47. F or the services he was to provide in connection with the placement of the

Japanese Bonds, KEENAN was to receive 30% of any net profit from the particular PPP.

28


3. The Kennedy Bond

48. KEENAN was also authorized by Mr. Yamaguchi to coordinate the investment of

the one (l) Kennedy Bond entrusted to him with a face value of One (l) Billion United States

Dollars. As attested to by Yamaguchi in his statement of the Kennedy Bond History dated

September 6,2008, the Kennedy Bond is good, clean, clear and free from any liens and

encumbrances.

49. For the services he was to provide in connection with the placement of the

Kennedy Bond, KEENAN was to receive at least 30% of any profit sharing from the placement

of the bond in a PPP for investment into infrastructural and economic development

projects.

50. KEENAN personally accepted the custodianship and income rights therefrom

accorded to him in accepting responsibility for investment of the Federal Reserve Notes on

January 22, 2009 in Zurich, Switzerland. He took possession of the Japanese Bonds and

Kennedy Bond on May 5, 2009, at which time he acknowledged in writing the receipt of all of

these instruments which comprise the DFFI. KEENAN remains the only legal custodian of the

DFFI by virtue of the written authority granted by the Dragon Family through Yamaguchi.

C. Events in April-May 2009, Preceding the "Chiasso Incident"

51. After receiving the DFFI, Yamaguchi, aided by KEENAN's connections in

Europe, and with additional Dragon Family financial instruments, began to approach various

international Governments, which were either in need of humanitarian aid or had provided the

Dragon Family with assistance in the past. In tum, KEENAN proceeded to select individuals

whom he knew and trusted to assist him in either finding or establishing a suitable PPP, or to

work with the principals who would be involved in obtaining proper verification of the DFFI, 29


which would be used as collateral in furthernnce of global humanitarian programs.

Alternatively, if the DFFI were not placed in a PPP, a suitable arrangement for concluding an

outright loan transaction would be sought. During the spring of 2009, KEENAN was very active

on behalf of Yamaguchi and the Dragon Family meeting with traders and Bank representatives,

particularly in Zurich, Switzerland, in furtherance of these goals.

52. In April 2009, KEENAN was approached by a group of Turkish investors (the

"Turkish Group") who were interested in establishing a relationship with the Dragon Family

through the Turkish Group's supposed traders in Zurich. During the course of the ensuing

meetings and negotiations, Yamaguchi was present at various times when KEENAN would

display, upon request, certain Dragon Family financial instruments, which notably included the

very same 2 Japanese Bonds, Nos. A 1306 and A1310, and the same Kennedy Bond, which

comprise a portion of the DFFI that are the focus of this lawsuit.

53. During this period of time, KEENAN and Yamaguchi were welcomed and

entertained in Zurich not only by several legitimate traders, lawyers and Bank representatives,

eager to do business with the Dragon Family and Yamaguchi as the Family'S authorized

signatory. At one meeting with Bank Julius Baer & Co. Ltd. ("Julius Baer"), attended by

KEENAN, Mr. Benny Guttman, Executive Director, went immediately to Yamaguchi and told

him that he had been waiting a long time to meet him. Guttman hosted an elaborate buffet

luncheon in honor of Yamaguchi. After discussions among the group, Guttman asked to review

the DFFI which Yamaguchi had with him. After looking at the instruments, Guttman asked if he

could take them to another room and have copies made. After approximately forty (40) minutes,

Guttman offered Yamaguchi the opportunity to deposit them in Julius Baer. KEENAN was

aware that security was present and that in the event of any determination that the DFFI were not 30


genuine, he and Yamaguchi were subject to':immediate incarceration. This was consistent with

the expectation that The Bank selected by Yamaguchi was expected to act accordingly so that

proper verification of the DFFI would be achieved. Only licensed financial traders would be

considered to act with respect to the DFFI. However, KEENAN and Yamaguchi were also

introduced to many individuals who were mere "brokers" who, as it happened, sought to take

advantage of their exposure to the opportunities presented by the introduction to the Dragon

Family and its significant assets.

54. In connection with these various meetings and myriad other meetings with several

people holding themselves out as traders and Banking representatives, particularly individuals

connected with the Turkish Group, KEENAN and Yamaguchi were led to believe that all

necessary arrangements and Bank verifications had been made in order to establish a PPP

through a Credit Suisse branch in Alstatten, Switzerland. On or about May 18,2009, Yamaguchi

accurately confirmed to Credit Suisse through Assistant Vice President Andre Weishaupt that the

2 Japanese Bonds were cash backed instruments of the Dragon Family under his name. He

represented that the bonds had a total value of $19 billion U.S. dollars, free of liens and

encumbrances. He also requested a Safekeeping Receipt of the bonds that had been deposited on

or about May 15,2009, pending verification from The Bank of Japan and the U. S. Treasury

Department which issued the Kennedy Bond and a joint account was opened for Yamaguchi.

55. Additionally, accounts for the investment of the funds, which were expected to

become available upon the establishment of the PPP and resultant trading profits were opened at

DZ Privatabank in Zurich, as well as Coutts & Co., a private bank whose principal place of doing

business is in London, United Kingdom. Arrangements were also made to set up an account at

the Central Bank of Switzerland, the Swiss National Bank (aka Schweizerische Nationalbank), 31


which subsequently assisted in the verification process regarding the Dragon Family Bonds in

May and early June 2009.

56. During this period of time, which involved several waiting periods while various

related contracts and trading programs were being approved, it was the practice of Yamaguchi

and Watanabe to travel from Switzerland to Carimate, Italy, where they would visit and stay at

the home of their longtime friend, Alessandro Santi ("Santi"). On such trips, the pair would

often travel through the Chiasso railway station, in the canton of Ticino, Switzerland, which is

owned by the Swiss Federal Railways, and serves as a border station between Switzerland and

Italy.

57. On approximately May 24, 2009, after one such trip, the pair had returned from

Carimate, and was staying at the Hilton Hotel Airport in Zurich. While there, they learned that

there had been a maj or change in the personnel involved in completing the transaction with the

Turkish Group that had approached KEENAN several weeks earlier. That Group appeared to

have been replaced as serious questions had arisen about the legitimacy of certain of its

members. However, a new group under the leadership of a Baron von Gise, appeared to be

ready, willing and able to establish a legitimate PPP, or so-called "Sovereign Program."

Yamaguchi and Watanabe thus decided to return to Italy on May 27 to await the completion of

preparations by Baron von Gise.

58. On May 31, 2009, KEENAN and Yamaguchi received news of yet another

setback in their plans and were awaiting confirmation that the details had been worked out in a

satisfactory manner. They were advised that everything would be in place and a Trading

Agreement ready to be executed by Yamaguchi between June 3-5.

32


59. On June 3, 2009, KEENAN was advised by Swiss lawyer Tobias Braegger, who

had acted as the attorney for the Turkish Group, that all necessary preparations would be

completed by the next day and the transaction would be completed within the next week. On the

same day, Yamaguchi advised KEENAN that he would be leaving Italy for a meeting in Madrid

on other business matters.

60. Although KEENAN had been advised during this time period that the Swiss

Central Bank had verified the Kennedy Bond, he was ultimately informed (following the Chiasso

Incident described infra) that both Banca Intesa and the Swiss Reinsurance Company declined to

engage in further transactions regarding it "for political reasons."

61. Despite the failed negotiations with the Turkish Group, and which might have

caused Yamaguchi to exercise more care, Yamaguchi, after receiving a telephone call while

having lunch with Santi and Watanabe in Carimate, suddenly left for the train station and headed

for Spain.

62. On June 4, 2009 Yamaguchi sent an email to KEENAN from Barcelona advising

that he was well, but was otherwise silent as to the events that had transpired upon his departure

from Carimate.

D. The Chiasso Incident

63. In fact, unbeknownst to KEENAN until days later, upon their arrival at Chiasso

on this particular trip, both Yamaguchi and Watanabe were approached directly by the ITALIAN

FINANCIAL POLICE and their bags were searched. The pair was found to be carrying Dragon

Family Instruments (hereinafter, the "DF Chiasso Instruments") virtually identical in content to a

portion of the DFFI, which are the focus of this litigation-in an amount approximating $134.5

Billion U. S. Dollars. Ironically, this was the exact amount that the United States Treasury 33


Department had announced on or about March 30,2009 remained in its Troubled Asset Relief

Program ("TARP"). These instruments included 249 1934 Series Federal Reserve Notes.

(similar to the 249 FRNs entrusted to KEENAN by the Dragon Family, except that they bore

serial nos. D 45183602A to D 45183850A), and 10 Kennedy Bonds issued in 1998 (Nos. API!

025691 A to No. APll 025700 A), each with a face value of One Billion U.S Dollars (as

compared to the 1 Kennedy Bond entrusted to KEENAN).

64. As reported by the Japanese and Italian press at the time, upon arriving at

Chiasso, Yamaguchi and Watanabe were detained by the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE after

attempting to enter Switzerland with "undeclared United States Treasury Bonds concealed in a

suitcase with a false bottom." The Japanese Consulate General in Milan confirmed that the

"detention" had taken place while trying to confirm the men's identities. Eventually, neither

Yamaguchi nor Watanabe were arrested, although their computer and eight telephones were also

confiscated. Reportedly, Yamaguchi advised the authorities that the pair was in possession of

valid historic bonds and that a mistake was being made. According to Japanese press reports,

Yamaguchi and Watanabe were released as they "broke no laws." Upon information and belief,

it was Yamaguchi' s position that since there had been no verification in accordance with the

protocol required by the Federal Reserve system, and no negotiation with the Federal Reserve

concerning the actual value of the financial instruments he was carrying, no laws had been

broken. Charges against the two were expected to be heard before the Procura Della Republica

in Como, Italy in May 2011. According to at least one Italian newspaper, "La Provincia," on or

about June 30, 2011, Yamaguchi and Watanabe were sentenced to three and a half years in

prison for trying to "smuggle" debt securities deemed to be false. The story also reported that

Mr. Santi had bargained in a preliminary hearing for a year and four-month probation on related 34


charges. The Japanese were reportedly provided with an attorney named Campisani in Como.

In March 2010, both Keenan and his attorney offered to assist Attorney Campisani but their

offers to help went unheeded. Upon information and belief, Campisani withdrew from the case

without ever responding to Keenan or his· attorney.

65. Upon information and belief, approximately three years prior to this incident, the

investment banking firm of Goldman Sachs in the United States had formally authenticated the

FRNs entrusted to KEENAN and owned by the Dragon Family, virtually identical to and sharing

the identical history of the FRNs seized at Chiasso. KEENAN believes that all of the 1934

FRNs, including those seized by the Italian authorities at Chiasso, as well as the DFFI entrusted

to KEENAN, were fully backed by United States gold bullion, authentic, and subject to

verification by the Federal Reserve when properly presented by the legitimate holder or their

representative, i.e., plaintiff herein, KEENAN.

66. At the time of the seizure, Colonel Rodolfo Mecarelli, GdF Commander in Como,

Italy, was reported to have stated that the seized DF Chiasso Instruments were very genuine

looking, "meticulous" work, and "indistinguishable" from authentic instruments and were

waiting to be confirmed. Yet, approximately two days after the seizure, the United States

Treasury claimed that the Federal Reserve Notes, which had been seized at Chiasso, were

counterfeit based solely upon its viewing of pictures of the Notes over the Internet. Further,

while confirmation of the DF Chiasso Instruments was still pending, on June 25, 2009, the New

York Times reported on the story and included the statements of a United States Secret Service

spokesman to the effect that the Secret Service had performed an inspection, as required by the

Italian Judiciary, and found that the Instruments were fictitious and had never been issued by the

Federal Reserve or the United States Treasury. Upon information and belief, the assertions that 35


the FRN s seized at Chiasso are not genuine are inaccurate as will be determined through the

verification process through the Federal Reserve System's black screen process.

67. It had been reported that it remains unclear to the Italian authorities how any such

inspections had been carried out and even whether the commission of American experts who

were expected to travel to Italy to perform the inspection, had ever arrived. Further confusing

the facts from reported allegations, it was also reported that the DF Chiasso Instruments were

accompanied by a recent and original bank record from Credit Suisse in Switzerland.

68. Further upon information and belief, soon after the seizure at Chiasso,

representatives of the ITALIAN REPUBLIC approached representatives of the Chinese

Government regarding the possibility of paying the "penalty" (40 % of the value of the seized

Instruments) for the alleged failure to declare the Instruments in crossing the SwisslItalian border

at Chiasso. Further, upon information and belief, the negotiations were halted when it was

suggested that the 40% penalty would be paid, but in return for such payment, the ITALIAN

REPUBLIC would reimburse its debt to China, which debt greatly exceeded the amount of the

penalty Italy demanded for the return of the Chiasso Instruments. Upon information and belief,

The ITALIAN REPUBLIC and the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE have steadfastly declined

to return the DF Chiasso instruments, but have actively and illegally sought to convert such

Instruments for their own benefit, as more fully described herein.

69. Despite the La Provincia newspaper article, an extensive search for the file related

to the seizure at Chiasso by Keenan and his representatives, no such file has been located. Such

representatives were told in August 2011 that the file in Como could not be found because of the

holiday season. In September, although they were told that the file had been transferred to the

centralized system in Rome, they were ultimately advised that "there is no such file." In early 36


October, a telephone call was made to the Justice Department in Rome and direct contact made

with a gentleman who identified himself as Giorgio Divincenzo, Chief Inspector from the GdF.

Mr. Divincenzo was described to appear to be very helpful and reported that he would run the

complete database on Alessandro Santi, Akihiko Yamaguchi and Mitsu Watanabee, all three men

charged at Chiasso. He confirmed that it would have been normal procedure for the Como file to

have been transferred to Rome because two of the defendants were foreigners and translations

would be required. Yet, he reported that nothing could be found on the matter. He further

responded, when asked if there could be any hidden or highly classified files, that he had full

authorization and, as his responsibilities required him to have full and complete access because

of his rank as Chief Inspector, he was also the Interpol liaison officer. He made it eminently

clear that there was no file to be found. Further, there has been no known report or record of the

destruction of the instruments seized at Chiasso which, upon information and belief, would have

been expected given the reported decision of the Court.

E. The Events of July 2009 and the Introduction of DAL BOSCO to KEENAN

70. Upon information and belief, on or about July 9,2009, following a long period of

emails between the two, Mr. Leo Zagami, a self-described 33rd degree Free Mason, who, as of

Apri12008, had reportedly claimed to be the leader of a breakaway faction of the Knights

Templar and high-level Freemasons centered around the elite of the Masonic P2 (Propaganda

Due) Lodge in Monte Carlo, arrived in Japan to speak with Fulford. According to Fulford,

Zagami had claimed to be a representative of the Vatican Illuminati and other European sect

societies and had been looking to make contact with certain Asian Secret Societies. After the

July 2009 meeting, Zagami informed Fulford that he had information that Yamaguchi and

Watanabe had been "set up" at Chiasso and further that he had "inside information" concerning 37


the seizure of the DF Chiasso Instruments. Zagami immediately put Fulford in touch with the

Italian Financial Police who confirmed the authenticity of the seized Instruments.

71. Upon his return to Italy, Zagami contacted Fulford to arrange for a meeting in

Rome where, among other things, they again discussed the Chiasso Incident. At that time,

Zagami introduced Fulford through SKYPE conversations to DAL BOSCO whom Zagami

represented was a trustworthy Vatican Banker and also associated with the P2 Masonic Lodge.

Zagami told Fulford that DAL BOSCO would be able to help "cash the bonds seized by the

Italian Treasury Police."

72. Upon information and belief, Fulford passed this information along to a member

of the British Royal Family who then passed it on to a "group of Asians of royal blood known as

the Dragon Family." On or about February 9, 2010, Zagami sent Fulford another email, on

behalf of an acquaintance, inviting him to Italy and Switzerland to discuss the transfer in

custodianship of the DFFI from KEENAN to DAL BOSCO and other issues.

73. As a result of the FulfordiZagami discussions in or about July 2009, KEENAN

received a request for a meeting from DAL BOSCO, who used Zagami's name as a reference.

KEENAN and DAL BOSCO spoke via Skype conversations on an almost daily basis for

approximately six weeks thereafter until they arranged to meet in Italy in September. During the

course of those discussions, DAL BOSCO represented to KEENAN not only that he was the

financial advisor to Zagami, but also to the Vatican, Vatican City, Rome as well as the Treasurer

of the P2 Masonic P2 Lodge in Rome and Monte Carlo working directly with Zagami.

74. Since the time he took possession of the DFFI, and during the course of his travels

throughout Europe and crossing of international borders, it had been KEENAN's practice to

maintain personal possession of all DFFI in order to avoid possible confiscation or other loss. In 38


the normal course, KEENAN would place the DFFI with hotel security before traveling, for

instance, throughout Italy, Switzerland and Austria, while on his various business ventures.

Over time, and throughout his discussions with DAL BOSCO, KEENAN became convinced that

it was in his best interests and safety, and that of his principal, the Dragon Family, to entrust

DAL BOSCO with custodianship of the DFFI for safekeeping, most especially in light of the

representations DAL BOSCO had made about his own credentials.

75. In early September 2009, KEENAN offered such custodianship to DAL BOSCO,

and by electronic transmission dated September 2, 2009, DAL BOSCO acknowledged to

KEENAN his "ACCEPTANCE" as "Custodian of the Dragon Family Financial Instruments"

and noted, among other things:

(a) I can assure you that you will never regret making this decision. You are aware of the fact I am well trusted and a financial advisor within the Vatican and Mason circles and would never jeopardize my position with them for anything.

(b) My word is my bond and my word is Gold.

( c) I will be waiting for your Zurich arrival so that we can do great things for the world. I understand clearly that I am not to discuss these bonds with anyone outside the immediate circle and my privacy is integral to the success of many nations.

(d) I further understand you are the authorized representative and Power of Attorney for said bonds and I will entrust them believe me as though it was my life depending on it. Therefore I humbly accept the custodianship of said Bonds in which I am only"to return them to either you or Mr. Yamaguchi. Not any other!

( e) Although electronic this email is to be considered my legal binding acceptance of the following bonds:

1. 250 Federal Reserve Notes, Series 1934, Numbers D 45184101 A to 45184350 A, with each having a face value of 500 Million USD each totaling 125 Billion USD.

39


2. Japanese Bonas 57 Series numbers 1306 and 1310 with a value of 19 Billion USD including the interest.

3. 1 Kennedy Bond with a value of $1 Billion USD.

(f) Will be ready when called upon to deliver said notes to you. Thank you once again for your kindness.

Yours truly, Daniele Dal Bosco

Italian Passport C 165124

76. On or about September 8, 2009, KEENAN flew to Italy to meet with his very

close friend, Alessandro Santi, with whom Yamaguchi had met prior to the seizure at Chiasso in

June. It was arranged that DAL BOSCO would meet KEENAN and Santi in Milan, as DAL

BOSCO wanted to speak with Santi about his knowledge of the Chiasso Incident.

77. On September 9, 2009 DAL BOSCO took a train into Carimate and KEENAN

and Santi picked him up at the train station. This was the first time KEENAN had met DAL

BOSCO personally. At this time, the Milan Fashion Show was taking place which was being

attended by DAL BOSCO's girlfriend, Alessia. After the Fashion Show ended, the group

traveled to Rome where DAL BOSCO offered to intercede on behalf of Santi with people he

claimed to know were associated with the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE and the Italian

Government, including former Italian Prime Minister, Silvio BERLUSCONI.

78. Upon information and belief, thereafter, according to DAL BOSCO, he visited

with the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE who advised him that the financial instruments that

had been confiscated at Chiasso were authentic, but that Santi had been charged with illegal

possession of certain bonds. DAL BOSCO further reported that the Italian Government, -through

BERLUSCONI, was demanding 400/0 of the instruments' face value for their return. KEENAN

was already aware of that information. 40


79. Throughout this period of time, KEENAN was working on coordinating efforts to

carry out his instructions regarding the intended proper placement of the DFFI with which he had

been entrusted for the benefit of certain European countries and business entities for investment

in recognized PPPs. For instance, on or about September 13,2009, Mr. Stanley Somberg

(hereinafter "Somberg"), a personal friend of KEENAN, flew into Rome to spend a few days

with KEENAN and for a planned trip with KEENAN to Vienna, Austria.

80. DAL BOSCO joined KEENAN and Samberg on the trip to Austria. On that trip,

KEENAN closely observed DAL BOSCO, whose words and actions appeared to justify

KEENAN's decision to entrust the DFFI to DAL BOSCO and corroborated his representations

that he was associated with the Monte Carlo P2 Masonic Lodge and a financial advisor to the

Vatican. DAL BOSCO spoke freely to Somberg and KEENAN about his connections with the

Vatican and the Italian Government. However, it was also during that trip that DAL BOSCO

told KEENAN that he had "good news" for him. Upon inquiry, DAL BOSCO explained that he

had received a call from a friend inside The ITALIAN POLICE (GdF) who had informed DAL

BOSCO that the GdF was willing to sell back the DF Chiasso.lnstruments for 10% of their face

value. KEENAN responded that he doubted that the Dragon Family would be interested in

buying back its own Bonds and reminded DAL BOSCO that he had no power of attorney to act

on behalf of the Dragon Family with regard to those Instruments and that his designated mission

and authority was to place only the DFFI with which he had been entrusted into a legally

recognized PPP.

81. Upon their return to Switzerland, on or about September 18,2009, prior to

KEENAN's departure for the Zurich airport and return home to Bulgaria, KEENAN physically

entrusted the DFFI to DAL BOSCO, as had been planned and acknowledged by DAL BOSCO. 41


82. On subsequent and frequent trips to Zurich, DAL BOSCO would meet KEENAN

at the Hilton Hotel Airport and place the DFFI in KEENAN's possession until KEENAN's

departure at which time KEENAN would again entrust the DFFI to DAL BOSCO.

F. Negotiation for Placement of the DFFI into a Private Program

1. The Introduction to H. Edward Wales

83. KEENAN subsequently traveled to Zurich on or about January 16,2010 for

meetings with people whom he believed could help in the placement of the Federal Reserve

Notes or the Kennedy Bond, which comprised part of the DFFI, into a qualified PPP. KEENAN

remained in Zurich until February 13,2010. On or about January 29,2010, KEENAN took DAL

BOSCO with him to meet with financial trade arranger H. Edward Wales (hereinafter "Wales")

in Geneva, Switzerland at the Intercontinental Hotel.

84. The meeting with Wales was arranged through a telephone call and email

communication to Wales from Sonya Nikolova Alexieva, a citizen and resident of Bulgaria.

Also attending the meeting was Javad Moharr, an Iranian citizen, and a resident of Switzerland.

The purpose of the meeting originally was to discuss the placement of the two (2) Japanese

Bonds into international trade through a qualified and legal PPP. However, at the meeting,

KEENAN requested DAL BOSCO, who was physically holding the entire DFFI portfolio for

KEENAN, to show the portfolio, including the Federal Reserve Notes and the Kennedy Bond, to

Wales. KEENAN inquired of Wales whether he could also arrange for a trading program which

would include these instruments as well. This was the first time Wales had seen an original

Kennedy Bond, and he informed KEENAN that he would like to concentrate on the Japanese

Bonds, but would be interested in further examination of the FRN s and Kennedy Bond for

potential use in a PPP. Wales gave the portfolio back to KEENAN, who then gave them to DAL 42


BOSCO, and instructed DAL BOSCO to sehd copies via email to Wales for his further review

and recommendations. DAL BOSCO was in possession of the instruments when everyone left

the hotel.

85. In accordance with KEENAN's instruction, on or about February 3, 2010, DAL

BOSCO forwarded copies of the documents of the DFFI via e-mail to Wales. On at least two

other occasions, DAL BOSCO also brought the DFFI to additional meetings in Zurich,

Switzerland in line with his role as Custodian, and in order to facilitate KEENAN's plan of

placing the DFFI into a PPP.

G. Doubts DAL BOSCO

86. Upon information and belief, unbeknownst'to KEENAN, after considerable

pUblicity throughout Europe and Asia following the Chiasso Incident, DAL BOSCO became

intent not only on learning more about the Dragon Family and, in particular, the nature and value

of the various Financial Instruments owned by the Dragon Family, but diligently began to

research how such Instruments were utilized in the international global finance system. DAL

BOSCO's interest intensified when he learned through his contacts in the ITALIAN

GOVERNMENT and THE ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE that the Federal Reserve Notes and

Kennedy Bonds owned by the Dragon Family and seized at Chiasso were genuine. Further,

cognizant of the fact that he was legally unauthorized and thus unable to negotiate in any lawful

transaction regarding the DFFI entrusted to him by KEENAN, without the authority of

KEENAN andlor Yamaguchi on behalf of the Dragon Family, DAL BOSCO sought assistance

from various other sources and contacts, in order to act upon and perpetrate a fraud in connection

with the sale or placement of the DFFI in the global marketplace through stealth, conversion and

bribery. 43


87. DAL·BOSCO's research and connections ultimately led to his introduction to

defendants SALE and OITC. As revealed by an OITC spokesman and published to the world at

large on or about January 3, 2011, on Fulford's Internet website, the assertion that, following

initial communications from DAL BOSCO on February 2,2010, defendant DAM executed a

written agreement with DAL BOSCO on March 16, 2010. This agreement acknowledged that

OITC was fully aware ofDAL BOSCO's intentions to steal the DFFI from KEENAN and place

them in the possession of OITC which would claim ownership pursuant to its alleged authority

under the provisions of its claimed U.N. Charter and the D.N.'s "sovereign immunity"

protections.

88. Upon information and belief, DAL BOSCO's connections in Europe included

defendant BRUNO and the WEF who, in turn, had direct contacts with defendant the UNITED

NATIONS. Thereafter, as set forth in more detail below, the various defendants entered into

various criminal schemes and enterprises whereby DAL BOSCO would knowingly betray,

violate and breach all of his previously acknowledged fiduciary duties to KEENAN and thereby

the Dragon Family, by stealing the DFFI and converting possession of the DFFI for their own

selfish, criminal and personal financial gain.

89. During KEENAN's stay in Zurich in the January-February 2010 time period,

DAL BOSCO suddenly and surprisingly advised KEENAN that he had made contact with high

level UNITED NATIONS officials, through the assistance of BRUNO and the WEF, whereby

DAL BOSCO and KEENAN could receive One-Hundred ($100,000,000.00) Million D. S.

Dollars for all of the United States Federal Reserve Notes contained in the DFFI. The offer did

44


not include the Japanese Bonds or the Kennedy Bond which, as described, form a portion of the

DFFI.

90. DAL BOSCO asked KEENAN if he wanted to pursue this offer but stated that, as

a condition, neither Yamaguchi nor the Dragon Family could be involved and that the UN did

not want Yamaguchi involved. KEENAN emphatically rejected any interest, noting further that

the Federal Reserve Notes were not his to sell.

91. DAL BOSCO told KEENAN that "I assure you this is our best deal and my friend

Giancarlo from the Economic Forum stands behind it. He went to see our friends in the

UNITED NATIONS and this is very delicate but can be done but nothing for Yamaguchi or the

Dragon Family." DAL BOSCO further stated that Yamaguchi would not only never know the

DFFI had been stolen but that the rightful owners, the Dragon Family, would "never be able to

receive ONE CENT" from the transaction. Further, upon information and belief, the DFFI

would be invested directly through the UN and its Sovereign Program and that the transaction

"was all set up" and "no questions would be asked." DAL BOSCO also expressed a great

reluctance to discuss the UN or BRUNO's involvement and stated that no one would ever get to

speak to BRUNO or his ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE or Vatican connections.

H. The Speaker Telephone Conference Call between DAL BOSCO and BRUNO

92. Following Dal Bosco's report to KEENAN of the offer from the UN and

BRUNO, and while still in Zurich in early February 2010, KEENAN had gathered several close

business associates and friends for a routine meeting/luncheon in the VIP Room on the 5th floor

at the Hilton Zurich Airport Hotel in which he stayed regularly while on business in Zurich.

KEENAN was accompanied by DAL BOSCO, with whom he was working on the aforesaid

potential transaction involving the Japanese Bonds with Wales. Other guests of KEENAN 45


included Nikolai Raykov, a Canadian citizen (hereinafter, "Raykov"), Vasil Ganov, a Bulgarian

citizen (hereinafter, "Ganov"), Ognyan Marinov, (hereinafter, "Marinov"), also a Bulgarian

citizen and retired Intelligence officer, as well as Walter Berens (hereinafter, "Berens"), a citizen

of Germany. At one point, DAL BOSCO arranged to place a telephone call via speaker phone to

a man whom he identified as Giancarlo BRUNO. DAL BOSCO indicated to those present that

the call was intended for KEENAN's ears only but that they could listen to the call. During the

course of the call, the man who was identified as BRUNO stated that he could arrange to "put

$100 Million USD into KEENAN's hands if KEENAN agreed to it." KEENAN, who has

always been told that any involvement participation by BRUNO must be kept a secret, was thus

caught off guard when a call of this nature was to take place, was disgusted with the call and

walked away from the table while DAL BOSCO continued the call with the man he identified as

BRUNO.

1. Recollections of Mr. Raykov

93. In a private discussion with DAL BOSCO in a hallway outside the meeting room,

Raykov expressed concern and doubt that the man whose voice was heard on the speaker phone

was actually BRUNO. DAL BOSCO asked Raykov if he had any idea who BRUNO was and

Raykov responded in the negative. DAL BOSCO then repeated that BRUNO could arrange for a

$100 Million USD payment to KEENAN, if KEENAN agreed to it.

94. Further, after the advice he received from DAL BOSCO, Raykov asked DAL

BOSCO ifhe could speak with BRUNO and was told that he could, but only from a pay phone

and not a cell phone. Raykov proceeded to drive with DAL BOSCO to the airport in a taxi and

DAL BOSCO then placed a call to BRUNO who spoke directly with Raykov. BRUNO told

46


Raykov that if he could convince KEENAN to take the money, he would make sure that

Raykov's family would be set for life.

95. During this telephone conversation, BRUNO said that the DFFI would "be placed

into a federal program using the UN as protection" along with "his company" which would

"generate unlimited capital for everyone involved." BRUNO assured Raykov that "there would

be no problems and that this was being blessed by the UNITED NATIONS" which "would

protect everyone" as the DFFI would be "placed into a Sovereign Program" after which the DFFI

"would disappear" and "there would be no questions asked."

96. Remaining somewhat skeptical that the person he had just spoken with was

actually BRUNO, Raykov told DAL BOSCO that he did not believe him. DAL BOSCO

thereupon called the number again and told Raykov to listen. The person speaking identified

himself as Giancarlo BRUNO. DAL BOSCO also gave Raykov a telephone number in New

York to call when Raykov was in the United States. Raykov, in fact, called the telephone

number he was given while in New York in July and the call was answered by BRUNO. Raykov

told BRUNO he was just checking the telephone number he had been provided by DAL BOSCO.

BRUNO then advised Raykov that DAL BOSCO had taken the DFFI which had been entrusted

to him by KEENAN and "now more than ever" Raykov was needed to speak with KEENAN to

try to convince him to cooperate with DAL BOSCO and BRUNO.

97. Raykov subsequently told KEENAN to be careful and that "the wolves are

surrounding him." KEENAN told Raykov not to get involved. Raykov spoke again with DAL

BOSCO and told him "to forget" about persuading KEENAN to cooperate with him. DAL

BOSCO responded that KEENAN would regret that as he "was no longer in possession" of the

DFFI. 47


2. Recollections of Mr. Gano-.v

98. Ganov recalls that following the telephone call, he inquired ofDAL BOSCO what

he would receive from this "transaction" and DAL BOSCO responded that he would receive

50% of KEENAN's $100 Million USD, the total amount of which would be placed into a

Sovereign Program by the UN and that they would each receive 2000/0 monthly returns minimum

from the total "investment" of$100 Million USD. DAL BOSCO was then asked how much the

UN, WEF, BRUNO and OITC would receive, and he responded that this was not KEENAN's

business and not to ask because "it can only cause trouble." DAL BOSCO stated that the Notes

would be placed into. the "Sovereign Program by the UN" and then, after a completed program,

that the Notes would be returned to their "owners," the OITC. DAL BOSCO also urged Ganov

to help him convince KEENAN to participate in his scheme.

99. DAL BOSCO informed Ganov that "everyone was also protected by the Italian

Financial Police and the Italian Government itself." DAL BOSCO boasted about his position as

Financial Advisor to the Vatican and Treasurer of the Masons and that "nothing could go

wrong."

100. Ganov and Berens also told KEENAN that they thought DAL BOSCO's

placement of the call in a public, rather than a private setting was ill-advised and put BRUNO,

whom they considered to be an important man, in a very bad light. Ganov thought DAL BOSCO

was playing the role of a salesman trying to sell something to all present. Raykov told Ganov

that he thought DAL BOSCO was a thief and that he thought DAL BOSCO was hiding the truth

from KEENAN and was using BRUNO and the UN to assist him in his scheme. Ganov told

KEENAN that he did not trust DAL BOSCO and was assured by KEENAN that he had no

48


interest in DAL BOSCO's "offer" and that his goal was not only to protect the DFFI but also to

get them placed into a proper PPP.

101. During KEENAN's trip to Zurich, Ganov asked if he could view the DFFI and

DAL BOSCO retrieved them for viewing. Ganov inquired as to their authenticity and DAL

BOSCO responded that the UN had verified their authenticity. Ganov also inquired about

Yamaguchi, and DAL BOSCO stated that he was a powerful, but unpopular man and that the UN

would not do business with him.

102. In discussions with DAL BOSCO, Ganov was informed that BRUNO was

prepared to pay "100 Million Dollars by Friday if things worked right" and should

KEENAN consent to the transaction. When Ganov commented that he thought KEENAN would

be jeopardized by any involvement in such a transaction, DAL BOSCO responded that "no one

can get in trouble ... it is perfect ... the UN protects everyone under their shield." Ganov was

also told by DAL BOSCO that most of the plans and communications were made between him,

BRUNO and the UN, either through BRUNO's private New York cell phone or his New York

office. DAL BOSCO also stated, in response to Ganov's questions about KEENAN's security,

were the Dragon Family to learn of any possible involvement by KEENAN, that "they will not

receive one cent so they will never know" and further that the DFFI "do not belong to the

Dragon Family but to OITC."

103. During this trip, Ganov had also asked KEENAN if he thought DAL BOSCO

could assist him and his business associates, who were present with him, on another proj ect on

which they were working in Italy. KEENAN responded that he thought DAL BOSCO might

have the ability to help and arrangements and introductions were made.

49


104. Ultimately, not only did Ganbv become aware that DAL BOSCO had stolen the

DFFI, but he also learned that DAL BOSCO had tried to swindle Ganov on his other business

deal on which DAL BOSCO purported to assist his group. KEENAN departed for Bulgaria on

February 13,2010.

3. Recollections of Mr. Ognyan Marinov

105. A highly respected retired Intelligence officer from the Country of Bulgaria,

Marinov, corroborates much of the foregoing, as he was also in attendance at the February 2010

meeting with DAL BOSCO at the Hilton Airport Hotel in Zurich. DAL BOSCO had apparently

been made aware of Marinov' s Intelligence background and approached him for a private

conversation. Believing KEENAN and DAL BOSCO were close friends, Marinov acceded to

the request. Marinov has stated that he shortly came to believe DAL BOSCO was engaged in a

plot to steal the DFFI with which he had been entrusted.

4. Raykov Meeting with BRUNO and DAL BOSCO in Geneva in May 2010

106. Months later, while in Geneva on business with some of his associates, Raykov

called DAL BOSCO for a social visit. DAL BOSCO, upon answering the call, asked Raykov to

meet him at the Balexert Mall in Switzerland and indicated that "he had to speak" with Raykov.

Upon DAL BOSCO's arrival with his girlfriend, Alessia, Raykov asked DAL BOSCO what he

wanted to speak about, and DAL BOSCO advised him to wait and he would see for himself.

107. Approximately 15 minutes later, a man came to the table at which Raykov and the

others were sitting, presented his business card, and introduced himself as Giancarlo BRUNO.

DAL BOSCO asked Raykov for the card saying an exchange of business cards "was not

necessary." BRUNO asked DAL BOSCO if Raykov "was assisting them yet." DAL BOSCO

replied that he had asked Raykov to meet with BRUNO because he wanted BRUNO to speak 50


directly to Raykov. BRUNO, speaking free'iy, told Raykov that KEENAN "was stupid for not

taking the 100 MILLION US DOLLARS" and that "things had been in the planning stages for

awhile and were about to be completed with or without KEENAN." BRUNO again asked

Raykov if he would help convince KEENAN to take the money that was offered and Raykov

responded that he could not and that KEENAN would not listen to him. BRUNO responded:

"Not even for 500 Million US Dollars?"

108. Raykov continued to listen to BRUNO's description of the details of how the

DFFI were received and were planned to be placed into a financial program and that "no one

would know anything." BRUNO said that "it would be silent" and after the completion of the

program, the DFFI would be given back to the owners, who DAL BOSCO identified as OITC.

BRUNO told Raykov "there would be no chance of trouble" and that the UN "provided them

with immunity as well did OITC."

109. BRUNO then told Raykov that he would only speak with him, if Raykov "called

his New York office" as New York was "protected" from eavesdropping, unlike Geneva.

BRUNO asked if Raykov "was in or out" and Raykov responded that "I would see." Raykov has

not spoken with BRUNO since this conversation.

5. Marinov Meeting with BRUNO and DAL BOSCO in Geneva in May 2010

110. In late May 2010, Marinov met DAL BOSCO at the Intercontinental Hotel in

Geneva, who introduced him to a gentleman he identified as Giancarlo BRUNO from the World

Economic Forum. Although Marinov extended his business card to BRUNO, DAL BOSCO

discouraged such an exchange. It was the impression of Marinov that DAL BOSCO was

deferential to BRUNO, whom Marinov considered being "highly intelligent" and who was

clearly "running the show." BRUNO proceeded to explain how the Davos Program had 51


achieved such success and seemed to Marinov would be welcome at future meetings

at Davos. BRUNO proceeded to boast about various dignitaries with whom he had done

business, such as former President Bill Clinton, Henry Kissinger and Alan Greenspan.

111. BRUNO then began to speak about "what they wanted to do with the Bonds or

Notes Mr. KEENAN was holding for the Dragon Family and who was involved." BRUNO

specifically named RAGAGLINI, MlRACHIAN and BERLUSCONI, and the ITALIAN

FINANCIAL POLICE and commented: "so you see there is no possible way we can have a

problem. We can cloak ourselves with the immunity shield and everyone will go away. Just

another day in the UN!"

112. Marinov asked BRUNO to explain what he was talking about and BRUNO

responded: "we want you to get KEENAN to give the bonds to us for 100 Million USD. We

have better uses for the notes than KEENAN would ever dream of nor would he release them to

us so readily. So we need your help."

113. DAL BOSCO then explained that he had approached others for help but that

KEENAN would not relinquish the bonds, although a "Sovereign Program" was all set up. It

was evident to Marinov that his status as a Bulgarian Intelligence Officer might influence

KEENAN's decision to cooperate in the scheme DAL BOSCO and BRUNO were openly

discussing.

114. As Marinov grew increasingly uncomfortable with the volume of telephone calls

being made and received by BRUNO, after approximately 45 minutes, he was introduced by

both BRUNO and DAL BOSCO to defendant MlRACHIAN, whom he found to be pleasant and

intelligent. In response to questions posed to her by BRUNO, MlRACHIAN stated that:

(i). "from the very top we were protected"; 52


(ii). "there was no reason lor anyone, including KEENAN, to worry

about any sort of repercussions";

(iii). "the Italian cohorts in New York had even approved the matter

with Secretary General BAN KI-moon 'but of course he will deny

any such matter if questioned!'"

115. Marinov had the clear understanding that what was being discussed was an

"Italian conspiracy to steal the Bonds with approval being granted by the Secretary General,

BAN KI-moon himself." BRUNO proceeded to take the position that "this is not a very large

undertaking ... in accordance to UN standards" and he then stated that the UN was "in the

process of confiscating Trillions and Trillions of Dollars in assets within the next couple of

months and no one could do anything about it." When Marinov inquired as to whether the

money being confiscated belonged to the UN, BRUNO responded "of course not!"

116. Marinov was convinced that DAL BOSCO and BRUNO needed his help to try to

persuade KEENAN to cooperate with DAL BOSCO to accomplish what DAL BOSCO and

BRUNO were proposing, especially in light of KEENAN's transfer of the DFFI to DAL BOSCO

the previous September. DAL BOSCO indicated that he was considering taking the Bonds and

using them for undisclosed purposes without KEENAN's permission but that he was reluctant to

do so as KEENAN might ask for them to be produced and DAL BOSCO might "find himself in

a bad spot." DAL BOSCO, however, went on to volunteer that there were "future plans" for the

Bonds. This necessitated that KEENAN turn them over "so that no one could cause a ruckus

claiming they were stolen from them." According to BRUNO, "not anyone could withstand such

scrutiny" thus "they were trying to buy The Bank of Lugano in Switzerland to hide such things

as stolen instruments." When Marinov asked who was buying the Bank, he was told "the 53


ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, BERLUSCONI and others" which would allow them to "trade

the many instruments stolen over the years by the Italian Financial Police and trade them from

the Swiss Bank and no one would be the wiser." It was apparent to Marinov that DAL BOSCO

and BRUNO saw it most advantageous to their conspiracy to gain KEENAN's cooperation and

participation "with the entire scheme already in motion," which KEENAN has steadfastly

refused to do.

117. In conclusion, Marinov witnessed the dialing of aNew York City telephone

exchange and placement of a telephone call by DAL BOSCO and BRUNO to RAGAGLINI in

New York. Marinov heard them ask "if everyone was ready to do the Bond deal" and he

confirms that RAGAGLINI stated that "the Powers that be in New York had no problems with

the actions about to be taken so long as some candy was tossed to them." Further, RAGAGLINI

acknowledged that BAN KI-moon "was on board and approved the plan so everything was in

place but KEENAN." RAGAGLINI concluded by asking Marinov "to rope KEENAN in

because it was necessary for success." Although compensation for Marinov's services was

discussed, no exact amount was ever mentioned. Marinov took no actions attempting to

persuade KEENAN to cooperate with the aforesaid scheme, and KEENAN has continuously

refused all overtures from the Defendants to participate in their illegal actions.

6. Berens' Telephone Call from DAL BOSCO in August 2010

118. KEENAN has known and conducted business with Berens for several years. He

is known to KEENAN to be highly respected and trustworthy. Berens was also present in

February 2010 at the Hilton Zurich Airport Hotel for the business luncheon arranged by

KEENAN. He was present when DAL BOSCO, whom he had met with KEENAN in the recent

months prior thereto, placed a telephone call via speaker phone to BRUNO in New York. He 54


heard DAL BOSCO asking KEENAN ifhe:wanted to do a "deal with the UN" which "involved

MR. BRUNO, very high ranking friends of Mr. BRUNO's and DAL BOSCO in the UN."

Berens heard DAL BOSCO tell KEENAN that they "could take the 100 Million Dollars as early

as Friday that week." KEENAN rejected the offer.

119. Subsequently, in August 2010, Berens received a telephone call from DAL

BOSCO who asked him if he would make contact with KEENAN to "once again" offer the 100

Million USD that had been previously offered in February in Zurich. Berens responded that it

was his understanding that KEENAN no longer held the Bonds and that DAL BOSCO "had run

with them." DAL BOSCO replied that he did possess the Bonds and "would not give control of

them until he knew he was safe." DAL BOSCO added that "if KEENAN took the money

everything would be better" and stated that "he is a good Christian who might have made some

very bad mistakes that could hurt a lot of people." DAL BOSCO mentioned he was even having

trouble with his girlfriend because of the situation, including Internet reports of what he had

done. He again stated that "if KEENAN would take the money it makes everything go away and

everyone can go back to things the way they were."

120. Berens inquired as to the authenticity of the Bonds and DAL BOSCO stated:

"Believe me, the UN has checked them out and they are very real. I gave them one bond to

check." Berens suggested to DAL BOSCO that he call KEENAN directly, to which he

responded that KEENAN would prefer to "hang him not speak with him." DAL BOSCO again

acknowledged his mistakes but that it was "impossible to take it all back seeing it had been

done." Berens ultimately asked DAL BOSCO precisely what he wanted him to inquire of

KEENAN so that he did not make any mistakes. DAL BOSCO responded that "100 Million

USD would be given to KEENAN immediately upon giving the Bonds to Mr. Giancarlo 55


BRUNO from the World Economic Forum who would then "take the Bonds and give them to

BRUNO and DAL BOSCO's friends in the UNITED NATIONS to take into the Federal

Sovereign Program for Trade," after which the bonds would be "given back to their rightful

owners the Organization (sic) of International Treasury Control so everyone ended up happy."

DAL BOSCO added that "taking part in this was Leo Zagami and the P2 Lodge in Rome."

121. Berens contacted KEENAN in September 2010 to inquire about the status of the

DAL BOSCO situation and asked about the bribe offer. KEENAN responded that "this was an

attempt at theft and nothing more." KEENAN also confirmed what DAL BOSCO had

previously told Berens, namely that the 100 Million USD would be split between KEENAN and

DAL BOSCO which DAL BOSCO wanted to place in another trading program to generate

capital and then enter into various programs and projects. KEENAN said that the Bonds were

"not his to give or sell" and that the UN had acknowledged their authenticity and that Yamaguchi

was well known as the comptroller/signature of the Dragon Family. KEENAN stated that the

transaction he was working on was "to help countries not the UN, OITC, the WORLD

ECONOMIC FORUM or BRUNO" and that "the returns would be greater for everyone involved

and the Dragon Family would receive a great return for their humanitarian projects."

I. The Continuing Duplicity and Ultimate Betrayal by DAL BOSCO March-June 2010

122. In or about March 2010, DAL BOSCO, in conversations with KEENAN, began to

intimate and suggest that he was continuing discussions within the UN about the negotiation of

the Federal Reserve Notes, but erroneously noted that the Japanese Bonds and the Kennedy

Bond were "government bonds" which could only be traded or negotiated between governments

and that it was illegal for any individual to possess them or to attempt to trade them. KEENAN

56


immediately rebuffed any suggestions that the Federal Reserve Notes be dealt with in any

unlawful manner.

123. KEENAN subsequently learned that Zag ami had informed Fulford on or about

June 19,2010 that DAL BOSCO had gone into the Swiss mountains in the vicinity of Stein,

Switzerland, with "some key members of the Swiss Illuminati" a year earlier to discuss, among

other things, the destruction of the Papacy. Thereafter, KEENAN was concerned that DAL

BOSCO might disappear on a whim.

124. In various conversations throughout April and May 2010, KEENAN reiterated to

DAL BOSCO that he was currently working on placing the Japanese Bonds only in a legally

recognized PPP through Mr. Wales in Geneva, Switzerland, and had no active plans for the

investment or placement of the Federal Reserve Notes or the Kennedy Bond. KEENAN kept

DAL BOSCO abreast of his efforts regarding his working with his connections in China and

Japan whereby the Bank of China would place 9.5 Billion Dollars as cash backing for the two (2)

Japanese Bonds upon verification by the Bank of Japan. KEENAN considered DAL BOSCO to

be more than a mere custodian of the DFFI, but a confidante and friend. However, KEENAN

had also been sensing a change in DAL BOSCO's attitude and demeanor, such as increasingly

frequent comments such as he "had to tell me something" but could never articulate what it was.

KEENAN slowly sensed the DFFI were in jeopardy under DAL BOSCO's control.

125. At the same time KEENAN was working to achieve the placement of the

Japanese Bonds into a trading program, he was also attempting to place the Federal Reserve

Notes into another program which would assist the United States and certain European countries.

In connection therewith, on or about May 19,2010, KEENAN reminded DAL BOSCO that he

57


would soon need the Japanese Bonds and that he might also have a deal for the Federal Reserve

Notes.

126. While DAL BOSCO continued to mention the "offer" from the UN, KEENAN

reiterated that the purported proposal by the UN was not acceptable legally or ethically. He told

DAL BOSCO to "forget it" and that he was only going to transact business lawfully through Mr.

Wales. It was made clear that KEENAN and the Dragon Family had arranged for the DFFI to be

used as collateral with the Bank of China, and that Wales had been requested to seek to invest

the DFFI in a recognized PPP.

127. At all relevant times leading up to the month of June 2010, KEENAN would

advise DAL BOSCO whenever he needed the DFFI for presentation at a business meeting and at

all times DAL BOSCO complied. However, beginning in or about May 2010, KEENAN

observed that DAL BOSCO had consciously decided to change apartments in Rome as if to

confuse KEENAN as to his whereabouts and, as it transpired, in order to avoid contact and

ultimately to disappear.

128. In conversations in early June 2010, indicated clearly to DAL BOSCO

his hopes of coordinating a transaction involving three European countries and expressed his

desire that DAL BOSCO participate in the venture. DAL BOSCO again reiterated the aforesaid

offer from the UN to buy the FRNs for $100 Million USD, but KEENAN again rejected the

notion and warned that the UN was acting unlawfully with respect to its planned disposition of

the DFFI.

58


129. On or about June 8,2010, KEENAN advised DAL BOSCO directly that his

associate, Mr. Joseph Bendana (hereinafter "Bendana"), an American citizen, would be traveling

to Geneva, Switzerland to retrieve the entire DFFI in order that they would be available for their

intended purposes.

J. The OITC Cease and Desist Order of June 8, 2010 (the "OITC Order")

130. Oddly, at or about the time that DAL BOSCO was advised by KEENAN that

Bendana would be flying to Geneva to retrieve the DFFI, or on or about June 8, 2010, the OITC

"served electronically" a "Cease And Desist" Order (hereinafter, the "OITC Order") purportedly

issued by "His Excellency, Dr. Ray C. Dam, International Treasury Controller 10-60847,"

representing, among other things, that DAM was appointed to that position under United Nations

Charter Control No: 10-60847 and UN International Clearing Code: UNRCD-ID006197. The

OITC order, among other things, stated that KEENAN, Yamaguchi and Watanabe "together with

all associates, colleagues" were to "Cease and Desist" from "attempting to handle various Master

Accounts and Assets of the Combined International Collateral Accounts of the Global Debt

Facility, which incorporates the Dragon Funds, without any Official Authority or Approval

whatsoever; which are legally owned under full Legal International Laws/International Treaty/

Convention Laws, as herein referred, by the aforementioned and referenced International

Treasury Controller." (Emphasis added)

131. Further, the OITC Order, among other things, directed the individuals to

"Immediately Surrender All" certificates, assets, or otherwise held in their possession on or

before July 7,2010.

132. On the day after the OITC Order was published, DAL BOSCO, feigning fear,

contacted KEENAN to advise that he had received a copy of the OITC Order by email and asked 59


KEENAN how OITC had obtained his email address. In fact, DAL BOSCO had aided in the

orchestration of the OITC Order and was neither in fear nor surprised by its issuance. He had

inquired about OITC from KEENAN as early as January 2010 and was told OITC was a

fraudulent organization. Further, DAL BOSCO had referred to OITC as the "owners" of the

FRNs in his discussions with Vasil Ganov in February 2010 in Zurich (see 102, supra) and

with Nikolai Raykov in Geneva in May 2010 (see 108, supra). KEENAN responded that he

had no idea and questioned how OITC even had his own email address.

133. At various other times DAL BOSCO advised KEENAN and others that he was

not returning the DFFI, but rather had placed the DFFI in the possession of his attorney

(unidentified) until the situation had been clarified in order to take the time necessary to "decide

what to do with them." Further, on June 22,2010, in a conversation with Fulford, DAL BOSCO

affirmatively stated that he was alternatively "working with the Police and the UN" as well as

"with Interpol." Fulford asked for the name ofDAL BOSCO's attorney or the names of the

Interpol person with whom he was in contact so that Fulford could "get the Japanese security

police to contact them on behalf of the Japanese government." DAL BOSCO responded that he . .

should "contact OITC @ [email protected] and explain what they want to do."

134. DAL BOSCO also advised KEENAN that he was communicating with

representatives from Interpol, but again refused to provide details of names or contact numbers.

Ultimately, he told KEENAN: "Buddy, the Bonds do not belong to the Dragon Family. They

belong to OITC."

135. On June 9, 2010, KEENAN notified the OITC bye-mail that he was in receipt of

the OITC Order and asked three questions, as follows:

60


1. What is your role or responsibility, or involvement in the bonds? Please be more descriptive.

2. Who is the party or persons that have provided you with our names?

3. What gives you the authority to issue such a Cease and Desist" document (PDF files?).

136. KEENAN further demanded detailed responses within 24 hours together with a

reservation of rights regarding future civil or criminal actions.

137. On or about June 9, 2010, DAL BOSCO contacted KEENAN and expressed his

own personal fear and his inability to make a decision regarding the DFFI. KEENAN assured

DAL BOSCO that he had done nothing wrong, that the OITC was a fraudulent entity and that,

despite its outward representations, enjoyed no protection, sanction, affiliation or approval from

either the UN, the Federal Reserve Board, or the BIS, and that any licensing it might once have

enjoyed had been nullified several years prior.

138. KEENAN told DAL BOSCO to ignore the OITC Order pointing out that DAL

BOSCO was not even named in the document. KEENAN did inquire of DAL BOSCO how the

OITC obtained his email address and DAL BOSCO denied my knowledge, although KEENAN

was aware that DAL BOSCO had prior communications with OITC.

139. On June 10, 2010, OITC sent a letter via email toKEENANwherein.interalia.it

"strongly advised" KEENAN not to ignore the OITC Order and to review "our Website

(www.unoitc.org) and in particular the Video Presentation ... " and further "adhere to the content

ofC&D Notice IOrder ... and comprehend what you are actually involved in." Additionally,

purporting to answer the questions put forth by KEENAN in his letter, OITC stated, in part, that

"The Bonds are issued against the Dragon Funds, whereby the Bonds are collateralized by the

61


Dragon Funds. The Dragon Funds are part of the Combined International Collateral Accounts of

the Global Debt Facility of which H.E. Dr. R. C. Dam (of Royal family origin) is the Legal Heir,

Owner, Sole Arbiter as appointed by the Nations of the World (January 20, 1995) to replace the

Trilateral Trillenium Tripartite Gold Commission established January 1945 with a Fifty (50) year

term, expiring in 1995."

140. The OITC also responded to KEENAN's letter by stating, in response to the

question as to who had provided OITC with the names in the OITC Order, that "This is

privileged information and cannot be disclosed." As to the third question posed by KEENAN as

to what gave the OITC the authority to issue its Order, OITC responded:

Our ownership of the Dragon Funds, being part of the Combined International Collateral Accounts of the Global Debt Facility, and our international status combined with our International Authority as granted, attested to, and formally issued by the Nations of the World.

The OITC letter concluded with a warning that the "impertinent mannerisms" in which

KEENAN had allegedly "approached this matter" would not be tolerated as it shows "an

insulting and arrogant attitude towards a Sovereign Entity which is legally chartered

under the United Nations and recognized by all Nations . . :" (Emphasis added) and was

signed:

Yours faithfully,

D.A. Sale, F. LLA. Special Global Envoy, Senior Commercial Advisor to H.E. The Chairman The Office of International Treasury Control, UN Charter Control No: 10-60847

141. On June 14,2010, KEENAN responded with a letter addressed to Mr. Dam, sent

via email in which he disputed that the BIS, UN or Federal Reserve recognized OITC, but urged

Mr. Dam "to request Mr. Yamaguchi to work directly with you," noting that "if you can possibly 62


assist him with his bonds then I can provide "the TRADER for you. Then there will be money for

humanitarian causes in our hands."

142. SALE responded the same day opening with the greeting that "Again your

arrogance and total lack of knowledge shows within the content of your communication." After

disputing that either Yamaguchi, as Controller, or the Dragon Family itself are the "Legal

Owners" of the missing DFFI, SALE advised that the OITC Order "stands and is enforceable in

full" and that "appropriate action" would be undertaken in due course for failure to comply.

SALE also NOTED that "H.E. Dr. Dam does not respond to communications directly from

people, as he is far to [sic] busy on more important issues attending to Royal Families. Neither

does H.E. Dam attend meetings with, nor have appointments with anyone other than Royal

Family members."

143. On June 17,2010, OITC sent KEENAN an email advising that, inter alia, (1)

since Monday, June 14, 2010, it had received several communications from a Swiss Law Finn

(unidentified) "relative to one of their clients"; (2) that Swiss Law Firm was "now in possession

of various Bonds and Certificates passed to their client by you"; (3) it had advised said Law Finn

"to ensure" that such instruments "are held totally secure at all times until they are able to verify

our status"; (4) it had "dispatched" to said Firm "details regarding the protocols that they must

apply, together with the relevant information reference to where and to whom they should apply

for verification of the OITC/H.E. Dr. Dam"; (5) it had made arrangements for the Swiss

Intelligence Services to visit the Law Firm "to ensure that the Law Firm is fully aware of what

they are handling and the seriousness of same"; (6) it had received from the Law Finn that

morning copies of threatening letters from "a Japanese person" and KEENAN and which it

would report to the Intelligence Services and Police; (7) that, as of that morning, H.E. Dr. R.C. 63


Dam had "agreed to cover the Law Firm., its '.Partners and employees, and the specific client

under International Security Clearance Level 3-5 and the Vienna Convention, whereby any

untoward act or actions ... will now be handled accordingly ... " and otherwise threatened to

issue a Warrant of Arrest which would be "enforceable internationally." The letter ended:

It is therefore in your own interest, and that of your colleagues, associates or otherwise, not to under-estimate the Status and Power ofR.E. Dr. Dam or the OITC.

Faithfully,

D .A. Sale, F. LLA. Deputy Chief of the Council for the Cabinet, Special Global Envoy, Senior Commercial Advisor to R.E. The Chairman The Office of International Treasury Control, UN Charter Control No: 10-60847

144. KEENAN responded immediately, advising OITC, inter alia, that it was an

"ongoing publicity seeker and not much more" with "no standing in any court or organization

and not a protected entity."

145. On June 20, 2010, KEENAN sent another email to DAL BOSCO advising that

"Apparently your attorney has made contact with OITC but still to this date your lawyer has not

made contact with our attorneys. Seeing it is the Dragon Family bonds that you have absconded

with, you have not given me to give to my attorneys any contact numbers for your attorney to

date which in itself is illegal. I see OITC has it and as previously mentioned you and your

attorneys are responsible for anything happening to those bonds outside a court of law. Your

attorney is speaking with OITC but not the owners of the bonds. This is very interesting and

illegal. Please forward attorney contact numbers immediately."

146. Within hours, KEENAN received a response from OITC, through DAL BOSCO,

by which OITC advised DAL BOSCO: 64


Dear Daniele,

Take no notice and do not reply, because that will only provoke him.

Kindest regards,

D.A. Sale, F. LLA. Special Global Envoy, Senior Commercial Advisor to H.E. The Chairman The Office of International Treasury Control, UN Charter Control No: 10-60847

No response has ever been received by KEENAN from any person purporting to act as an

attorney for DAL BOSCO.

K. Attempted Retrieval of the DFFI by Joseph Bendana

147. Bendana had previously worked with KEENAN on PPPs initiated by the Dragon

Family. For instance, on or about September 23,2008 Yamaguchi, "as the legal holder of the 10

Kennedy Bonds and the 415 metric Tons of AU (gold)" had executed an Authorization Letter in

favor of Bendana whereby Bendana was authorized "to oversee all'operations involved with the

Private Placement Program for both the bonds and the AU and you are to insulate at all times the

members of the Dragon Family by handling all issues that arise with Mr. Neil Keenan, project

coordinator ... to make sure that the programs are ready for us to enter upon authentication of

the bonds or AU certificates ... "

148. On or about June 14,2010, Bendana received a telephone call from DAL BOSCO

and after discussing with him his authorizations, made specific arrangements to meet with DAL

BOSCO in Geneva to retrieve the DFFI.

149. On or about June 15,2010, Bendana flew to Geneva for the sole purpose of

retrieving the DFFI, including the Federal Reserve Notes and the Kennedy Bond, so that he

could arrange their return to KEENAN. On or about June 17,2010, Yamaguchi executed a

65


Power of Attorney in favor of Bendana "to the bonds/notes from the hands of Mr.

Daniele Dal Bosco or from the legal safekeeping vault where Mr. Daniele Dal Bosco deposited

them," such written instrument also expressing the hope that Mr. DAL BOSCO would place

them in Mr. Bendana's hands "as he received them from Mr. Keenan." The instrument also

directed Mr. Bendana to make preparations to move the DFFI in accordance with KEENAN's

instructions after KEENAN has confirmed that the DFFI retrieved by Bendana are the same as

those turned over to DAL BOSCO.

150. Ultimately, DAL BOSCO neither contacted nor met with Bendana at the

appointed time and location. Bendana did meet with Wales briefly at the Intercontinental Hotel,

and Wales also attempted to contact DAL BOSCO. Upon information and belief, Wales did

have conversations with DAL BOSCO in which he suggested that DAL BOSCO return the DFFI

to KEENAN and even provided a draft format of a safekeeping receipt for use by DAL

BOSCO's attorney to send to KEENAN. Wales' attempts to assist KEENAN were rebuffed

causing him to inform Bendana that DAL BOSCO would not be returning the Federal Reserve

Notes and Kennedy Bond, which comprised part of the DFFI,.to him. After spending three days

in Geneva, Bendana left empty handed for Bulgaria where he saw KEENAN while harboring

hopes that DAL BOSCO would change his mind and Bendana could fulfill his assignment. This

did not occur and Bendana ultimately returned to the United States on July 4, 2010. It was not

until a few days after Bendana home that DAL BOSCO called him to state that he might

reconsider returning the DFFI and to "wait a little longer."

151. During his trip, Bendana had dinner with KEENAN at Ganov's house in Bulgaria.

Bendana expressed his regret that he had divulged his itinerary to DAL BOSCO and that he was

sure DAL BOSCO was planning to steal the DFFI. Bendana also said that by revealing his 66


itinerary, DAL BOSCO might have been pressured to take action with the DFFI more quickly

than he might originally have planned.

152. Eventually, DAL BOSCO himself told KEENAN that he would never return the

DFFI and that he "should get on with his life." DAL BOSCO's actions caused substantial

economic harm to KEENAN as the European group KEENAN had been dealing with had made

all the necessary financial arrangements in order to invest Fourteen Billion Dollars

($14,000,000,000.00) in the form of a cashier's check in return for the use of the FRNs which, as

described, comprised a portion of the DFFI as well as a 50% participation in a PPP.

153. At various and continuing times from June 2010 through the present, DAL

BOSCO and OITC have threatened, harassed and attempted to intimidate KEENAN by stating,

among other things, that the DFFI should be placed with the OITC andlor the Italian Government

and has at all times refused to relinquish control of or return the DFFI to KEENAN, Yamaguchi

or the Dragon Family.

L. Affirmative Actions Taken by KEENAN and/or his Principal to Retrieve the DFFI

154. Since the time it became clear that DAL BOSCO had utterly breached any and all

fiduciary and legal obligations he owed to KEENAN under his agreement to act as temporary

safe keeper and custodian of the DFFI, KEENAN has spared no effort to try to either reason with

or persuade DAL BOSCO, and those with whom he has elected to conspire to steal and convert

the DFFI for their own selfish and illegal purposes, to return the DFFI. These efforts have been

entirely futile and DAL BOSCO, and those with whom he has conspired, has at all times refused

to relinquish control of or return the DFFI to KEENAN, Yamaguchi or the Dragon Family. I

155. Among the actions taken or participated in by KEENAN to enforce his rights and

to repudiate DAL BOSCO's actions, have been the following: 67


i. The service of his own Cease and Desist Order upon DAL BOSCO on or about June 20, 2010, demanding the return of the DFFI, citing DAL BOSCO's broken trust and attempts to sell the DFFI to the UNITED NATIONS and the ITALIAN REPUBLIC or agencies thereof; his failure to turn the DFFI over to Bendana as had been arranged; DAL BOSCO's collaboration with OITC and participation in attempting to bribe KEENAN with the assistance of the UNITED NATIONS and its high ranking representatives, BRUNO, the WEF and/or WEF USA and others; DAL BOSCO's failure to advise of the identity of the "attorney" with whom he had allegedly deposited the DFFI, or the identity of the "police" with whom he had allegedly conferred about the DFFI

ii. The issuance of another Cease and Desist Order upon DAL BOSCO by Yamaguchi on or about June 22, 1010, as well as his filing of a Criminal Complaint on or about June 24, 2010 with the Governments of France and Switzerland in their respective Ambassadors' offices in Tokyo. The Complaint noted DAL BOSCO's illegal possession of the DFFI, with an estimated value of 989 Billion USD for the past 3 weeks, as well as DAL BOSCO's expressed threats to transfer their possession to OITC.

111. The filing of another Criminal Complaint on or about July 2,2010, by Yamaguchi against DAL BOSCO with the Italian Embassy in Tokyo c/o Ambassador Vincenzo Petrone, charging DAL BOSCO with, inter alia, "grand theft, fraud, conspiracy, grand larceny, and conspiring acts of bodily harm against the papacy, [and] violence directed toward the Vatican ... "; the Complaint charged that DAL BOSCO had been colluding with some members of the Italian Government in attempting to "extort extreme amounts of money from the Dragon Family." Yamaguchi urged that the DFFI be returned from DAL BOSCO and his lawyer through Mr. Keenan as soon as possible. He further requested the Italian Authorities to detain DAL BOSCO if he entered their jurisdiction and to launch a full investigation of said charges.

iv. The filing of yet another Criminal Complaint by Yamaguchi with the Metropolitan Police Department in Tokyo on or about July 8, 2010 , alleging "the robbery damage" ofDAL BOSCO by virtue of his stealing the DFFI in Geneva from KEENAN, to whom Yamaguchi had entrusted the DFFI in January and May 2009.

v. The submission on or about July 21,2010 ofa sworn statement by Bendana to Interpol advising of his written authorization in June 2010 "to retrieve over a trillion dollars worth of bonds" from DAL BOSCO in Geneva, Switzerland and which were then in the possession of DAL BOSCO for safe keeping only. Bendana also referenced his

68


exchange of contact information with DAL BOSCO prior to his trip to Geneva.

vi. The issuance by Wales on or about July 26, 2010, of his own "Cease and Desist Order Effective Immediately" against DAL BOSCO, based upon DAL BOSCO's misappropriation of the DFFI, which he knew were under the legal control of KEENAN, and DAL BOSCO's subsequent "slanderous and malicious attack" upon Wales' person or character.

vii. On or about July 27, 2010, KEENAN submitted a package of information to Interpol Headquarters in Lyon, France "revealing the theft of approximately 1 Trillion USD in Financial Instruments by Italian Daniele Dal Bosco ... " Among other things, KEENAN advised Interpol that his enclosed package contained documentary evidence to support his claims against the actions taken by DAL BOSCO relating to the theft and (a) DAL BOSCO's refusal to return the Instruments "back to their rightful owners/custodians," (b) DAL BOSCO's attempted sale of the DFFI to the UNITED NATIONS "which offered him 100 Million USD for them" (c); DAL BOSCO's steadfast refusal to provide contact information for the individuals, including his lawyer, or law enforcement agencies, including Interpol itself, with whom he had allegedly conferred about depositing the DFFI; and (d) the closing by DAL BOSCO of his London office, his change of email address, and moving from his apartment. Included in the package was (e) an affidavit from Mr. Somberg in which Somberg described his understanding of the relationship between KEENAN and DAL BOSCO based upon the several conversations he had with DAL BOSCO while travelling with him in Switzerland, Germany and Austria during the September 2009 time period (see supra). Somberg related his own observation that DAL BOSCO; during this period, "was very close by Mr. Keenan and was clearly the caretaker of the financial instruments that Mr. Keenan was authorized to use by the Dragon Family and their comptroller/signatore Mr. Yamaguchi." Somberg understood that KEENAN "was attempting to work an international transaction involving various governments to help them in their time of crisis." Somberg also quoted the response ofDAL BOSCO, whom he had deemed at that point to be "a very sound and practical person" when queried by him as to why he was then custodian of the D FFI:

Neil has to travel across borders and it is illegal to carry the bonds across said borders and if he gets stopped he will have an international scandal and this is what we are trying to avoid. I am a trusted financier not only in Switzerland but in France and Italy as well. I am the custodian of many

69


bonds and instruments so Neil's instruments that he represents are in good hands. Nothing will happen to them.

v1n. On or about July 29,2010, KEENAN sent a letter to His Eminence Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Bertone, whom he had met previously at a Celebration for the Dominican Republic and President Belaguer in October 1992. He noted his regret to have to advise the Cardinal that Italian Citizen DAL BOSCO, who had represented that he was a resident of Vatican City, as well as Divonne-Ies-Bain, France, and was the Financial Advisor to the Vatican and Treasurer of the Masons, had "absconded with approximately 1 Trillion USD and Japanese Bonds in June 2010 that were entrusted to me." KEENAN noted that DAL BOSCO "was a very nice young man who presented himself properly at all times and of course I believed him." KEENAN also advised Cardinal Bertone that DAL BOSCO had told him he had been working with the Vatican through its financial programs, or Platforms, and had been hopeful of placing the DFFI into such a program. Despite DAL BOSCO's stated intentions of working with the Vatican, KEENAN also felt obliged to report to Cardinal Bertone that he had received information (while expressing reservations about its accuracy) to the effect that DAL BOSCO had been involved with others in discussions concerning a plot to destroy the Papacy

ix. In a letter dated July 31, 2010, which enclosed a package of pertinent information, sent via certified mail return receipt requested by Mr. Bendana from his residence in New Jersey, KEENAN advised BAN KI-moon that DAL BOSCO, "an Italian citizen, passport number C165124 absconded with 1 Trillion Dollars in BondslN otes which had been entrusted to me yet belonged to the Dragon Family." He further stated that the "sole reason" he was writing was that "it is the UNITED NATIONS itself that set DAL BOSCO off on his quest to either Sell the Bonds or place them in a Private Program." KEENAN further advised that "You have individuals inside the UN in Geneva who know Mr. Dal Bosco and who offered him One Hundred Million USD for them." Further, DAL BOSCO's "UN friends advised him that Mr. Yamaguchi was a very powerful member of the Dragon Family whose titles are indeed Signature (sic)/Comptroller but that they at no cost wanted Mr. Yamaguchi involved in this transaction. He was not even to receive one cent for the Dragon Family." KEENAN also referenced DAL BOSCO's illicit connections with OITC and SALE and the use of the UN "as a cover for their illegal dealings" as well as the danger posed to the United States by the UN's condoning such activities through the promises of "security and secrecy" and called for a serious reprimand of any people within the UN for their participation in the plot to steal the DFFI. While KEENAN never received a direct response to his letter to BAN KI-Moon, upon

70


information and belief, Mr. Bendana spoke on at least two occasions with him during the course of which BAN KI - moon stated, among other things, that "this goes much higher than me." Mr. Bendana relayed this information to KEENAN and added: "I cannot wait to see you buddy; wait until you hear the information I have." He also repeated this to his brother-in-law who was present during the conversation. Mr. Bendana, who received the return receipt requested from the UN on September 2, 2010, was found dead in his apartment in New Jersey on the morning of September 4, 2010, two days before he was to depart to visit with KEENAN and provide him with all the information he had received from his conversations with BAN KI-moon and days after he had received a telephone call from DAL BOSCO threatening his physical safety if he continued pursuing legal claims on behalf of KEENAN.

x. On August 30, 2010, KEENAN sent a personal letter to BRUNO, certified mail, addressed to WEF headquarters in Switzerland, by which he reminded BRUNO that he, KEENAN, was the person who had entrusted the DFFI to DAL BOSCO, who had informed him, inter alia, that (a) BRUNO had offered 100 Million USD as a cash payment with no questions asked; (b) a Stipulation of such payment was that Mr. Yamaguchi was never to receive anything for the bonds and that all or a portion of the bonds would have been placed into a FED investment program handled by you and your organization (World Economic Forum); (c) five (5) International Complaints were currently filed against DAL BOSCO and one with Interpol; (d) he was filing a civil complaint in the federal district court in Manhattan in which BRUNO and WEF would be named; ( e) DAL BOSCO was reportedly claiming that the DFFI were in a Federal Trading program and in safe hands in the UN, which was what DAL BOSCO had claimed BRUNO had proposed more than two months prior thereto.

To date, KEENAN has not received a response to his August 30, 2010 letter from either BRUNO or WEF.

M. Recent Revelations Concerning the DAL BOSCO! OITC Enterprise

156. On or about November 9, 2010, KEENAN received a written communication

from Keith F. Scott, formerly associated with the OITC as Chief of Cabinet of OITC, Special

Envoy and Executor for His Excellency Dr. Ray C. Dam and later, Chief of Council of the

Cabinet. Scott directly contradicted the June 2010 communications from SALE, and stated

71


clearly that the DFFI are the rightful propertY of the Dragon Family who are legally entitled to

same.

157. Scott also informed KEENAN that in late September or early October 2010, he

had become aware of one of Fulford's internet blogs regarding "the theft of a series of Historical

Bonds that with their accrued value with interest coupons was worth approximately One Trillion

United States Dollars" and that such bonds "had been stolen from one Neil Keenan."

158. According to Scott, he informed DAM about two weeks later and witnessed

DAM's reaction in anger as DAM explained to Scott that he had been aware that SALE had

access to the Bonds and had sent him scanned copies which DAM proceeded to showed to Scott.

DAM advised Scott that he had determined that the Bonds were authentic based upon his

experience and review of records which he had historically kept in his what he referred to as a

"Book of Codes," which, upon information and belief, purports to be a detailed listing of all

records and true owners of the International Combined Accounts, further blocked to the "IPRA"

or International Parent Registration Accounts.

159. According to Scott, the Dragon Family, through various secret arrangements, hold

vast assets which he has substantiated to KEENAN by presenting "copies of official top secret

bank documents that confirm the amount of gold delivered by the Dragon Family." Scott is clear

and emphatic in stating that any alienation of the Bonds from the Dragon Family or their

appointed Agents is illegal. Scott maintains that the Dragon Family are the known Depositors of

gold as well as other bullions and other assets in private bank accounts held in Swiss Banks, and

that the DFFI were in fact obligations of the Federal Reserve System against the assets blocked

to the Federal Reserve System Accounts. Scott explained that these assets deposited in the

Dragon Family owned accounts were part of the aforementioned "IPRA." 72


160. In recent postings available to the world at large via the Internet, SALE has

admitted that it is "verifiable" through OITC's own records that the "first ever written

communication from Mr. Dal Bosco was within the first week of February 2010, in fact 2nd

February 2010." Further SALE has published "a few relevant sections of the Agreement dated

March 2010" between DAL BOSCO and OITC "duly executed by DAM." It has thus been

admitted to a global audience by SALE, confirming KEENAN's worst suspicions, that DAL

BOSCO had contacted OITC no later than February 2010, and entered into a written contract

with OITC no later than March 2010, regarding the disposition of the DFFI with which he had

been entrusted by KEENAN in September 2009. This further corroborates the conversations that

DAL BOSCO had with Vasil Ganov in February 2010 in Zurich when trying to persuade Ganov

to influence KEENAN to accept the $100 Million USD bribe and when DAL BOSCO alluded to

OITC as the "owners" of the Notes which would be returned to OITC after having been placed in

a UN "Sovereign Program." It also corroborates DAL BOSCO's discussions with Nikolai

Raykov in May 2010 in Geneva (See 98-104; 106-117, supra).

161. Further, it has become evident that during the period in the very months after

KEENAN had entrusted DAL BOSCO with the DFFI, namely early 2010, DAL BOSCO, in total

dereliction of his fiduciary duties, was, in fact, embarking simultaneously upon staggering

schemes to steal and convert the DFFI through his illiCit actions, including bribery, not only with

BRUNO, THE WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM, the UNITED NATIONS, BAN KI-moon,

RAGAGLINI, MIRACHIAN, BERLUSCONI, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, the

ITALIAN REPUBLIC and others but also with OITC, SALE and DAM. These schemes were

plotted_solely for the purpose of aggrandizing the various Defendants' personal wealth at the

expense of the rightful Legal Holders of the DFFI and their designated agent KEENAN. 73


N. Recent Revelations Concerning DAL BOSCO, BRUNO, ITALIAN REPUBLIC, ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, BERLUSCONI Enterprise

162. In or about mid-December 2010, it was learned by KEENAN that, beginning in or

about September 2008, Brazilian financier, Carlo Alfredo Nascimento da Silva, with the

assistance of his attorney, Rubens Mariani, was planning to purchase Banca Commerciale

Lugano, Lugano CH (Switzerland) ("Banca Cornmerciale"). Upon information and belief, this

plan came to be aided and abetted by DAL BOSCO, BERLUSCONI and BRUNO, as well as

retired Colonel of the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, Mauricio Fanelli, Italian attorney, Pierre

Luigi Manzione, and others. Further, upon information and belief, the plan included the deposit

of stolen bonds and notes into Banca Commerciale or any other Swiss bank to establish credit

lines and to enter into trading programs. The stolen assets which were to be deposited included

not only all the DF Chiasso Instruments seized in June 2009, and still held by THE ITALIAN

FINANCIAL POLICE, but also the DFFI stolen by DAL BOSCO in June 2010, and

continuously held under his custody or control. This information further confirms the

recollection of Ognyan Marinov's discussion with DAL BOSCO and BRUNO in Geneva in May

2010 (See Paragraph, supra).

o. Deed of Authorization and Agreement from Dr. Edy Soekanto

163. In November 2011, KEENAN was issued a deed of Authorization and Agreement

(the "Agreement") from Dr. Seno Edy Soekanto, who has sworn to be the "legal heir of record as

stated in the last will and testament of the late President Soekamo of Indonesia and heir son of

the late Kiyai Hadji Djawahir, as well as the legal holder of the Family Heritance Guarantee, as

attached to all the gold deposits as ordered by President Soekamo between 1948 and 1968 when

74


he was granted such Heritance Guarantee as C'payment for his services to the World." See

2(iii)( c).

164. Dr. Soekanto swears that President Soekarno had designated to him the

responsibility to collect all those funds known as the Family Heritance Guarantee and the

accumulated interest thereon and that he has "been acknowledged by depository bank, as

evidenced by the bank instruments, books, record and ledgers and codes in his possession, as the

sole recognized heir to" the aforesaid fortune. Further, under such Agreement, on account of his

"severe and long term chronic illness," he granted to KEENAN the authority to act as one of his

Attorneys in Fact "to act jointly and/or severably and to undertake all means and methods to

recover the funds owing to me and the People of Indonesia."

165. Dr. Soekanto has further agreed and has confirmed that he holds the "full secret

Book of Codes (Maklumat Book) and Ledgers and all Records of the Accounts as delivered" to

him and that, upon their request, he will "deliver or cause delivery of the originals of such books

for presentment to any court determined to have such jurisdiction" and "for any other purpose"

KEENAN may require or need the Books. KEENAN and others under his direction are

presently in custody of certified copies of said Book of Codes (Maklumat Book) and Ledgers

with the authorizations to use them when needed.

166. These Books and Ledgers define the information that is held in the Federal

Reserve screen system. They contain the secret code cyphers and data on legal decisions,

treaties and other arrangements. Upon information and belief, they provide information

pertaining to all the accounts and sub-accounts that contain the gold and other assets, as well as

information pertaining to the financial instruments issued against the gold. Further, they specify

and provide the factual information as to what is in the Global Accounts, such as who owns the 75


gold and the source of its ownership. The protection and security of these Books is, therefore, of

the utmost importance and central to the authentication and verification process.

AS AND FOR A FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST DEFENDANT DAL BOSCO [Expropriation and under Federal Common Law and International Law]

167. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each of the allegations contained in paragraphs 1

through 166 of the Complaint with the same force and effect as though fully set forth herein.

168. Pursuant to a certain Special Power of Attorney executed by Yamaguchi on behalf

of the Dragon Family, and with the approval of General Haan, the Head of the Dragon Family,

which authorized Plaintiff KEENAN to act on behalf of Yamaguchi and the Dragon Family for

the private placement of or legal return of the DFFI, KEENAN lawfully possessed the DFFI.

169. KEENAN released custodianship of the DFFI to defendant DAL BOSCO

pursuant to his written ACCEPTANCE of September 9, 2009, whereby DAL BOSCO would

retain custody of the DFFI for safekeeping while KEENAN travelled throughout Europe in his

effort to invest the DFFI in recognized PPPs. DAL BOSCO agreed to only return custody of the

DFFI over to KEENAN or Yamaguchi and "Not any other!"

170. DAL BOSCO proceeded to engage in a course of conduct totally contrary to his

oral and written agreement. Such actions were taken intentionally and without authority by DAL

BOSCO, who at all relevant times engaged in the unauthorized assumption and exercise of right

of ownership of the DFFI, thus interfering with KEENAN's right of possession. Such

unauthorized assumption of control is evidenced, in part, by DAL BOSCO's following and

unauthorized activities, alone and in conspiracy with others:

76


(1) Exercised dominion cind control over the DFFI totally outside of and beyond the scope of his acknowledged duties, and remains in custody and control of the DFFI, despite repeated demands for their return;

(2) Further exercised his dominion and control over the DFFI by entering into a written agreement with defendant OITC for the purpose of proclaiming the DFFI as the lawful property ofOITC, rather than KEENAN, and subsequently conspiring with OITC to issue a fraudulent Cease & Desist Order proclaiming such ownership;

(3) Entered into an agreement with defendants BRUNO, the WEF and/or WEF USA, UNITED NATIONS, BAN KI-moon, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC, RAGAGLINI and MlRACHIAN whereby a bribe of $100 million USD would be offered to KEENAN for the release of the DFFI to BRUNO for the ultimate investment of the DFFI in a "Sovereign Program" under the control of defendant the UNITED NATIONS, at all times under the claimed umbrella of protection afforded by the "sovereign immunity" accorded the UN;

( 4) Entered into an illicit agreement with defendants the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC, BERLUSCONI, WEF, WEF USA, BRUNO and others whereby said defendants plotted to utilize the stolen the DFFI, which in combination with other various stolen or seized assets, would be placed into international commerce through the purchase of a Swiss Bank, Banco Commerciale di Lugano, or another Swiss bank for future credit and trading purposes.

171. After rejecting numerous improper offers and bribes made by DAL BOSCO, as

detailed supra, KEENAN demanded orally and in writing on multiple occasions that DAL

BOSCO return the DFFI to KEENAN's possession.

172. Despite these demands, DAL BOSCO unlawfully withheld possession of the

DFFI from KEENAN and the Dragon Family in violation of their legal rights to the same.

173. KEENAN has suffered serious financial detriment·on account of the conversion

of the DFFI by DAL BOSCO and, at a minimum, DAL BOSCO is required to pay the full value

of the DFFI and all of its accumulated interest, with interest. DAL BOSCO is also required to

77


pay KEENAN's lost profits from the fees to which he was entitled for performing his services

for the Dragon Family with respect to coordinating the placement of the DFFI into an approved

trading program.

174. Consequently, KEENAN has been damaged by the conversion of the DFFI by

defendant DAL BOSCO and has sustained damage in a sum to be determined at trial, but

believed to be in excess of One Trillion ($1,000,000,000,000.00) US dollars.

AS AND FOR A SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST DEFENDANTS DAL BOSCO, BERLUSCONI, RAGAGLINI, MIRACHIAN,

ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, ITALIAN REPUBLIC, BAN KI-moon, UNITED NATIONS, BRUNO, WEF and WEF USA,

[Civil Conspiracy to Expropriate and Convert the DFFI under Federal Common Law and International Law]



176. Upon information and belief, defendants DAL BOSCO, BERLUSCONI, the

ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, and the ITALIAN REPUBLIC entered into an agreement

whereby each party knowingly and voluntarily agreed to participate in a scheme to steal and

convert certain financial instruments for the purpose of profiting from this theft of financial

instruments, including the DFFI. Among the prospective unlawful uses planned for the DFFI by

said defendants was the purchase of a Swiss Bank, such as Banco Commerciale di Lugano, or

any other Swiss Bank into which they could immediately move all stolen assets, including the

DFFI.

177. Upon information and belief, defendants BRUNO and the WORLD ECONOMIC

FORUM and/or the WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM USA, INC. knowingly and voluntarily

agreed to participate in this scheme to convert various financial instruments, including the DFFI.

78


Defendants BRUNO and the WEF and/or WEF USA further knowingly and voluntarily agreed

to utilize their connections within the defendant UNITED NATIONS to set up Sovereign

Programs for the investment of the unlawfully obtained financial instruments that they knew to

be either stolen or seized under color of police authority of the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE

or unlawfully obtained by others, and which included the DFFI, to the profit of all the co-

conspirators.

178. Upon information and belief, BRUNO, acting within his authority as the Director

responsible for the Financial Services Industry Group of the defendant WEF and/or WEF USA in

its New York City offices, and defendants BERLUSCONI, H.E. Ambassador CESARE MARIA

RAGAGLINI, Permanent Representative of the Italian Mission to the UN in New York, H.E.

Ambassador LAURA MlRACHIAN, Permanent Representative of the Italian Mission to the UN

in Geneva, defendant BAN KI-moon, Secretary-General of the United Nations, and other

unknown representatives of defendants the ITALIAN REPUBLIC, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL

POLICE and the UNITED NATIONS procured an agreement entered into knowingly and

voluntarily by the foregoing defendants whereby the unlawfully obtained financial instruments

that said defendants knew to be either stolen or seized under color of police authority of the

ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE or unlawfully obtained by others, and which included the

DFFI, would be invested in a " Sovereign Program" wholly under the auspices, protection and

umbrella of the "sovereign immunity" allegedly accorded to the UNITED NATIONS and the

ITALIAN REPUBLIC.

179. Upon information and belief, in furtherance of the aforesaid civil conspiracy,

defendants the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE and the ITALIAN REPUBLIC intentionally

participated in the furtherance of the plan by seizing the DF Chiasso Instruments in an amount 79


approximating $134.5 Billion U.S. Dollars from Dragon Family representatives Yamaguchi and

Watanabe. This seizure of the DF Chiasso Instruments, which incident was described in detail

supra, was then utilized by the defendant co-conspirators as a pretext for introducing DAL

BOSCO to KEENAN for the purpose of convincing KEENAN that it would be wise to entrust

custody of the DFFI to DAL BOSCO in order to avoid a similar incident from occurring with

respect to the D FFI.

180. Further upon information and belief, in furtherance of the aforesaid civil

conspiracy, defendant DAL BOSCO intentionally participated in the furtherance of the plan by

making knowingly false material representations to KEENAN for the purposes of inducing

KEENAN to relinquish custody of the DFFI into DAL BOSCO's possession, orchestrating and

participating in the numerous attempts to bribe KEENAN in an effort to induce KEENAN to

participate in the theft of the DFFI from the Dragon Family as detailed supra, and ultimately

absconding with the DFFI when the attempts to bribe KEENAN were unsuccessful.

181. In furtherance of the aforesaid civil conspiracy, defendant BRUNO, acting within

his capacity and authority as the Director responsible for the Services Industry Group

of the defendant WEF andlor WEF USA in its New York City offices, intentionally participated

in the furtherance of the plan by offering KEENAN a $100 Million USD bribe to be split with

DAL BOSCO in an effort to obtain his participation and cooperation in the theft of the DFFI

from the Dragon Family and by speaking to and meeting with acquaintances of KEENAN,

including Raykov and Marinov in an effort to obtain their assistance in convincing KEENAN to

participate in the scheme to convert the DFFI.

182. Upon information and belief, in furtherance of the aforesaid civil conspiracy,

defendants BRUNO, acting within his capacity and authority as the Director responsible for the 80


Financial Services Industry Group of the defendant WEF and! or WEF USA in its New York City

offices, defendants RAGAGLINI, MARACHIAN, BERLUSCONI, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL

POLICE, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC, BAN KI-moon, the UNITED NATIONS and other

unknown individual co-conspirators acting on behalf of defendants the ITALIAN FINANCIAL

POLICE, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC and the UNITED NATIONS intentionally participated in

the furtherance of the conspiracy by planning, negotiating, developing and facilitating the

creation of a UN Sovereign Program for the investment of the stolen DFFI. Said defendants'

actions in this regard also furthered the conspiracy in that said defendants, in an effort to obtain

KEENAN's cooperation in the conspiracy to convert the DFFI, repeatedly misrepresented to

KEENAN and his acquaintances as detailed supra, that by acting in conjunction with the WEF

andlor WEF USA, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC and the

UNITED NATIONS, all of the individual co-conspirators' illegal actions would be protected

under the umbrella of sovereign immunity.

183. KEENAN has suffered serious financial detriment on account of and as a direct

proximate result of the civil conspiracy to expropriate and convert the DFFI and, at a minimum,

defendants DAL BOSCO, BERLUSCONI, RAGAGLINI, MlRACHIAN, the ITALIAN

FINANCIAL POLICE, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC, BAN KI-moon, the UNITED NATIONS,

BRUNO, WEF and/or WEF USA are jointly and severally liable for the full value of the DFFI

and all of its accumulated interest, with interest. Said defendants are also jointly and severally

liable for KEENAN's lost profits from the fees to which he was entitled for performing his

services for the Dragon Family with respect to coordinating the placement of the DFFI into an

approved trading program.

81


184. Consequently, KEENAN has been damaged by the civil conspiracy to expropriate

and convert the DFFI by defendants DAL BOSCO, BERLUSCONI, RAGAGLINI,

MlRACIDAN, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC, BAN KI-

moon, the UNITED NATIONS, BRUNO, WEF andlor WEF USA and has sustained damage in a

sum to be determined at trial, but believed to be in excess of One Trillion

($1,000,000,000,000.00) US dollars.

AS AND FOR A THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST DEFENDANTS DAL BOSCO, SALE, DAM AND OITC,

[Civil Conspiracy to Expropriate and Convert the DFFI under Federal Common Law and International Law]



186. Upon information and belief, DAL BOSCO, as early as January 2009, had

discussions with defendant OITC and its President, defendant SALE, who was acting with the

knowledge of and under the authority of defendant DAM, to discuss various fraudulent schemes,

options andlor alternative actions DAL BOSCO and the other defendants, including OITC,

SALE and DAM, would take with respect to bribing KEENAN or otherwise defrauding

KEENAN into relinquishing control of and ultimate defalcation of the DFFI, which were then to

be traded under DAM's Federal Reserve Master Commitment Holder Trading License. As a

result of these discussions, defendants OITC, SALE and DAM knowingly and voluntarily agreed

to participate in this scheme to unlawfully steal and convert the DFFI from KEENAN.

According to recently published admissions by defendant SALE, DAL BOSCO admittedly

contacted OITC no later than February 2010, and entered into a written contract with OITC no

later than March 2010, whereby said parties agreed to steal and convert the DFFI, which had

82


been temporarily entrusted to DAL BOSCO, in complete contravention ofDAL BOSCO's oral

and written representations, as well as all fiduciary duties concomitant with such representations.

187. In furtherance of the aforesaid civil conspiracy defendants SALE and DAM,

acting on behalf of defendant OITC, intentionally participated in the furtherance of the plan by

taking the position that the DFFI stolen and converted by DAL BOSCO were, in fact, the

"property" of OITC rather than the Dragon Family, thereby enabling DAL BOSCO to perpetuate

his fraud and convert the DFFI. Said acts in furtherance of the civil conspiracy include the

following statements and/or actions of OITC, through SALE and DAM:

(1) Issuing the OITC Order of June 8,2010, on behalf of DAM stating: (a) DAM was appointed as international Treasury Controller under United Nations Charter Control No: 10-60847; (b) that the DFFI were, in fact, the property of the International Collateral Accounts of the Global Debt Facility which are legally owned by His Excellency, Ray C. DAM, International Treasury Controller"; ( c) directing KEENAN and Yamaguchi to surrender the DFFI on or before July 7, 2010;

(2) Sending the June 10, 2010 letter via email to KEENAN "strongly advising" him not to ignore the OITC Order and to "adhere" to its content; and

(3) Misrepresenting in writing to KEENAN that "Our ownership of the Dragon Funds being part of the Combined Internationl;ll Collateral Accounts of the Global Debt Facility, and our international status combined with our International Authority as granted, attested to, and formally issued by the Nations of the World" and warning that that the "impertinent mannerisms" in which KEENAN had allegedly "approached this matter" would not be tolerated as it shows "an insulting and arrogant attitude towards a Sovereign Entity which is legally chartered under the United Nations and recognized by all Nations ... "; and

(4) Advising DAL BASCO that all conspirators could rely upon the "immunity" enjoyed by OITC for many years in reliance upon the umbrella of protection afforded by its relationship with the UN.

188. KEENAN has suffered serious financial detriment on account of and as a.direct

proximate result of the civil conspiracy to expropriate and convert the D FFI and, at a minimum,

defendants DAL BOSCO, SALE, DAM and OITC are jointly and severally liable for the full 83


value of the DFFI and all of its accumulated interest, with interest. Defendants DAL BOSCO,

SALE, DAM and OITC are also jointly and severally liable for KEENAN's lost profits from the

fees to which he was entitled for performing his services for the Dragon Family with respect to

coordinating the placement of the DFFI into an approved trading program.

189. Consequently, KEENAN has been damaged by the civil conspiracy to expropriate

and convert the DFFI by defendants DAL BOSCO, SALE, DAM and OITC and has sustained

damage in a sum to be determined at trial, but believed to be in excess of One Trillion

($1,000,000,000,000.00) US dollars.

AS AND FOR A FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST DEFENDANTS DAL' BOSCO, BERLUSCONI, RAGAGLINI, MIRACHIAN,


[Aiding and Abetting the Expropriation and Conversion of the DFFI under Federal Common Law and International Law 1



191. The actions of defendants DAL BOSCO, BERLUSCONI, RAGAGLINI,

MlRACHIAN, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC, BAN KJ-

moon, the UNITED NATIONS, BRUNO, WEF and/or WEF USA violate any and all notions of

jus cogens, a body of peremptory principles of customary and universal intemationallaw

recognized by civilized nations. At a minimum, the actions of said defendants constitute a

knowing and willful participation to aid and abet the theft and conversion of the DFFI, valued at

approximately ONE TRlLLION UNITED STATES DOLLARS, which theft and conversion was

carried out by defendant DAL BOSCO, who personally absconded with the DFFI.

84


192. Upon information and beliet defendant BRUNO, acting within his capacity and

authority as the Director responsible for the Financial Services Industry Group of the defendant

WEF and/or WEF USA in its New York City offices, defendants RAGAGLINI, MARACHIAN,

and BERLUSCONI, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC, BAN KI-

moon, the UNITED NATIONS and other unknown individual co-conspirators acting on behalf

of and with the approval of defendants the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, the ITALIAN

REPUBLIC and the UNITED NATIONS, with knowledge of the planned theft and conversion of

the DFFI from its true and rightful owners, and for the express purpose of facilitating the

conversion of the DFFI from its true and rightful owners, provided substantial assistance in the

expropriation and conversion of the DFFI from KEENAN by planning, negotiating, developing

and facilitating the creation of a UN Sovereign Program for the investment of the DFFI

purportedly under the umbrella of the ITALIAN REPUBLIC's and the UNITED NATION's

sovereign immunity. In doing so, these defendants provided practical assistance, encouragement

and moral support to the expropriation and conversion of the DFFI from KEENAN.

193. The substantial assistance and complicity of defendants BRUNO, WEF and/or

WEF USA, RAGAGLINI, MARACHIAN, BERLUSCONI, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL

POLICE, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC, BAN KI-moon, the UNITED NATIONS and other

unknown individual co-conspirators acting on behalf of and with the approval of defendants the

WEF and/or WEF USA, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC and

the UNITED NATIONS in the theft and conversion of the DFFlis further illustrated by the

following acts performed with knowledge of the planned theft and conversion of the DFFI from

its true and rightful owners, and for the express purpose of providing substantial assistance in the

conversion of the DFFI from its true and rightful owners: 85


(1) . Defendant UNITED NATIONS knowingly and actively participated in the conversion of the DFFI stolen by DAL BOSCO when it agreed to offer a bribe to KEENAN in the amount of $100 Million USD in an effort to obtain KEENAN's cooperation in the conversion of the DFFI, for its own benefit, those of its representatives, including defendants BAN KI -moon, for the benefit of defendants the ITALIAN REPUBLIC and its representatives, including defendants BERLUSCONI, RAGAGLINI, MlRACHIAN and the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, and for the benefit of the WEF andlor WEF USA, and its representative, defendants BRUNO, and for the benefit of others presently unknown, who participated in and aided and abetted the criminal enterprise.

(2) As part of the criminal enterprise and scheme, defendant DAL BOSCO made contact with high level UN officials through the assistance of defendants BRUNO and the WEF andlor WEF USA, and as a result defendants the UNITED NATIONS and BAN KI-moon knowingly and actively approved the purchase of the DFFI, which it knew had been stolen by DAL BOSCO, not only for the purpose of aiding and abetting the conspiracy, but entered into the scheme with the avowed purpose of further concealing the theft and actively engaging in the conversion of the DFFI by: (1) purchasing the DFFI then in the possession of DAL BOSCO who had breached his fiduciary duties to KEENAN as temporary custodian of the DFFI by converting the DFFI; (2) offering to pay the sum of $100 Million USD for the release of the DFFI; (3) placing the stolen DFFI into a Sovereign Program for its own financial benefit; (4) all of the above to be accomplished without the knowledge of the Legal Holders of the DFFI, the Dragon Family.

(3) The complicity of defendants the WEF andlor WEF USA, the UNITED NATIONS, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE and the ITALIAN REPUBLIC is apparent from the telephone conference call placed to BRUNO by DAL BOSCO on a speaker phone in the VIP Room of the Hotel Zurich in Switzerland in early February 2010. Such call was made via international telephone communication between DAL BOSCO and defendant BRUNO, of the WEF and/or WEF USA, who, upon information and belief, participated from New York, New York wherein the participation and approval' of the UNITED NATIONS was described in detail by BRUNO, who represented that he could "put 100 Million Dollars into KEENAN's hands if KEENAN agreed [to release the DFFI in contravention of the Dragon Family's rights in the same]." After this call, Vasil Ganov, who had been present for the call inquired of what DAL BOSCO would receive from the "transaction." DAL BOSCO stated that he would receive half of the $100 Million USD offered to KEENAN for his assistance, which he indicated would be placed into a Sovereign Program by the UN and that they would receive 200% monthly returns minimum from the total "investment." DAL BOSCO refused to comment on how much defendants the UN, WEF andlor WEF USA, BRUNO and OITC would receive from the transaction, indicating that such an inquiry "can only cause trouble." DAL

86


BOSCO did, however, indicate that the stolen Notes would be placed into a "Sovereign Program by the UN," and upon completion would be returned to their rightful "owners," which he indicated was the OITC. DAL BOSCO further informed Ganov that "everyone was protected by the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE and the Italian Government itself."

(4) This complicity is also corroborated by the international telephone communication between DAL BOSCO and BRUNO, as overheard and described by Nikolay Raykov during his trip to the Zurich airport with DAL BOSCO following the telephone conference speaker call described above, and by Raykov's other interactions with DAL BOSCO and BRUNO. In the telephone conversation, BRUNO represented to Raykov that the DFFI would "be placed into a federal program using the UN as protection" along with "his company" referring to the WEF and/or WEF USA, which would "generate unlimited capital for everyone involved." According to BRUNO, "there would be no problems and that this was being blessed by the UNITED NATIONS" which "would protect everyone" as the DFFI would be "placed into a Sovereign Program" after which the DFFI "would disappear" and "there would be no questions asked." In a subsequent telephone call between Raykov and BRUNO, which took place while both parties were in New York, BRUNO advised Raykov that DAL BOSCO had absconded with the DFFI and that "now more than ever" Raykov was needed to convince KEENAN to cooperate in the conspiracy to deprive the Dragon Family of its interest in the DFFI. At a subsequent meeting between Raykov, BRUNO and DAL BOSCO at the Balexert Mall in Switzerland in May 2010, BRUNO commented that KEENAN "was stupid for not taking the 100 Million U.S. Dollars" and that "things had been in the planning stages for a while and were about to be completed with or without KEENAN." BRUNO again requested Raykov's assistance in convincing KEENAN to participate in the scheme. When Raykov indicated that KEENAN would not listen to him, BRUNO exclaimed, "Not even for 500 Million U.S. Dollars?" BRUNO then encouraged Raykov to call him at his New York office of the WEF USA to speak about the matter further.

(5) Defendants' complicity was further corroborated during the course of the meeting between DAL BOSCO, BRUNO and Miranov at the Balexert mall in Switzerland in May 2010. At this meeting, defendant BRUNO explained who was involved in the conspiracy to convert the DFFI, specifically naming defendants RAGAGLINI, MlRAClllAN, BERLUSCONI, and the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, stating: "so you see there is no possible way we can have a problem. We can cloak ourselves with the immunity shield and everyone will go away. Just another day in the UN!" During this meeting held for the purpose of convincing Miranov to assist the defendants in their theft, a telephone call was received from defendant H.E. Ambassador MlRACHIAN, Permanent Representative of the Italian Mission to the UN in Geneva, who confirmed the direct knowledge and approval of the UNITED NATIONS Secretary General,

87


BAN KI-moon stating: (i) "from the very top we were protected"; (ii) "there is no reason for anyone, including KEENAN, to worry about any sort of repercussions"; (iii) "the Italian cohorts in New York had even approved the matter with Secretary General BANK KI-moon" whom she expressly acknowledged "would deny he knew anything about it."


and proximate result of defendants' acts aiding and abetting the expropriation and conversion of

the DFFI and, at a minimum, defendants DAL BOSCO, BERLUSCONI, RAGAGLINI,

MlRACHIAN, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC, BAN KI-

moon, the UNITED NATIONS, BRUNO, WEF andlor WEF USA are jointly and severally

liable for the full value of the DFFI and all of its accumulated interest, with interest. Defendants

DAL BOSCO, BERLUSCONI, RAGAGLINI, MlRACHIAN, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL

POLICE, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC, BAN KI-moon, the UNITED NATIONS, BRUNO, WEF

andlor WEF USA are also jointly and severally liable for KEENAN's lost profits from the fees

to which he was entitled for performing his services for the Dragon Family with respect to


195. Consequently, KEENAN has been damaged by the actions of defendants DAL

BOSCO, BERLUSCONI, RAGAGLINI, MlRACHIAN, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE,

the ITALIAN REPUBLIC, BAN KI-moon, the UNITED NATIONS, BRUNO, WEF andlor

WEF USA aiding and abetting the expropriation and conversion of the DFFI and has sustained


($1,000,000,000,000.00) US dollars.

AS AND FOR A FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST DEFENDANTS DAL BOSCO, SALE, DAM, OITC, and UNITED NATIONS,

[Aiding and Abetting the Expropriation and Conversion of the DFFI under Federal Common Law and International Law]

88


196. Plaintiff repeats and each of the allegations contained in paragraphs 1


197. The actions of defendants DAL BOSCO, SALE, DAM, OITC and the UNITED

NATIONS violate any and all notions of jus cogens, a body of peremptory principles of

customary and universal international law recognized by civilized nations. At a minimum, the

actions of said defendants constitute a knowing and willful participation to aid and abet the theft

and conversion of the DFFI, valued at approximately ONE TRILLION UNITED STATES

DOLLARS, which theft and conversion was carried out by defendant DAL BOSCO, who

personally absconded with the DFFI.

198. Defendants SALE and DAM acting on behalf of defendant OITC, with

knowledge of the planned theft and conversion of the DFFI from its true and rightful owners, and

for the express purpose of facilitating the conversion of the DFFI from its true and rightful

owners, provided substantial assistance in the expropriation and conversion of the DFFI from

KEENAN by taking the position that the DFFI stolen and converted by DAL BOSCO were in

fact the "property" ofOITC rather than the Dragon Family, thereby enabling DAL BOSCO to

perpetuate his fraud and convert the DFFI. In doing so, these defendants provided practical

assistance, encouragement and moral support to the expropriation and conversion of the DFFI

from KEENAN. Said acts in substantial assistance to the conversion of the DFFI from

KEENAN, which were made with knowledge of and for the purpose of facilitating the

conversion of the DFFI, include the following statements and/or actions of OITC, through SALE

and DAM:

(1) issuing the OITC Order of June 8,2010, on behalf of DAM stating: (a) DAM was appointed as international Treasury Controller under United Nations Charter Control No: 10-60847; (b) that the DFFI were, in fact, the

89


property of the International Collateral Accounts of the Global Debt Facility which are legally owned by His Excellency, Ray C. DAM, International Treasury Controller; ( c) directing KEENAN and Yamaguchi to surrender the DFFI on or before July 7, 2010.

(2 Sending the June 10,2010 letter via email to KEENAN "strongly advising" him not to ignore the OITC Order and to "adhere" to its content; and

(3) Misrepresenting in writing to KEENAN that "Our ownership of the Dragon Funds being part of the Combined International Collateral Accounts of the Global Debt Facility, and our international status combined with our International Authority as granted, attested to, and formally issued by the Nations of the World" and warning that that the "impertinent mannerisms" in which KEENAN had allegedly "approached this matter" would not be tolerated as it shows "an insulting and arrogant attitude towards a Sovereign Entity which is legally chartered under the United Nations and recognized by all Nations ... "; and


199. The UNITED NATIONS has been complicit in the nefarious and fraudulent

activities of OITC in that it has never formally denounced or disassociated itself from OITC, and

has allowed OITC to hold itself out to the world community as protected by its umbrella of

legitimacy and chartered by the UNITED NATIONS itself. Upon information and belief,

defendant the UNITED NATIONS, with knowledge of the planned theft and conversion of the

DFFI from its true and rightful owners, and for the express purpose of facilitating the conversion

of the DFFI from its true and rightful owners, provided substantial assistance in the expropriation

and conversion of the DFFI from KEENAN by allowing and actively encouraging the OITC to

represent itself as affiliated with and charted by the UNITED NATIONS in OITC's efforts to

convince KEENAN to release the DFFI to defendants on the purported basis that the DFFI

belonged to 0 ITC rather than the Dragon Family.

90


200. KEENAN has suffered seriofts financial detriment on account of and as a direct

and proximate result of the action of defendants DAL BOSCO, SALE, DAM, OITC and the

UNITED NATIONS aiding and abetting the expropriation and conversion of the DFFI and, at a

minimum, said defendants are jointly and severally liable for the full value of the DFFI and all

of its accumulated interest, with interest. Defendants DAL BOSCO, SALE, DAM, OITC and

the UNITED NATIONS are also jointly and severally liable for KEENAN's lost profits from

the fees to which he was entitled for performing his services for the Dragon Family with respect

to coordinating the placement of the DFFI into an approved trading program.


BOSCO, SALE, DAM, OITC and the UNITED NATIONS aiding and abetting the expropriation

and conversion of the DFFI and has sustained damage in a sum to be determined at trial, but


AS AND FOR A SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST DEFENDANT DAL BOSCO [Fraud under Federal Common Law and International Law]



203. As described in more detail supra, DAL BOSCO arranged to meet with

KEENAN in July 2009 for the conscious purpose of gaining his trust and confidence with the

intention of fraudulently inducing KEENAN to transfer custodianship and control of the DFFI in

order that DAL BOSCO and his co-conspirators could unjustly enrich themselves for their own

personal benefit and utterly to the detriment of KEENAN and the Dragon Family.

204. At all relevant times, DAL BOSCO's intention was to knowingly assume control

and exercise ownership over the DFFI in contravention of the rights of KEENAN and the

91


Dragon Family and to utilize the DFFI in various selfish and unlawful ways, including the

pronouncement by OITC through its unlawful Cease and Desist Order of its alleged legal

ownership of the D FFI and further criminal actions as described herein

205. Despite DAL BOSCO's knowledge and intent to abscond with the DFFI for his

own personal benefit and the benefit of his co-conspirators, he falsely misrepresented to

KEENAN, as set forth both orally and in his written ACCEPTANCE of September 9, 2009,

made for the express purpose of inducing KEENAN to rely upon them, as follows: (1) "I can

assure you that you will never regret making this decision"; (2) "You are aware of the fact I am

well trusted and a financial advisor within the Vatican and Mason circles and would never

jeopardize my position with them for anything"; (3) "My word is my bond and my word is

Gold"; (4) "I will be waiting for your Zurich arrival so that we can do great things for the

world"; (5) "I understand clearly that I am not to discuss these bonds with anyone outside the

immediate circle and my privacy is integral to the success of many nations"; (6) "I further

understand you are the authorized representative and Power of Attorney for said bonds and I will

entrust them believe me as though it was my life depending on it. Therefore I humbly accept the

custodianship of said Bonds in which I am only to return them to either you or Mr. Yamaguchi.

Not any other !"; (7) "although electronic this email is to be considered my legal binding

acceptance of the following bonds (bonds listed)"; (8) "Will be ready when called upon to

deliver said notes to you."

206. KEENAN reasonably and justifiably relied, to his severe personal detriment, on

the knowingly false material misrepresentations ofDAL BOSCO set forth above, as well as the

numerous material oral misrepresentations of a similar or identical nature made by DAL BOSCO

between July and September 2009 set forth in detail in the Complaint at paragraphs 70 through 92


82, and KEENAN transferred custody of the DFFI to DAL BOSCO on or about September 18,

2009 on the basis of said misrepresentations.

207. Defendant DAL BOSCO deliberately made such misrepresentations in order to

induce plaintiff KEENAN to rely on said misrepresentations and convince KEENAN to transfer

custody of the DFFI to him. KEENAN has suffered serious financial detriment on account of and

as a direct and proximate result of defendant DAL BOSCO's fraud and, at a minimum, DAL

BOSCO is liable for the full value of the DFFI and all of its accumulated interest, with interest.

DAL BOSCO is also liable for KEENAN's lost profits from the fees to which he was entitled for

performing his services for the Dragon Family with respect to coordinating the placement of the

DFFI into an approved trading program.

208. Consequently, DAL BOSCO's intentional failure to return the DFFI, which were

entrusted to him by KEENAN on the basis of his numerous misrepresentations, has caused

severe financial detriment to KEENAN. Consequently, KEENAN has sustained damage in a

sum to be determined at trial, but believed to be in excess of One Trillion

($1,000,000,000,000.00) US dollars.

AS AND FOR A SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST DEFENDANTS DAL BOSCO, BERLUSCONI, RAGAGLINI, MIRACHIAN,


[Civil Conspiracy to Commit Fraud under Federal Common Law and International Law]



210. Upon information and belief, defendants DAL BOSCO, BERLUSCONI, the

IT ALlAN FINANCIAL POLICE, and the ITALIAN REPUBLIC entered into an agreement

whereby each party knowingly and voluntarily agreed to participate in a scheme to steal certain 93


financial instruments for the purpose of profiting from this theft of financial instruments. As part

of this scheme, defendants DAL BOSCO, BERLUSCONI, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE,

and the ITALIAN REPUBLIC knowingly and voluntarily agreed to defraud KEENAN of the

DFFI. Among the prospective unlawful uses planned for the DFFI by said defendants was the

purchase of a Swiss Bank, such as Banco Commerciale di Lugano, or any other Swiss Bank into

which they could immediately move all stolen assets, including the DFFI.

211. Upon information and belief, sometime thereafter, defendants BRUNO and the

WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM and/or the WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM USA, INC.

knowingly and voluntarily agreed to participate in this scheme to assist DAL BOSCO in his

effort to obtain the DFFI from KEENAN through various acts of fraud. Defendants BRUNO and

the WEF and! or WEF USA further knowingly and voluntarily agreed to utilize their connections

within the defendant UNITED NATIONS to set up Sovereign Programs for the investment of the

unlawfully obtained financial instruments that they knew to be either stolen or seized under color

of police authority of the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE or unlawfully obtained by others, and

which included the DFFI, to the profit of all the co-conspirators. Among the prospective

unlawful uses planned for the DFFI by said defendants was the purchase of a Swiss Bank, such

as Banco Commerciale di Lugano, into which the DFFI, in combination with other stolen or

seized assets, could be deposited and traded for the profit of said co-conspirators.

212. Upon information and belief, thereafter BRUNO, acting within his authority as

the Director responsible for the Financial Services Industry Group of the defendant WEF and/or

WEF USA in its New York City offices, and defendants BERLUSCONI, H.E. Ambassador

CESARE MARIA RAGAGLINI, Permanent Representative of the Italian Mission to the UN in

New York, H.E. Ambassador LAURA MlRACHIAN, Permanent Representative of the Italian 94


Mission to the UN in Geneva, defendant BAN Kl-moon, Secretary-General of the United

Nations, and other unknown representatives of defendants the ITALIAN REPUBLIC, the

ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE and the UNITED NATIONS procured an agreement entered

into knowingly and voluntarily by the foregoing defendants whereby the unlawfully obtained

financial instruments that said defendants knew to be either stolen or seized under color of police

authority of the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE or unlawfully obtained by others, and which

included the DFFI to be obtained by DAL BOSCO's fraud, would be invested in a "Sovereign

Program" wholly under the auspices, protection and umbrella of the "sovereign immunity"

allegedly accorded to the UNITED NATIONS and the ITALIAN REPUBLIC.

213. Upon information and belief, and in furtherance of the aforesaid civil conspiracy

to defraud, defendants the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE and the ITALIAN REPUBLIC

intentionally participated in the furtherance of the plan by seizing the DF Chiasso Instruments in

an amount approximating $134.5 Billion U.S. Dollars from Dragon Family representatives

Yamaguchi and Watanabe. This seizure of the DF Chiasso Instruments, which incident was

described in detail supra, was then utilized by the defendant co-conspirators as a pretext for

introducing DAL BOSCO to KEENAN for the purpose of convincing KEENAN, through

numerous misrepresentations detailed supra that it would be wise to entrust custody of the DFFI

to DAL BOSCO in order to avoid a similar incident from occurring with respect to the DFFI.

214. Upon information and belief, and in furtherance of the aforesaid civil conspiracy

to defraud KEENAN, defendant DAL BOSCO intentionally participated in the furtherance of the

plan by making knowingly false material representations to KEENAN for the purposes of

inducing KEENAN to relinquish custody of the DFFI into DAL BOSCO's possession,

orchestrating and participating in the numerous attempts to bribe KEENAN in an effort to induce 95


KEENAN to participate in the fraudulent scheme as detailed supra, and ultimately by

absconding with the DFFI when the attempts to bribe KEENAN were unsuccessful.

215. In furtherance of the aforesaid civil conspiracy to defraud KEENAN, defendant

BRUNO, acting within his capacity and authority as the Director responsible for the Financial

Services Industry Group of the defendant WEF and/or WEF USA in its New York City offices,

intentionally participated in the furtherance of the plan by offering KEENAN a $100 Million

USD bribe to be split with DAL BOSCO in an effort to obtain his participation and cooperation

in the fraudulent scheme and by speaking to and meeting with acquaintances of KEENAN,

including Raykov and Marinov in an effort to obtain their assistance in convincing KEENAN to

participate in their fraudulent scheme.

216. Upon information and belief, in furtherance of the aforesaid civil conspiracy to

defraud KEENAN, defendants BRUNO, acting within his capacity and authority as the Director

responsible for the Financial Services Industry Group of the defendant WEF and/or WEF USA in

its New York City offices, defendants RAGAGLINI, MARACHIAN, and BERLUSCONI, the

ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC,_ BAN KI-moon, the UNITED

NATIONS and other unknown individual co-conspirators acting on behalf of defendants the

ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC and the UNITED NATIONS

intentionally participated in the furtherance of the conspiracy by planning, negotiating,

developing and facilitating the creation of a UN Sovereign Program for the investment of the

DFFI to be fraudulently obtained from KEENAN. Said defendants actions in this regard also

furthered the conspiracy to defraud KEENAN in that said defendants, in an effort to obtain

KEENAN's cooperation in the fraudulent scheme, repeatedly misrepresented to KEENAN and

his acquaintances as detailed supra, that by acting in conjunction with the WEF, WEF USA, the 96


ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC and the UNITED NATIONS, all

of the individual co-conspirators' illegal actions would be protected under the umbrella of

sovereign immunity.


proximate result of the civil conspiracy to defraud KEENAN of the DFFI and, at a minimum,

defendants DAL BOSCO, BERLUSCONI, RAGAGLINI, MlRACHIAN, the ITALIAN

FINANCIAL POLICE, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC, BAN KI-moon, the UNITED NATIONS,

BRUNO, WEF and/or WEF USA are jointly and severally liable for the full value of the DFFI

and all of its accumulated interest, with interest. Defendants DAL BOSCO, BERLUSCONI,

RAGAGLINI, MlRACHIAN, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC,

BAN KI-moon, the UNITED NATIONS, BRUNO, WEF and/or WEF USA are also jointly and

severally liable for KEENAN's lost profits from the fees to which he was entitled for performing

his services for the Dragon Family with respect to coordinating the placement of the DFFI into

an approved trading program.

218. Consequently, KEENAN has been damaged by the civil conspiracy to defraud

him of the DFFI by defendants DAL BOSCO, BERLUSCONI, RAGAGLINI, MlRACHIAN,

the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC, BAN KI-moon, the UNITED

NATIONS, BRUNO, WEF and/or WEF USA and has sustained damage in a sum to be

determined at trial, but believed to be in excess of One Trillion ($1,000,000,000,000.00) US

dollars.

97


AS AND FOR A EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST DEFENDANTS DAL BOSCO, SALE, DAM AND OITC,

[Civil Conspiracy to Commit Fraud under Federal Common Law and International Law]



220. Upon information and belief, DAL BOSCO, possibly as early as January 2009,

had discussions with defendant OITC and its President, defendant SALE, who was acting with

the knowledge of and under the authority of defendant DAM, to discuss various fraudulent

schemes, options andlor alternative actions DAL BOSCO and the other defendants, including

OITC, SALE and DAM, would take with respect to bribing KEENAN or otherwise defrauding

KEENAN into relinquishing control of and ultimate defalcation of the DFFI, which were then to

be traded under DAM's Federal Reserve Master Commitment Holder Trading License. As a

result of these defendants OITC, SALE and DAM knowingly and voluntarily agreed

to participate in this scheme to participate in this scheme to obtain the DFFI from KEENAN by

fraud. According to recently published admissions by defendant SALE, DAL BOSCO

admittedly contacted OITC no later than February 2010, and entered into a written contract with

OITC no later than March 2010, whereby said parties agreed to assist DAL BOSCO in the

fraudulent scheme to abscond with the DFFI for the enrichment of all co-conspirators.

221. In furtherance of the aforesaid civil conspiracy to defraud KEENAN, defendants

SALE and DAM, acting on behalf of defendant OITC, intentionally participated in the

furtherance of the plan by taking the position that the DFFI stolen and converted by DAL

BOSCO were, in fact, the "property" of OITC rather than the Dragon Family, thereby enabling

DAL BOSCO to perpetuate his fraud and convert the DFFI. Said acts in furtherance of the civil

conspiracy include the following statements andlor actions of OITC, through SALE and DAM: 98


(1) Issuing the OITC Order of June 8, 2010, on behalf of DAM stating: (a) DAM was appointed as International Treasury Controller under United Nations Charter Control No: 10-60847; (b) that the DFFI were, in fact, the property of the International Collateral Accounts of the Global Debt Facility which are legally owned by His Excellency, Ray C. DAM, International Treasury Controller"; (c) directing KEENAN and Yamaguchi to surrender the DFFI on or before July 7,2010;

(2) Sending the June 10,2010 letter via email to KEENAN "strongly advising" him not to ignore the OITC Order and to "adhere" to its content;




proximate result of the civil conspiracy to defraud KEENAN of the DFFI and, at a minimum,

defendants DAL BOSCO, SALE, DAM and OITC are jointly and severally liable for the full

value of the DFFI and all of its accumulated interest, with interest. Defendants DAL BOSCO,

SALE, DAM and OITC are also jointly and severally liable for KEENAN's lost profits from the



223. Consequently, KEENAN has been damaged by the civil conspiracy to defraud

him of the DFFI by defendants DAL BOSCO, SALE, DAM and OITC and has sustained damage

in a sum to be determined at trial, but believed to be in excess of One Trillion

($1,000,000,000,000.00) US dollars.

99


AS AND FOR A NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST DEFENDANTS DAL BOSCO, BERLUSCONI, RAGAGLINI, MIRACHIAN,


[Aiding and Abetting Dal Bosco's Fraud under Federal Common Law and International Law]



225. The actions of Defendants DAL BOSCO, BERLUSCONI, RAGAGLINI,

MlRACHIAN, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC, BAN KJ-

moon, the UNITED NATIONS, BRUNO, WEF and WEF USA violate any and all notions of jus

cogens, a body of peremptory principles of customary and universal international law recognized

by civilized nations. At a minimum, the actions of said defendants constitute a knowing and

willful participation to aid and abet the defrauding of KEENAN of the DFFI, valued at

approximately ONE TRILLION UNITED STATES DOLLARS, which fraud was completed by

defendant DAL BOSCO, who personally obtained the DFFI from KEENAN through fraudulent

misrepresentations.

226. Upon information and belief, defendant BRUNO, acting within his capacity and

authority as the Director responsible for the Financial Services Industry Group of the defendant

WEF andlor WEF USA in its New York City offices, defendants RAGAGLINI, MARACHIAN,

and BERLUSCONI, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC, BAN KI-

moon, the UNITED NATIONS and other unknown individual co-conspirators acting on behalf

of and with the approval of defendants the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, the ITALIAN

REPUBLIC and the UNITED NATIONS, with knowledge of the plan to fraudulently obtain the

DFFI, and for the express purpose of facilitating said fraud, provided substantial assistance to the

100


fraudulent scheme by planning, negotiating; developing and facilitating the creation of a UN

Sovereign Program for the investment of the DFFI to be fraudulently obtained from Keenan. In

further substantial assistance of the fraudulent scheme, said defendants, in an effort to obtain

KEENAN's cooperation, repeatedly misrepresented to KEENAN and his acquaintances as

detailed supra, that by acting in conjunction with the WEF andlor WEF USA, the ITALIAN

FINANCIAL POLICE, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC and the UNITED NATIONS, all of the

individual co-conspirators' illegal actions would be protected under the umbrella of sovereign

immunity. In doing so, these defendants provided practical assistance, encouragement and moral

support to the fraudulent deprivation of the DFFI from KEENAN and the Dragon Family.

227. The substantial assistance and complicity of defendants BRUNO, WEF, WEF

USA, RAGAGLINI, MARACHIAN, BERLUSCONI, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, the

ITALIAN REPUBLIC, BAN KI-moon, the UNITED NATIONS and other unknown individual

co-conspirators acting on behalf of and with the approval of defendants the WEF andlor WEF

USA, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC and the UNITED

NATIONS in the fraudulent scheme to deprive KEENAN and the Dragon Family of the DFFI is

further illustrated by the following acts performed with knowledge of the fraudulent and

unlawful nature of the scheme, and for the express purpose of providing substantial assistance

therein:

(1) Defendant UNITED NATIONS knowingly and actively participated in the fraud when it agreed to offer a bribe to KEENAN in the amount of$100 Million USD in an effort to obtain KEENAN's cooperation in the fraudulent scheme, for its own benefit, those of its representatives, including defendants BAN KI-moon, for the benefit of defendants, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC, and its representatives, including defendants BERLUSCONI, RAGAGLINI, MIRACHIAN and the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, and for the benefit of the WEF andlor WEF USA, and its representative, defendants

101


BRUNO, and for the benefit of othets presently unknown, who participated in and aided and abetted the criminal enterprise.

(2) As part of the criminal enterprise and scheme, defendant DAL BOSCO made contact with high level UN officials through the assistance of defendants BRUNO and the WEF and/or WEF USA, and as a result defendants the UNITED NATIONS and BAN KI -moon knowingly and actively approved the purchase of the DFFI, which it knew had been on the basis of fraudulent misrepresentations by DAL BOSCO, not only for the purpose of aiding and abetting the conspiracy, but entered into the scheme with the avowed purpose of further concealing the fraud and actively engaging in the conversion of the DFFI by: (1) purchasing the DFFI then in the possession of DAL BOSCO who had breached his fiduciary duties to KEENAN as temporary custodian of the DFFI by fraudulently obtaining and converting the DFFI; (2) offering to pay the sum of $100 Million USD for the release of the DFFI; (3) placing the stolen DFFI into a Sovereign Program for its own financial benefit; (4) all of the above to be accomplished without the knowledge of the Legal Holders of the DFFI, the Dragon Family.

(3) The complicity of defendants the WEF, the WEF USA, the UNITED NATIONS, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE and the ITALIAN REPUBLIC is apparent from the telephone conference call placed to BRUNO by DAL BOSCO on a speaker phone in the VIP Room of the Hotel Zurich in Switzerland on or about February 2010. Such call was made via international telephone communication between DAL BOSCO and defendant BRUNO, of the WEF and/or WEF USA, who participated from New York, New York wherein the participation and approval of the UNITED NATIONS was described in detail by BRUNO, who represented that he could "put 100 Million Dollars into KEENAN's hands if KEENAN agreed [to release the DFFI in contravention of the Dragon Family's rights in the same]." After this call, Vasil Ganov, who had been present for the call inquired of what DAL BOSCO would receive from the "transaction." DAL BOSCO stated that he would receive half of the $100 Million USD offered to KEENAN for his assistance, which he indicated would be placed into a Sovereign Program by the UN and that they would receive 2000/0 monthly returns minimum from the total "investment." DAL BOSCO refused to comment on how much defendants the UN, WEF and/or WEF USA, BRUNO and OITC would receive from the transaction, indicating that such an inquiry "can only cause trouble." DAL BOSCO did, however, indicate that the stolen Notes would be placed into a "Sovereign Program by the UN," and upon completion would be returned to their rightful "owners," which he misrepresented was the OITC. DAL BOSCO further informed Ganov that "everyone was protected by the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE and the Italian Government itself."

102


(4) This complicity is also corroborated by the international telephone communication between DAL BOSCO and BRUNO, as overheard and described by Nikolay Raykov during his trip to the Zurich airport with DAL BOSCO following the telephone conference speaker call described above, and by Raykov's other interactions with DAL BOSCO and BRUNO. In the telephone conversation, BRUNO represented to Raykov that the DFFI would "be placed into a federal program using the UN as protection" along with "his company" referring to the WEF andlor WEF USA, which would "generate unlimited capital for everyone involved." According to BRUNO, "there would be no problems and that this was being blessed by the UNITED NATIONS" which "would protect everyone" as the DFFI would be "placed into a Sovereign Program" after which the DFFI "would disappear" and "there would be no questions asked." In a subsequent telephone call between Raykov and BRUNO, which took place while both parties were in New York, BRUNO advised Raykov that DAL BOSCO had absconded with the DFFI and that "now more than ever" Raykov was needed to convince KEENAN to cooperate in the conspiracy to deprive the Dragon Family of its interest in the DFFI. At a subsequent meeting between Raykov, BRUNO and DAL BOSCO at the Balexert Mall in Switzerland in May 2010, BRUNO commented that KEENAN "was stupid for not taking the 100 Million U.S. Dollars" and that "things had been in the planning stages for a while and were about to be completed with or without KEENAN." BRUNO again requested Raykov's assistance in convincing KEENAN to participate in the fraudulent scheme. When Raykov indicated that KEENAN would not listen to him, BRUNO exclaimed, "Not even for 500 Million U.S. Dollars?" BRUNO then encouraged Raykov to call him at his New York office of the WEF USA to speak about the matter further.

(5) Defendants' complicity was further corroborated during the course of the meeting between DAL BOSCO, BRUNO and Miranov at the Balexert mall in Switzerland in May 2010. At this meeting, defendant BRUNO explained who was involved in the fraudulent scheme to steal the DFFI, specifically naming defendants RAGAGLINI, MlRACIDAN, BERLUSCONI, and the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, stating: "so you see there is no possible way we can have a problem. We can cloak ourselves with the immunity shield and everyone will go away. Just another day in the UN!" During this meeting held for the purpose of convincing Miranov to assist the defendants in their fraud, a telephone call was received from defendant H.E. Ambassador MlRACHIAN, Permanent Representative of the Italian Mission to the UN in Geneva, who confirmed the direct knowledge and approval of the United Nations Secretary General, BAN KI-moon stating: (i) "from the very top we were protected"; (ii) "there is no reason for anyone, including KEENAN, to worry about any sort of repercussions"; (iii) "the Italian cohorts in New York had even approved the matter with Secretary General BANK KI-moon" whom she expressly acknowledged "would deny he knew anything about it."

103


228. KEENAN has suffered seriotls financial detriment on account of and as a direct

and proximate result of defendants' acts aiding and abetting the fraudulent scheme and, at a

minimum, defendants DAL BOSCO, BERLUSCONI, RAGAGLINI, MlRACHIAN, the

ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, the ITALIAN REPUBLIC, BAN KI-moon, the UNITED

NATIONS, BRUNO, WEF and/or WEF USA are jointly and severally liable for the full value of

the DFFI and all of its accumulated interest, with interest. Defendants DAL BOSCO,

BERLUSCONI, RAGAGLINI, MlRACHIAN, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, the

ITALIAN REPUBLIC, BAN KI-moon, the UNITED NATIONS, BRUNO, WEF and/or WEF

USA are also jointly and severally liable for KEENAN's lost profits from the fees to which he

was entitled for performing his services for the Dragon Family with respect to coordinating the

placement of the DFFI into an approved trading program.


BOSCO, BERLUSCONI, RAGAGLINI, MlRACHIAN, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE,

the ITALIAN REPUBLIC, BAN KI-moon, the UNITED NATIONS, BRUNO, WEF andlor

WEF USA aiding and abetting the effort to defraud KEENAN of the DFFI and has sustained


($1,000,000,000,000.00) US dollars.

AS AND FOR A TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST DEFENDANTS DAL BOSCO, SALE, DAM, OITC, and UNITED NATIONS,

[Aiding and Abetting Dal Bosco's Fraud under Federal Common Law and International Law]



104


231. The actions of defendants DAL BOSCO, SALE, DAM, OITC and the UNITED

NATIONS violate any and all notions of jus cogens, a body of peremptory principles of

customary and universal international law recognized by civilized nations. At a minimum, the

actions of said defendants constitute a knowing and willful participation to aid and abet the

defrauding of KEENAN of the DFFI, valued at approximately ONE TRILLION UNITED

STATES DOLLARS, which fraud was completed by defendant DAL BOSCO, who personally

obtained the DFFI from KEENAN through fraudulent misrepresentations and absconded with

the DFFI.

232. SALE and DAM acting on behalf of defendant OITC, with

knowledge of the planned fraudulent scheme to obtain the DFFI in contravention of the rights of

its true and rightful owners, and for the express purpose of facilitating the said fraud, provided

substantial assistance·in the fraud by taking the position that the DFFI stolen and converted by

DAL BOSCO were in fact the "property" ofOITC rather than the Dragon Family, thereby

enabling DAL BOSCO to perpetuate his fraud and convert the DFFI. In doing so, these

defendants provided practical assistance, encouragement and moral support to the fraud. Said

acts in substantial assistance to the scheme to defraud KEENAN, which were made with

knowledge of and for the purpose of facilitating the fraud, include the following statements

andlor actions of OITC, through SALE and DAM:

(1) Issuing the OITC Order of June 8,2010, on behalf of DAM stating: (a) DAM was appointed as international Treasury Controller under United Nations Charter Control No: 10-60847; (b) that the DFFI were, in fact, the property of the International Collateral Accounts of the Global Debt Facility which are legally owned by His Excellency, Ray C. DAM, International Treasury Controller"; (c) directing KEENAN and Yamaguchi to surrender the DFFI on or before July 7,2010.

105


(2) Sending the June 10,2010 letter via email to KEENAN "strongly advising" him not to ignore the OITC Order and to "adhere" to its content;



233. The UNITED NATIONS has been complicit in the nefarious and fraudulent

activities of OITC in that it has never formally denounced or disassociated itself from OITC, and

has allowed OITC to hold itself out to the world community as protected by its umbrella of

legitimacy and chartered by the UNITED NATIONS itself. Upon information and belief,

defendant the UNITED NATIONS, with knowledge of the planned fraudulent scheme, and for

the express purpose of facilitating the defrauding of KEENAN and the Dragon Family, provided

substantial assistance to said fraud by allowing and actively encouraging the OITC to represent

itself as affiliated with and charted by the UNITED NATIONS in OITC's efforts to convince

KEENAN to release the DFFI to defendants on the purported basis that the DFFI belonged to

OITC rather than the Dragon Family.


and proximate result of the action of defendants DAL BOSCO, SALE, DAM, OITC and the

UNITED NATIONS aiding and abetting the fraudulent scheme and, at a minimum, said

defendants are jointly and severally liable for the full value of the DFFI and all of its

accumulated interest, with interest. Defendants DAL BOSCO, SALE, DAM, OITC and the 106


UNITED NATIONS are also jointly and severally liable for KEENAN's lost profits from the




BOSCO, SALE, DAM, OITC and the UNITED NATIONS aiding and abetting the effort to

defraud KEENAN of the DFFI and has sustained damage in a sum to be determined at trial, but


AS AND FOR A ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST DEFENDANT DAL BOSCO

[Breach of:'Contract under Federal Common Law and International Law]

236. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each of the allegations contained in Paragraphs 1

through 235 with the same force and effect as though fully set forth herein.

237. After months of meetings and discussions with KEENAN, DAL BOSCO, for

valuable consideration, entered into a written contract with plaintiff, KEENAN.

238. The contract provided: (1) "I can assure you that you will never regret making

this decision"; (2) "You are aware of the fact I am well trusted and a financial advisor within the

Vatican and Mason circles and would never jeopardize my position with them for anything"; (3)

"My word is my bond and my word is Gold"; (4) "I will be waiting for your Zurich arrival so

that we can do great things for the world"; (5) "I understand clearly that I am not to discuss these

bonds with anyone outside the immediate circle and my privacy is integral to the success of

many nations"; (6) "I further understand you are the authorized representative and Power of

Attorney for said bonds and I will entrust them believe me as though it was my life depending on

it. Therefore I humbly accept the custodianship of said Bonds in which I am only to return them

107


to either you or Mr. Yamaguchi. Not any other!"; (7) "although electronic this email is to be

considered my legal binding acceptance of the following bonds" (bonds listed); (8) "Will be

ready when called upon to deliver said notes to you."

239. DAL BOSCO has failed to perform his obligations under the contract and thereby

breached the contact by failing to return and/or deliver the DFFI entrusted to him upon

notwithstanding KEENAN's repeated requests made in accordance with the terms of the

contract.


and proximate result ofDAL BOSCO's breach of contract and DAL BOSCO is consequently

liable for the full value of the DFFI and all of its accumulated interest, with interest. DAL

BOSCO is also liable for KEENAN's lost profits from the fees to which he was entitled for

performing his services for the Dragon Family with respect to coordinating the placement of the

DFFI into an approved trading program, which loss was a foreseeable result ofDAL BOSCO's

breach of contract.

241. Consequently, KEENAN has been damaged by DAL BOSCO's breach of

contract and has sustained damage in a sum to be determined at trial, but believed to be in excess

of One Trillion ($1,000,000,000,000.00) US dollars.

AS AND FOR A TWELFTH CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS [Replevin under Federal Common Law and International Law]



243. Pursuant to a certain Special Power of Attorney executed by Yamaguchi on behalf

of the Dragon Family, and with the approval of General Haan, the Head of the Dragon Family,

108


which authorized KEENAN to act on behalf of Yamaguchi and the Dragon Family for the

private placement of or legal return of the DFFI, KEENAN lawfully possessed the DFFI.

244. Defendant DAL BOSCO converted the DFFI from KEENAN and the Dragon

Family.

245. All Defendants engaged in a civil conspiracy to convert the DFFI from KEENAN

and the Dragon Family.

246. All Defendants aided and abetted the conversion of the DFFI from KEENAN and

the Dragon Family.

247. Despite repeated demands by KEENAN to return the DFFI, the Defendants have

continued in their refusal to return the DFFI to KEENAN or the Dragon Family.

248. Upon information and belief, defendant DAL BOSCO andlor alternatively all of

some of the Defendants currently possess all or a portion of the DFFI.

249. Plaintiff KEENAN therefore seeks a permanent Injunction ordering DAL BOSCO

or any other Defendant or related entity to return the DFFI to plaintiff KEENAN.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff NEIL F. KEENAN, Individllally and as Agent for THE

DRAGON FAMILY, requests judgment in his favor against Defendants as follows:

1. As to Counts One and Six against defendant DANIELE DAL BOSCO, awarding

KEENAN compensatory and consequential damages in a sum to be determined at trial, but

believed to be in excess of One Trillion ($1,000,000,000,000.00) US dollars;

2. As to Counts Two, Four, Seven and Nine against defendants DAL BOSCO,

BERLUSCONI, RAGAGLINI, MlRACHIAN, the ITALIAN FINANCIAL POLICE, the

ITALIAN REPUBLIC, BAN KI-moon, the UNITED NATIONS, BRUNO, WEF and/or WEF

USA, jointly and severally, awarding KEENAN compensatory and consequential damages in a 109


sum to be determined at trial, but believed t6 be in excess of One Trillion

($1,000,000,000,000.00) US dollars;

3. As to Counts Three, Five, Eight and Ten against defendants DAL BOSCO,

SALE, DAM, OITC and the UNITED NATIONS, jointly and severally, awarding KEENAN

compensatory and consequential damages in a sum to be determined at trial, but believed to be in

excess of One Trillion ($1,000,000,000,000.00) US dollars;

4. As to Count Eleven, against defendant DANIELE DAL BOSCO, awarding

KEENAN contractual and liquidated damages, and for compensatory, consequential and

reasonably foreseeable damages in a sum to be determined at trial, but believed to be in excess of

One Trillion ($1,000,000,000,000.00) US dollars;

5. As to Count Twelve, against all Defendants, the entry of a permanent injunction

directing each Defendant found to be in possession of the DFFI or any portion thereof, to return

the said DFFI or portion thereof to plaintiff KEENAN, which DFFI consists of:

(i) Two-Hundred Forty-nine (249) United States 1934 Series Federal Reserve Notes which, according to a Federal Reserve System Inventory List (SC1226-71-DOO4-D45184101 A) prepared at the time of issuance, were contained in "Box No. D 45184101 A" bearing Bond Nos. "D 45184101 A- D 45184350 A" (one sheet No. D 45184349 A missing) each with a face value of $500 Million ($500,000,000.00) United States Dollars in the total amount of One Hundred Twenty-Four Billion Five-Hundred Million United States Dollars ($124,500,000,000.00);

(ii) Two (2) 57th Series Japanese Government Bearer Bonds, Nos. A 1306 and A 1310, which were issued on April 30, 1983 by the Ministry of Finance, Government of Japan, each having a face value of Japanese Yen Five Hundred (500) Billion, which is equivalent to an amount in excess of Nine and One-Half (9.5) Billion United States Dollars; and

(iii) One (1) United States Kennedy Bond with a face value of One (1) Billion United States Dollars, bearing registration number APII 024068 A.

110


6. Awarding plaintiff KEENAN punitive damages and the costs of this action,

including reasonable attorneys' fees, assessed against all Defendants, jointly and severally;

7. F or such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and proper.

Dated: White Plains, New York November 23,2011

BLEAKLEY PLATT & SCHMIDT, LLP

By: William H. Mulligan, Jr. ( 2945) Justin M. Gardner (JMG 6169) Attorneys for Plaintiff One North Lexington Avenue White Plains, New York 10601 (914) 949-2700

111


UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK . . _ . ... **__l"__r_____L-_r**~**-------------h*-+**-*----------------***-** X

NEIL F. KEENAN, Individually and as Agent for 11- THE DRAGON FAMILY, citizens of foreign states,

.Plaintiff, I

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE -against-

DANIELE DAL BOSCO, a citizen of a foreign state, Et al.

Defendants. - " I _ X

I, Edward M. Person, Jr., declare and state under penalty of pe j

a. Am over 18 years of age and not a party to this action.

b. My place of business is located at 5342 Clark Road #I75 Sarasota Florida 34233.

c. On January 24,20 12, Chsbphcr Strunk gave me instmct~ons to personally serve a true conformed copy

of the Sin&% Notice of Motion to Intervene with Supporting f idav i t Exhibits and Memorandum of

Caw with the Verified Supplement to the Complaint for the case Keenan et a1 , v Bosco Er 01.. S D M

Case No.: 201 1-8500, for personal service upon Gancarlo Bruno and the World Economic Forum USA

Inc.

d. I placed one copy each in a brom envelope with the name and address of the Party with the notice

"Urgent Legal Sentice" printed in the lower left corner of the envelope and seating same.

e. OnJanuary24,2012,at 1:56PM-Ip~dlywenttoserveuponGian~loBrunoandtheWorld

Economic Forum USA Inc. at the 17th Floor of 3 East 54th Street New York New York where Rafaela

Caucasian 25 years old Brownish hair there for Recepti~n received service for Giancarlo Bruno and the

World Economic Forum USA Inc.

Dated: New York New York January 24,2012

- &:7L1 Edward M. f erson, Jr.

2

UNITED STATES DISTRIm COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK *-*---d-*--*------*-----------------------------------------------X

NEIL F. KEENAN, individually and as Agent for THE DRAGON FAMILY, citizens of foreign states, I

Plaintiff, - '7 1 .

against-

DANIELE DAL BOSCO, a citizen of a foreip state, Et d. -.

Defendants.

---------d--p-----------*-------*----------- X

I, Edward M. Person, Jr., declare and state under penalty of perjury with 28 USC

I a. Am over 18 years of age and not a party to this action. I b. My place of business is located at 5342 Clark Road #I75 Sarasota Florida 34233.

c. On January 24,2012, Chnstophcr Stmnk gavc me instructions to personally scrvc a true conformed copy

of the Sbmk's Notice of Motion to Intervene with Supporting Mdavit Exhibits and Memorandum of

Law d the Verified Supplement to the Complaint for the case Keenan et al. v Bosco Ef at.. ,TDNY

Case No.: 201 1-8500, for petsonal service upon H.E. Ambassador Marcello Spatafora Del Consoklato

G e n d e d'ltafia a New York for the Italian Government defendants..

d. T placed one copy each in a brmn envelope with the name and address of the Party with the notice I "Urgent Legal Set-vice" printed in the lower left corner of the envelope and sealing same.

e. On January 24,2012, at 1:40 PM - I personally went to serve upon HE. Ambassador Marcello

Spatafora Del Consolato Gende d'Italia a New York for the Italian Government defendarrts at the 690

Park Avenue New YorkNew York where xhe 55 year old heavyset man bald there fbr WeptionlSecurity received service for the HE, Ambassador Marcello Spatafora h1 Consolato

Generale d'ltdia a New York.

Dated: New Yo& New York January 24,20 12

b - -- I

UNITED STATES DISTRlCT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ______L_r_____rr___- - - - - -~ - - - - - - * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -m- - - - - - - - - - X I

NEIL F. KEENAN, Individually and as Agent for 1 1 -CV-8500 [ W H ) THE DRAGON FAMILY, citizens of foreign states,

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE

DANIELE DAL BOSCO, a citizen of a foreign state, Et al.

- Defendants. . - - . -

I--__ _IYI______I_-_IC_I______ X

I, Edward M. Person, Jr., declare and state under penalty of perjury with 28 USC

' a. Am over 18 years of age and not a party to this action.

b. My place of business is located at 5342 Clark Road #I75 Sarasota ~lorida 34233.

c. On laouary 24,20 12, Christopher Strunk gave me imtmctions to personally serve a true conformed copy

of the Sfrunk's Notice of Motion to Intervene with Supporting *davit Exhibits and Memorandum of

Law wah the Verified Supplement to the Complaia for the case Keenan et a1 u Bosco Et nl.. SDNY

Case No.: 20 1 1-8500, for persod service upon Consulate General of Switzerland.

d. I placed one copy each in a brown envelope with the name and address of the Party with the notice

"Urgent Legal Senice" printed in the lower leR comer of the envelope and sealing same.

e. On January 24,20 12. at 2:3 1 PM - I personally went to the Consulate General of Switzerland at the 3 0'

Flmr of 633 Third Avenue New York New York where Rafaela received service for the Consulate

General of Switzerland. C

Dated: New York New Yerk January 24,2012

- :&*Lgg?g Edward M. Person, Jr.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 1----*--*-"--__----------*--*-*-----------h+--+--*--*--"---------- X PRO SE OFFICE NEIL F. KEENAN, Individually and as Agent for 1 1-CV-8500 []R31H) THE DRAGON FAMILY, citizens of foreign states,

Plaintiff, AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE

- - - -

DANIELE DAL BOSCO, a citizen of a foreign state, Et al. -a,-

Defendants. ... - - -

-..YIC-III------lllllt-t..r"---I--------1~-..1----1-1-- X - r -

I, Edward M. Person, Jr., declare and state under penalty of perjury 1 7 Y &

d a. Am over 18 years of age and not a party to this action.

b. My place of business is located at 5342 Clark Road #I75 S a r e t a Florida 34233.

c. On Jamaary 24,2012, Christopher Stmnk gave me instructions to personally serve a true confumed copy

of the Summons and Complaint filed 1 1/23/20 1 1 for the case Keenan et al. v Basco Et a/. . SDM Case

No.: 201 1-8500, for persod service by USPS certified return receipt upon Tbe Foreign Bondholders

Protective Council by John R..Petty the PtificipaI, Ban Ki-Moon Individually and as the Secretaq

General of the United Nations.

d. 1 placed one copy each in a brown envelope with ml y the name and address of the defendant with the

notice "Urgent Legal Service" printed in the lower left comer of the envelope and sealing same with a

certified return receipt with return address of Christopher Stmnk and the USPS placed proper postage.

e. On January 24,2012, at 5 : 00 PM - I personally went to the Church Street Station Post Office where

each envelope was deposited with the USPS for senjce upon Partics nad or their counsel:

Fo- Bendholdefk Pidtkctive C o u d Inc, By J o h R. Petty Principal 1402 LAMGLEY PL MC LEAN, VA 221 01-3010 Cert RR # 701 11 570000107000671

Dated: New York New York January 24,20 12

Ban Ki-moon individually and as Secretary General of the United nations United Nat~ons Head'quarters Room GA-1857 New York, New York 1001 7 Cert RR # 701 11 570000107000688

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ----------=*-------------*-m*-------------------------------------

NEIL F. KEENAN, Individually and as Agent for 1 f -CV-8500 (-1 THE DRAGON FAMILY, citizens of foreign states,

.Plainm, AFFrnA

-against-

DANIELE DAL BOSCO, a citizen of a foreign state, Et d.

Defendants. . . . - . ..

+ w I, Edward M. Person, Jr., declare and state under penalty of perjury with 28 USC WW r '7 5f.k

a. Am over 18 years a€ age and not a party to this action.

b. My place of business is located at 5342 Clark Road #I75 Sarasotn Florida 34233.

c. On January 24,2012, Christopher Stnmk gave me instructions to personally serve a t rue conformed copy

of the Strunk's Notice of Motion to Intervene with Supporting Affjdavit Exhibits and Memorandum of

Law with the Verified Supplement to the Complaint forthe case Keenan et al. v Bosco Et al..SDM

Case No.: 201 1-8500, for personal service by USPS cedfied r a m receipt upon The Foreign

Bondholders Protective Council by John R.,Petty the'hncipd. Ban Ki-Moon Individually and as the

Secretary General of the United Nations and Neil F. Keenan by counsel William H. Mulligan of Bleakley

Platt & Schmidt LLP

d. 1 placed one copy each in a brown envelope with only the name and address of the defendant with the

notice "Urgent Legal Service" printed in the lower lefi corner of the envelope and sealing same with a

certified return rcccipt &th rcturn addrcss of Christopher Stnrnk and the USPS placcd propcr postage . e. On January 24,2012, at 5 : 00 PM - I p e r s d I y went to the Church Stred Station Post Wee where

m b envelope was deposited with the USPS for service upon Parties and or their counsel:

Foreign Bondholders Protective Council Inc, By John R. Petty Principal 1402 LANGLEY PL Ban Ki-moon idividuallya and as Secretary Generl MC LEAN, VA 22101301 0 of the United nauons Cert RR #7011157000010?000671 United Nations Headquarters .

Room GA- 1 5 5 7 William H, Mulligan Jr. f sq. New York, New York 10017 Bleakley Matt &Schmidt LLP Cert RR # 70t 11 57000010700~88 One North Lexington Avenue White Plalns NY 10601 Cert RR # 701 115700001 07000895

Dated: New York New York '

Jammy 24,2012

UNITED STATES DISTWCT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

NEIL F. KEENAN, Individually and as Agent for THE DRAGON FAMILY, citizens of foreign states, ..

Plaintiff, .r AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE

:F . I 8

I DANlELE DAL BOSCO, a citizen of a foreign state, Et al.

Defendants. - - - --I-II ---- ---- -----------*- X t .

w I, Edward M. Person, Jr., declare and state under penalty of perjury with 28 USC 1 7 9-6- .-. e7 .

- - . _ . . I a. Am over 1 8 years of age and not a party to this action.

i'b 1 I(

. -A . b. My place of business is Iocated at 5342 CIark Road #I75 Sarasota Florida 34

j c. On January 24,2012, Chstophcr Strunk gave me instructions to penonally scrvc a true conformed copy -

afthe Strunk's Notice of Motion to Intervene with Supporting Affidavit Exhibits and Memorandum of

Law with the Verified Supplement to the Complaint for the case Keenan et a1 . v Bosco Et a?. . SDM

Case No.: 201 1-8500, for personal service upon The Federal Reserve Bank of New York by Chairman /

President Lee C. Bollinger.

d. T placed one copy each in a b m envelope with the name and address of the Party with the notice

"Urgent Legal Service" printed in the lower left corner of the envelope and sealing same.

e. On January 24,2012, at 4: I0 PM - I personally went to the Mailroom of Federal Resene Bank of New

York at 75 Libaty Street New York New York where Mr. Press received service of Federal Reserve

Bank of New York by Chainnan I President Lee C. Bollinger.

Dated: New York New York I I

Janua1y24.2012

Edward M. Person, Jr..

update with voluntary withdrawal of complaint by keenan in re ces nom to intervene with exhibits and...

Documents

i complaint

william mulligan

im hedging

im pro se

foreign defendants

invoice net invoice

invoice date

dal bosco hadnt