Wednesday, October 16, 2019

Clown world election


20 comments:

zapoper said...

Look at the picture that CBC chose for that YT video. Bernier is a NAZI. LOL

Chainsawmillerman said...

Maxime Bernier is a hard working man and he has proven he takes his work home with him. LOL Maxime Bernier resigned from cabinet over a security breach involving classified documents left at his girlfriends house in 2008. He is the only guy I agree with though. These people are a collection of clowns. We need to start using the Bank of Canada as it was intended. Before 1974 we used the bank for interest free infrastructure loans for the country. None of these pooh flingers care about Canadians or will mention this.Pierre Trudeau destroted this country in 1974. Its time we had a none of the above option on the ballot. Voter turn out would explode to at least 80 percent i bet LOL

zapoper said...

The Bank of Canada by the way is still the people's bank. It's not a private entity like the federal reserve but it behave as if it is.

zapoper said...

"Its time we had a none of the above option on the ballot."

Especially if they force us to vote as they are talking about.

Chainsawmillerman said...

Your right Zap but its an illusion wouldn't you say?

Canada is the only public bank in the g 20. All other banks are private it's true . Sec 17 of the Bank of Canada Act says, The minister of finance holds all shares on behalf of her majesty the queen, in other words the minister holds all the assets of Canada on behalf of the people of Canada. Under sec 14 of the Bank Of Canada Act, The minister of finance has the final say over the governor of the Bank of Canada. Since 1974 the Minister of finance has refused to request these loans for human capital expenditures. The way these loans worked was they were interest free up to a maximum of 1/3 of the annual budget, which had to be paid in the next fiscal year. This avoided the interest and so no accumulating debt. Now here is a bizarre fact...For years now the Bank of Canada has started floating loans to the commercial banks at around 1/2 a percent interest. The commercial banks then turn around and lends it back to the government at a commercial rate 2 or 3 times higher than what the bank of Canada lent it to them at. This begs the question WHY? The Bank of Canada is taking orders from a bunch of private bankers in Europe and they determine Canadian sovereignty with respect to currency, interest and Canadian socioeconomic development. That's the reason the Bank of Canada was set up for in the first place, to be a bank for a sovereign Canada.

The second part of the problem is the finance ministers refusal and inaction in providing the house of commons the true figure of total revenues every year before the house of commons decides to borrow to meet its budgetary needs, for instance they say we have revenues of 240 billion we have budgetary needs of 280 billion so we are going to borrow 40 billion. That's not actually accurate. They don't get the actual revenue collected or collectable before the various tax credits under the taxing statutes are remitted back to the tax payers. that includes everything from child tax credits to research and developments all sorts of corporate tax credits that go back. So parliamentarians don't have the true revenues. Why this is important is because if they did, they could effectively debate if running a deficit or not running a deficit is in our best interests and pay all this interest to commercial banks. Where that ties into is there is a constitutional right to no taxation without representation in the Canadian constitution. If the parliamentarians do not have all the figures and facts they cannot effectively debate what taxation levels are necessary. If they did they could debate whether or not they wanted to run a deficit.

Chainsawmillerman said...

That being said there have been some changes in recent years but the scam still remains.
https://cba.ca/global-banking-regulations-and-banks-in-canada

zapoper said...

Very well explained Chain.

It is an illusion but I would argue that the said illusion is illegal.

If I could effectively argue in the first place that is. LOL

John Miller said...

Is Canada too - behind the curtain - controlled by a clique of greasy Jewdaist/Globalist communist bastards ?
Thanks for infos

John Miller said...

Or is it just an illusion ?

John Miller said...

Hi...
I have no reason to "LOL"
Mine are serious questions....

Chainsawmillerman said...

The illusion runs deep for sure and although our fellow citizens were born with a brain capable of deciphering this scam. We are subjected to a Bernasian like mind control starting in elementary school and are born with altruistic tendencies.
Our Judicial system too is tied into the financial system through corporate personhood. Every statute redefines you into some other corporate legal fiction such as "driver" under the Motor Vehicle act etc. All that freeman on the land stuff is true however you swim in their sea. It's organized crime and the individual is not going to bring it down. Anyone who tries pays with jail time and possibly a reduction of their IQ during their stay in the crowbar hotel LOL

Chainsawmillerman said...

So the above is not illegal because we all have the "right" to contract.Just about every statute requires your signature. It's a commercial system as we all know.The only illegal aspect i can see is the lack of full disclosure. But i suspect their is something about the notion of tacit agreement in law that saves them even from that.

ruxpert said...

Mike's Ingenious Idea
http://www.chimpanzoo.org/african_notecards/chapter_19.html

ruxpert said...


Presidential 'debates' aren't debates at all - they're joint press conferences
This kind of format promotes the use of candidates' focus-group tested messaging, "one-liners and canned mini-speeches."
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/52407.htm
http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?m=1101581137416&ca=f7a541da-5c6c-4dec-b552-bdbde76a1432

Liam said...

Canada, oh Canada! how I love the corporation of Canada.

It's just commerce, no more, no less. Look to the Bills of Exchange Act, the oldest and earliest, as the most recent, 1984 maybe, defines a bank differently, but I doubt it has royal accent.

The Bills of Exchange Act, I suggest, is the Number One Act in all corporations posing as nations.

Liam said...

"however you swim in their sea" Yes we do, and they have brought Admiralty Law onto the but we can too, "walk on water" as the parable states when we interpret the "script" accurately. Remedy is in the Law, Natural Law, not legal statutes.

Liam said...

Admiralty Law onto the Land, but

Liam said...

Arguing is dishonourable, which is why lawyers and Corporate Courts encourage it. I have lost by walking in. "Settle with your brother / neighbour before you go to Court, if you go to court, be prepared to go to jail" I paraphrase. I have shown I cannot act with honour, and settle out of court.

Hello Schafers and Alison Chabloz!
Conditional acceptance is honourable. I accept your claim subject to you providing admissible affadavit evidence to unconditionally support your claim.
Look to Graham Hart's recent experience and writings.

Chainsawmillerman said...

Russell Porisky whom i followed closely was sentenced to 5 1/2 years for tax evasion in April of 2019. Winston Shrout who i followed closely. In the US,did you hear that Winston Shrout got convicted in Fed court? Sentenced to 10 years on 4 counts of willful failure to file; 13 counts of 18:514(a)(1) – Fictitious Obligations. He got 10 years on each of the indictments for a total 40 years, but they are running them concurrently. He was supposed to surrender in June but did not. Now he is a fugitive with a federal warrant issued. Order of Dismissal of Appeal by USCA-9th Circuit as to Winston Shrout regarding Notice of Appeal 163 USCA # 18-30228. Appellee has informed this court that appellant is a fugitive and that there is an outstanding warrant for appellant’s arrest.
If you want to play this gave it seems it might be more beneficial to create a class action suit.In it prove the fundamental tenets of this flawed system with respect to corporate personhood and the oppression that this occult contract into voluntary slavery is really mass involuntary slavery and is really a ruse against non Talmudic Jews. I suspect the term Monster in Blacks Law dictionary is really referring to the Goyim.

Chainsawmillerman said...

I know it is much more difficult to be a plaintiff than a defendant.At the same time it seems it may be better to really prepare and present this as human beings not as legal fictions. You and I and everyone else that forms this "body politic" belong to the law society. If we can get consensus on this with the greater population which is extremely difficult and walk away from this current system then we all have a chance. There is no remedy in this organized crime system that has locked you down and butt fucked you hard.We need to challenge the system as a new society that wants to erase this evil satanic one.You dont argue you walk away. Now what are the chances we are going to get the numbers we need?