I am a firm believer in the concept that we get the “leaders” we collectively deserve — even though they all come from the (cess) pool of candidates the powers that be (those I refer to as our “BOSOs”) select for us.
After last October’s Canadian federal elections, I first gave our new prime minister, Justin Pierre James Trudeau, the benefit of the doubt as to his true allegiance. When he announced that he would bring 25,000 so-called Middle Eastern refugees to Canada, without appropriate vetting, of course, I knew he was in with the globalist agenda. By the way, this objective was reached on February 27th, 2016. Way to go Justin.
Meanwhile, our beau new PM found time out to pose with his wife, Sophie Grégoire, for some lascivious photographs published in the January 2016 issue of Vogue magazine. Making you proud to be Canadian.
Outsourcing jobs, curtaining our national sovereignty, sounds good to Justin
Then came the matter of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, known as the TPP, which the precedent Conservative government of Stephen Harper had discreetly agreed to on October 5, 2015, at a ministerial meeting held in Atlanta, Georgia — just before being ousted by the Canadian electorate in the October 19 general election. In February of 2016, the new Liberal government confirmed its intention of signing the controversial trade deal at a meeting held in New Zealand. Isn’t it a wonderful aspect of “democracy” to see the same agendas being carried forward even when we throw an old crowd out and bring a new one in…
Friends in high places
Justin called his three-day March getaway to Washington a “tremendous success” after being wined and dined by the allegedly gay muslim occupant of the White House and his First Lad Michael. Trudeau took time out to address a pair of liberal think-tanks, and for a meeting at the World Bank with its president, Jim Yong Kim. The visit also emphasized Trudeau’s personal bond with Barack Hussein Obama II rather than their policy agreements, which include pacts on methane emissions, Arctic conservation, and traveller information-sharing…
Let me spend your money
After this 3-day love feast with his friends in Washington, Canada’s poster boy has gone on in true socialist fashion not only to spend other people’s money, but money that does not even exist since it is borrowed from the future — in polite circles, this is called “deficit spending”.
On March 22, Finance Minister Bill Morneau tabled the Liberal government’s first budget — and quite liberal it is, with a forecasted $29.4 billion deficit for this year, followed by an additional $29 billion deficit next year. Hey, who’s counting?
Your money now officially belongs to the bank
What went unreported in the mainstream media amidst all the new spending on families, infrastructure and indigenous peoples, were the dispositions hidden deep within the budget with regards to future bank failures. For Tyler Durden of Zero Hedge, this is “official confirmation that Canada has just become the latest country to treat depositors as the bank creditors they are, and as such, they too will be impaired, or ‘bailed-in’, the next time a Canadian bank needs to be rescued.”
According to the Examiner, bank failures may actually be occurring sooner than the Canadian people think. A large number of banks are finding themselves unable to receive payments due for billions of Canadian dollars in loans made to oil companies. In the wake of falling prices, several domestic producers are apparently not only losing money, but in some cases having to shut down operations altogether. According to recent statistics, Canada’s six largest banks are on the hook for over $100 billion in energy sector loans and credit lines that are in danger of going into default as oil prices remain in the dumps.
So, not be caught off-guard, the Liberal government has taken measures to preserve Canada’s precious banking sector when the stuff hits the fan. Not if, when. The new Canadian “Bail-in” Regime was announced in one of the last sections of the last chapter of the budget, under the vague heading “Renewing Financial Sector Legislation“.
Here is was it actually says, with my comments in brackets:
Introducing a Bank Recapitalization “Bail-in” Regime
To protect Canadian taxpayers [i.e. to protect banksters] in the unlikely [really? So why this new legislation?] event of a large bank failure [which is “unlikely”, as we just said], the [liberal socialist/communist/globalist] Government is proposing to implement a bail-in regime that would reinforce [i.e. change the basic rules of banking we have always relied upon, meaning that money in the bank is our money] that bank shareholders and creditors [this means depositors] are responsible for the bank’s risks [and not the banks themselves — surprise!] — not taxpayers [taking money from depositors has less of a public impact than a more publicized bail-out coming out of the government’s coffers]. This would allow authorities to convert eligible long-term debt of a failing systemically important bank into common shares to recapitalize the bank [this means they will take your “eligible” long-term deposits and give you shares of your failing bank in compensation] and allow it to remain open and operating. Such a measure is in line with international efforts [i.e. this is part of the global agenda] to address the potential risks to the financial system and broader economy of institutions perceived as “too-big-to-fail”.
The Government is proposing to introduce framework legislation for the regime [i.e. “the actual law is coming soon folks”] along with accompanying enhancements to Canada’s bank resolution toolkit [whatever this means]. Regulations and guidelines setting out further features of the regime will follow [like I said, this is coming, soon]. This will provide stakeholders with an additional opportunity to comment on elements of the proposed regime [comment all you like, we have to implement our masters’ agenda — sorry folks, you elected us].
Canada’s financial system performed well during the 2008 global financial crisis. Since that time, Canada has been an active participant in the G20’s financial sector reform agenda aimed at addressing the factors that contributed to the crisis. This includes international efforts to address the potential risks to the financial system and broader economy of institutions perceived as “too-big-to-fail”. Implementation of a bail-in regime for Canada’s domestic systemically important banks would strengthen our bank resolution toolkit so that it remains consistent with best practices of peer jurisdictions and international standards endorsed by the G20.
You can’t make this up — this is the actual text from the budget. It clearly states that every major country is in line with our masters’ agenda. By the way, if you want to understand what “bail-in” means, look at what happened in Cyprus in 2013. This was a dress rehearsal for this new bankster scheme officially adopted as the G20 Summit of November 2014.
Let those who have ears hear. And those who have eyes read. Read this again. Let it sink in.
And I ask you again: to whose tune is our beau Justin dancing, do you think?
I encourage you to freely redistribute my posts, so long as the text is unaltered and provided full credit with a live link back to the original story are given.
- Our “Benevolent” Occult Satanist Overlords — I find this expression more descriptive and accurate than others such as “The Cabal”, the “Global Elite”, the “One per cent”, the “Illuminati”, etc. Besides, it encompasses all of these and probably more we don’t even know about.
- Here is an interesting little tidbit for those who believe our leaders are groomed well in advance: on April 14, 1972, during a state visit to Canada, U.S. president Richard M. Nixon gave a toast to the then 4-month old Justin: “I’d like to toast the future prime minister of Canada, to Justin Pierre Trudeau”, to which Trudeau’s father, Pierre Elliott, responded that should his son ever assume the role, he hoped he would have “the grace and skill of the president”.
- I am always intrigued by what might be in a name. Pierre Elliott Trudeau had based his 1968 electoral campaign around the theme of a “just society”, and I clearly remember that in the conservative family circle I was growing up in, it was said that he had named his first son “Justin” in reference to this theme that was very close to his heart as a socialist/communist who had first made his teeth as a trade union activist.