This paper was originally posted by me and served on everyone in July 2007

Sunset provision (of the 1985 Bank Act of Canada)
[OR IS IT DOOMSDAY PROVISION?]

dollar(1) Subject to subsection (2), banks shall not carry on business and authorized foreign banks shall not carry on business in Canada after April 24, 2007,
Except that if Parliament dissolves on that day or at any time within the three-month period before that day, banks may continue to carry on business, and authorized foreign banks may continue to carry on business in Canada, respectively, until the day that is one hundred and eighty days after the first day of the first session of the next Parliament.

(2) The Governor in Council may, by order, extend by up to six months the time during which banks may continue to carry on business and authorized foreign banks may continue to carry on business in Canada. No more than one order may be made under this subsection.
1991, c. 46, s. 21; 1997, c. 15, s. 2; 1999, c. 28, s. 9; 2001, c. 9, s. 44; 2006, c. 4, s. 199.
1991, c. 46, s. 20; 1999, c. 28, s. 8; 2005, c. 54, s. 6
NOTE: [As to PART 2] The ability to feed the beast does not require legislation,
- It's done by Orders in Council [behind closed door] - under Sec 33 of the Charter
- It cannot be legislated because it's so unconstitutional
NOW look at the number of times this hammer has been used.
To paraphrase a Rothchild:
- He care not who rights the laws, by controlling the supply of money, he rules the world
_____________________________________________________________________________

This clause of the Bank Act has beeg used to systematically turn us into slaves

brianThe 1985 Bank Act can never be sent to the legislature again since it's last revision of 1992, {after NAFTA changes}
- because it's so unconstitutional. 
BUT: The SCC ruled it legal & until Parliament changes the law it's legal

So this means that since it's unconstitutional to present another Bank Act [without violating this NAFTA contract - foreign obligation] means that every time the Banksters want to improve the system they force an "Order in Council" to harmonize the form under the NEW WORLD ORDER
It's all done under economic duress,[new definition of Color of Office] because the banks might stop printing, or trading money

My contention is that:
Collusion between the 1985 Bank Act and Brian Mulroney has created a 'vice' that cranks tighter every time they use this DOOMSDAY CLAUSE, since 1992, which enables the banks to rule and improve the racket of converting everyone to warehouse receipts,

By simply perverting the definition of words, they totally perverted the law
through an addiction to lexicography, with a greater standing under roman & feudal law
[Hitler did exactly the same thing after he got into power - he was also a puppet of the banksters]

Parliament passed a law in 1985 declaring that we need our own law Dicitonary, [DCL]
So that we are not influenced by foreign definitions to words used in our laws, so they legislated
that if a word exists in this new [DCL] that's the only definition that can apply in Canadian law.

[the lexicography link goes in great detail - BUT these glaring definitions must be points]

WAREHOUSE RECEIPTS: (DCL- Dictioany 0f Canadian Law) receipts given by any person for any hydrocarbons received by him as bailee, whether this obligation to restore required delivery of same hydrocarbons or may be satisfied by delivery of like quantity of hydrocarbons of similar grade or kind, - Bank Act RSC 1985 -
We humans have been reduced to bags of hydrocarbons AND there really are people this evil

beaver1Schedule II Warehouse Receipts are Receipts given by the owners of warehouses,-, etc., acknowledging the possession of chattel property (SOB) stored, or kept for the owners of such chattel property.  The ownership of the property may be changed on purchase, by the endorsement and delivery of the warehouse receipt.  These receipts are used largely as collateral security.  They are given to bankers, -, and others along with their notes, as security for further advances of money....
(Ps: We've been made into chattel to back the value of money)

The Dictionary was commissioned in 1985 and all kinds of perverted definitions to words [like this] were inserted, in 1985 across a dozen or so Acts that effect the Bank Act. . The real fraud here lies in the fact that they didn't print any of these changes until they printed the first DCL - 4 years later
- this means nobody in the public could scrutinize any of this until it was way to late

NOTE: NONE OF THIS WAS LEGALLY POSSIBLE WITHOUT SEC- 33 OF THE CHARTER
This is why I call this 'notwithstanding clause' the Masonic /demonic clause of our Charter

-  My contention is that the BAR swore an oath to the bankster's rule of law in 1993,
due to improvements made to the 1992 Sunset provisions, and
THAT: "Civilian Oversight" in the 1998 Police Act was created by the 1997 Sunset provisions, and this robbery in 2002 enabled foreign police to trespass any jurisdiction, at will.
______________________________________________________________________________  

harperAND EXACTLY AS PRE-ORDAINED [by the 1985 Bank Act]
-  Stephen Harper 'gave' everything that encompasses Maritime jurisdiction to NATO, within the first 100-days in Office
- NATO is the police /army of NAFTA and EEC [new world order] .  
[he did not sell it - he gave it - under Order of Council] AND then went to Parliament and passed it as a priority bill or go back to another election

All NATO needs is 1-more election, and it doesn't matter who wins,
we all loose …welcome to the NEW WORLD ORDER
- I filed this protest with my MP Libby Davies and in Court Affidavit,
she calls this effort to save our country 'diatribe' [ranting - nonsense]

I filed this information in my Appeals Court file to urge then to seize my file in order to file an intervener to the Bank Act, by using my damage award to pay off this debt, and the panel refused to seize my file.
IF this panel had seized my file, they could have seized a moment to intervene in this round of the Sunset provisions. By not seizing the file they can say that they knew nothing that was in the file.

gansterI am firmly convinced that they justify all their activity through case law precidents, and that the banksters who push this law through this new 'color of Office' [by the people under economic duress] means they will seize my file to take a giant leap into perversion, because they just can't help it.
NATO is imposing the most criminally organized society in the history of mankind on the world and it's all based on a form in slavery

[It's all done through roberry] Robbery is not a crime;
it's one authority exorcising authority in another jurisdiction under this new color of Office, which now is defined as “by the people under economic duress”, under this undefined 'rule of nature' .
- as opposed to 'by the people for the people under the rule of law

Here's another example of robberry through word perversion: This new DCL defines a Judge as an authority that holds quasi-legal juridiction. This means that they can break the law

judgeThis Appeals Court refused to seize my file, so did not in law have to do anything, and they refused to forward my file , THEY COULD HAVE RESOLVE MY CASE BEFORE THE CUT-OFF DATE, ON JUST JURISDICTIONAL GROUNDS, BY FORWARDING MY FILE TO A CHIEF JUSTICE, which means I would have a case to force them to rule a 'yes' or a 'no' ruling to just looking at my damages award, that is in this case file OR use this interferer to force Parliament to BRING THE BANK ACT TO PARLIAMENT FOR A PUBLIC DEBATE AND VOTE. 

This means that they had about a month to call my damages award frivolous and vexatious, under economic duress or 'address it' to pay off this bullshit debt to banksters who have perverted it to the point where it's impossible to pay and never can never be paid

Within a few days after this date there were all kinds of declarations made by especially the courts, to the effect that they were being given greater powers to impose authority

My Lord's nature is like a hen wanting to gather her children under her wings; [Mat-23]
nafta
But this not Baal's nature. Baal is always attributed as a demon who possesses rulers,
it's not it's a demon that possesses nations.

As in Egyptian times, we are kneeling to Baal, [serving the economy stupid] Moses came and liberated the Jews from slavery to Baal. and

All I'm here to do is deliver the message of the Spirit of Life that liberates us from Baal.

THE ROOTS ARE EVIL BECAUSE THEY ARE NOURISHED WITH BLOOD - THE FRUIT OF PURSUING THIS TREE IS DEATH ITSELF...