88. Big Brother is IN your HOUSE!

VIEWS @ 7024

On another note - no less serious, if not worse! We have a publicly owned utility, BC Hydro (British Columbia being the Province I live in). They have been installing 'Smart-Meters,' replacing what they now refer to as 'legacy' meters; these are the 'old,' standard meters, meters that need to be read, every 2 month billing phase - by a real person, a Hydro employee.

New technology allows Hydro electronic access to read your meter, the way you access information on your cell phones. This means great savings to Hydro, by cutting the jobs of meter readers. Those of us who refused these new 'Smart Meters' are being penalized to the tune of $35.00 a month. (Even though the meters were read every 2 months.) We are holding out for a number of reasons. It is yet another area in which freedom of Democracy for individual rights are being challenged. The article I publish below is from a caring professional.

Guest Editorial from John Ranns   November  2013

 

What I find most disturbing about BC Hydro’s forced imposition of smart meters is how readily politicians of all parties have abandoned fundamental principles of a free society in order to accommodate bureaucratic expediency. Individual freedom demands that government has boundaries.  As far back as the 1600s the concept that individuals need sanctuary from government was established in British Common Law ( still applicable in British Columbia) clearly stating that your home is your castle and the sovereign will not cross your threshold without following due process.  Except now they have.  In one stroke the Province is saying that lawful citizens no longer have a choice in what enters or leaves their homes.

 

Although debate has been carefully steered to encompass technical arguments and ignore principle there are two facts about smart meters which cannot be denied.  They emit radiation into your house and, when Hydro chooses, they will gather and disseminate personal information which previously would have required a court order. 

Whether the radiation is harmful or ultimately proves to be safe is not the point. What is critical to the issue is that many people believe it to be harmful and now their sanctuary along with their peace of mind is denied them. Nor does it matter how little you may care what government, corporations and hackers know about what you do in your home, What matters is that the safeguards protecting others who do care must remain in place..

 

And forget the argument that they are free to go somewhere else. In our current economy most people in this province who have a job and a mortgage have no choice but to stay where they are and do what BC Hydro dictates. For populated areas supplied electricity has become more essential to life than supplied water.  Urban regulations will not permit alternative sources and those who could legally go off the grid can rarely afford the expense.  BC Hydro is a government established monopoly so there are no competitors to turn to for service provision. Under these circumstances the only protection an individual has are our elected representatives. Except in this case, regardless of party, they have determined that what is good for business is more important than long established individual rights.

 

Recently, politicians of all description prominently displayed poppies and paid homage to the sacrifices made by previous generations who understood that to maintain a free system over time it is necessary for certain principles to be inviolate.  Government must conform to the principle rather than change the principle to accommodate the wishes of whoever happens to be in power. It is why we have Constitutions.  Unfortunately many politicians these days don’t seem to think that way. They do not recognize that our jobs are not only to represent our electorate, majority and minority, but also to serve as guardians of the free system.  Sadly  we seem all too willing to thoughtlessly forfeit our freedom for the latest of fleeting  conveniences that our runaway technology may provide.

 

John Ranns          

 

87. A Dichotomy of Matter

VIEWS @ 7009

While enjoying a fairy-book ending to the Canadian women's unlikely Olympic hockey Gold medal win over the US team, remember, although, still goat-like fleet of foot, I am approaching 75.
Caught a 'first of the season' hummingbird hovering in front of the window, facing my blooming-again 'Xmas Cactus.' "Sorry dear..."

Had a call yesterday from Divisional Court's Ms. Salkeley, acknowledging receipt of my letter.... Deadline for filing confirmed (by unrecorded verification I assume), being March 25, 2014.  Possible Dates for Appeal given, depending on when Certificate of Completion is filed.

Checked some Postal Codes to identify certain locations. Noticed Defense 'Canada Inc.' company is alive and well with their promos. Also realized some time ago that although crying wolf in court, insurance likely paid for most of their legal costs.

So while watching my Democracy's delight in Russia's madhouse of political strife, while hosting the olympics, as the Ukraine is falling apart, I ponder general sensibilities, while I, once again, doggedly compile text on paper to fight another war.

Why am I so obsessed with truth and honesty? Do I have nothing better to do? Why not leave mankind to dissolve itself naturally? Why meddle with madness? Does anything need to make sense?

86. On Preparing the Factum for my Appeal.

Factum = "The statement of the Facts of a Case."

Pretend you are on the moon, or on Mars for that matter (it will happen folks).
WHAT would be considered FACTS there? Perchance, a lack of OXYGEN?... YIP!

Did you know, that OXYGEN was only a GAS that showed up late on this planet of 'ours?'
When sea plankton began creating it, through osmosis. And then, low and behold certain species, including eventually our species, beginning to, cleverly, make use of it? And now, as our life-line, can NOT live without it?

Since we NEVER addressed the FACTS of my claim (clever defense manipulation with well-timed motions to dismiss, based on my claim's purported 'frivolity' took front and center), I am now forced to address, not the FACTS of the claim, but, in FACT, what the Masters in Case Management decided was pertinent and relevant. All purported "FACTS"considered by the court being based on the text and aims of Defense Motions. There was ZERO effort spent on perusing the detailed factors of the filed claim.

This then is taking me in to the realm of the Rules of Civil Procedures (as I interpret them); the adherence thereof, or, in my appeal's case - the LACK of adherence thereto.

So THAT's what I am striving to do at the moment. Based on the 2 Transcripts, I am interpreting WHY the MASTERS, in their wisdom, although admitting they were familiar with the claim, decided to forego dealing with the facts inherent in the claim. Rather force case issues towards finding pertinent and relevant "in the circumstances," to order this now reduced claimant to appellant, to answer questions far beyond the most simple claim's factors of Contractual Non-Compliance.

 I ask again: What in heavens name does my work as a Handyman - late in my life - have ANY factual bearing, to a highly confined and specific contracted website?









 

85. Am I Flogging a Dead 'Status Quo Ridden' Horse...?

VIEWS @6,885

If it took 2 Atom Bombs to save my life, is it likely one Divisional Court Judge will accept my reasons for appeal? Clearly, no single Self-Representing Litigant will effect the system's status quo.

Having reread, and mulled over the transcripts of the 2 most telling Defense Motion-run Conferences, I am reassessing my energies and focus. What will my continued efforts attain? Insult to injury? Have I not gleaned enough? Isn't it time I accepted a contract means dick all? That courts have a set agenda?

I am watching Olympics. It's exciting! What you see is what you get! I'm sure that any drug use is controlled, or are we being hood-winked? Don't think so.

Over this short stretch of re-charging time, while watching humanity bask in their well-deserved glory of achievement, I am re-thinking these serious legal matters. Realizing I have NEVER been part of a more convoluted, inefficient, deviously manipulative, well-oiled, profession-controlled, system.
If this is the ultimate representation of what poses as 'Democracy', Orwell's 1984 is alive and well in 2014.

Do I quit, or will I pursue alternatives? Do I have the necessary energy to continue trying to make a difference? I'll know soon enough. For now, let the Olympians shine.

Humanity can be - awesome!

84. FOR THE RECORD

VIEWS @ 6818

NOTE:

The email below I just sent out to 5 email contacts at the Ottawa Court House. When I filed my appeal, I was informed by the secretary of the Divisional Court I was NOT to make email contact. I could leave a telephone message, use Canada Post mail, or FAX. 

I just spent over an hour trying to use my iMac's FAX, but to no avail. I can't figure it out. Something to do with the inside Modem, rather than the Ethernet  Modem Telus provided me. I have chosen to ask one of the 5 connects to please forward the following text.

FOR THE RECORD

(as additionally posted on my blog)

To whom @ the Divisional Court of Ottawa this may concern:

Background to request/order 2 transcripts:

Case #10-49776 was ordered in to Case Management on January 17, 2012. After some 6 Defense Motion driven case conferences over the following 20 months, on September 20, 2013, Master Calum Macleod, acting on behalf of the Ottawa Superior Court presided at a 'Special Appointment Defense Motion Hearing.' The focus was the Plaintiff's alleged refusal to comply with earlier Endorsement Orders. 

On Dec 06, 2012, during a 3 hour Defense Motion's scrutinizing perusal of the Plaintiff's answers to Defense Undertakings, stating he was familiar with the claim - it "not being an example of excellence in drafting" - Master Roger concluded the Plaintiff was "on notice to comply;" "all questions ordered answered have been found relevant and outstanding." "The above is a fair and reasonable disposition in the circumstances of this case." "Considering generally the concept of proportionality...." 

Responding to the Plaintiff's continued request to explain how the, to him, claim irrelevant questions were considered 'Relevant', Master Macleod responded: "The court is not there to explain itself. I'm not going to over-turn his (the Master's) order."  On September 23, 2013, Master Macleod dismissed the claim, posting it as Case law #10-49776 on Canlii.org.  

Present:

On October 21, 2013, this former Plaintiff filed an Appeal. He ordered transcripts of the above 2 sessions. Both are now in possession of the Appellant; the second being filed as a 'Certificate/ Notification of completion' by its transcriber on January 24, 2014."  

The appellant understands the rules stipulate a 60 Day filing deadline date for the completion of his Appeal's Certificate of Completion, from the Date of the official January 24, 2014, filing of the second Transcript.

The Appellant calculates that date to be: March 25, 2014.

NOTE: 

Although most all Ottawa Court offices allow for official email connective exchanges, the Ottawa Divisional Court has forbidden this Canadian Citizen this most efficient online privilege. 

After much effort, the appellant has been unable to FAX the above to Ms. Salkeley. Rather than risking leaving a telephone message, the appellant herewith chooses to send this email notice, notifying additional Court departments of the above information and understandings. 

The appellant would much appreciate hearing from any court services, concurring his above calculations are correct. Conversely, the forwarding of same to Ms. Salkeley would be much appreciated.

Thank you so very much,

Jan Steen

(Self-Representing)

83. Musings on the meaning of WORDS...

VIEWS @ 6775

The day before my 3rd birth day, on March 20, 1942, I was interned in a Sumatra (Indonesia) Japanese concentration camp. All men over 14 years old were transported to build the Burma to Japan railroad connective, while hundreds of women and children were constrained by simple barbed wire fences in a number of makeshift out-door 'camps' across the country.

In some 9 different locations during those 4 1/2 years, I was exposed to a number of languages: Dutch, Malay, English, German, French, plus Japanese and Korean, spoken by the guards. A Dutch colony since the 1500's, European controlled oil companies had been drilling for oil since the 1930's.

My parents and I were Indonesia born, and at 14, my mother was sent to Switzerland to learn French, and, at 17, to London England to learn English. Now 25, with her ability to speak a number of languages, her hodgepodge of international camp friends were attracted to hang out with her. 

This clearly rubbed off on me, since I have had a fascination for language and the meaning of words ever since. However, is there a possibility I am taking the meaning of LIFE and the language of words too literally?

(Definition of: "LITERAL" (adjective)

1 taking words in their usual or most basic sense without metaphor or allegory : dreadful in its literal sense, full of dread.• free from exaggeration or distortion : you shouldn't take this as a literal record of events.• informal absolute (used to emphasize that a strong expression is deliberately chosen to convey one's feelings) : fifteen years of literal hell.2 (of a translation) representing the exact words of the original text.• (of a visual representation) exactly copied; realistic as opposed to abstract or impressionistic.3 (also literal-minded) (of a person or performance) lacking imagination; prosaic.4 of, in, or expressed by a letter or the letters of the alphabet : literal mnemonics.

By accepting defined dictionary explanations of words as the indisputable essence of comprehension, is it possible that my interpretation of 'defined' can allowably be reinterpreted by others; those who have been given superior powers to do so, by the State itself? 

Let's have a look at the meaning of certain words and 'phrases' [ phrase |frāz|
noun/ a small group of words standing together as a conceptual unit, typically forming a component of a clause.]
Now I know I have been here before, but taking the 2010 adjusted Rules of Civil Procedures as an example, let's 'visit' some phrases...
_________________________________________________________________________________

 "DISCOVERY

The reforms (*) to the discovery rules include:

1. Scope of Discovery

The scope of discovery has been narrowed in the new civil rules. The "semblance of relevance" test has been replaced with a stricter test of "relevance". The phrase "relating to any matter in issue" has been changed to "relevant to any matter in issue" (see rules 30, 31 and 76).

This reform provides a clear signal to the bar that restraint should be exercised in the discovery process. It strengthens the objective that discovery be conducted with due regard to cost and efficiency. The effects of this reform will be felt by those who abuse the discovery process or engage in areas of inquiry that could not reasonably be considered necessary. "

Note: Made Bold by this Blogger
_______________________________________________________________________________

The above Canadian Government online written text has served me steadfastly [steadfast |ˈstedˌfast|adjective/ resolutely or dutifully firm and unwavering : steadfast loyalty.]

resolute |ˈrezəˌloōt; -lət|adjective: admirably purposeful, determined, and unwavering : she was resolute and unswerving. 
In my early days of speaking english, thinking a word would mean what I thought it meant, I would at times  use words incorrectly. This could either bring about a quick snicker, or at times even anger, resulting in a blunt  departure.
 Together with my interest in creature behaviour, this curiosity for language and communication, coupled with the meaning of words, led me to being accepted by one of the most acclaimed British theatre schools, The Royal Central School of Speech and Drama. Upon graduation, I pursued a short, but successful career in Theatre and Film, by running my own small companies. I Produced and Directed a number of plays, and produced some 30 documen- taries. An Off-Broadway Musical and a 'Chris' Award for best Educational film in its class, were high-light indications that others appreciated what I was doing. 
Since both my character, and my actions have been challenged in the - to me - daring, as well as wrongful  dismissal of this case, I want to continue discussing the meaning of words, the due process of procedures, certain manipulative elements at play, yet maintain a general sense of lucidity of character.
* Revisiting the "Discovery" - Reforms - 
'Scope' of Discovery"The scope of discovery has been narrowed in the new civil rules."1) scope 1 |skōp|nounthe extent of the area or subject matter that something deals with or to which it is relevant : we widened the scope of our investigation | such questions go well beyond the scope of this book. See note at range .• the opportunity or possibility to do or deal with something : the scope for major change is always limited by political realities.
2) Discovery: This is that lengthy stretch where the parties ask each other those 'Relevant questions.'  ("Relevant to any matter in issue!"  - Not a semblance! It must relate specifically to what is discussed inside the claim!
3) "narrowed"... (see 2)4) "new civil rules."  They were "New" in 2010. We are now existing in 2014! Can we pleeze bring up the rear, and begin applying them...
Last one for this Posting:
'Case Management' = 2 words: 'Case' and 'Management''Case' = a set of circumstances  (to pick the most appropriate in this 'case.')'Management' = 1) the act of running, or controlling a business, or organization. 2) The act or skill of dealing with people or situations in a successful way. 
To me, I have experienced all the skills of 1), but question the skills performed as mentioned in 2) I have experienced Case Management primarily as Motion Facilitators.  "Motion"

• motion legal definition of motion. 

  legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Motion

  Motion. A written or oral application made to a court or judge to obtain a ruling or order directing that some act be done in favor of the applicant.
  
  That's been my experience.

My appeal shall be all about the process as is presently executed. I have yet to experience an ounce of justice.