Friday, 29 May 2015

195. Addressing those in power.

VIEWS@12,900

Hornby Island, BC, May 29/ 2015

Dear Madame Justice Suzanne Anton, Minister of Justice + Attorney General for BC:

Seeking to avoid any adversarial stance, this letter is intended as an amicable gesture, incorporating the principle of good faith, and a duty to act honestly.

As Minister of Justice and Attorney General of British Columbia you are in charge of the daily actions and behavior of those you employ, i.e. the Masters and Justices of this province. Additionally your National office created the Rules of Civil Procedure on which all our country’s legal decisions are based.

In your honourable and highly privileged position, I ask you to comprehend that as a Self Representing Litigant (by need, since I exist on a minimum pension), I have these past five years endured the ins and outs of our Democracy’s legal system. It continues to be both a financial, as well as an emotional nightmare.

All the while searching for Justice and due process, I experienced none of its defined prerequisites. Our Rules of Civil Procedure, the Sedona Conferences (Moving the law forward in a reasoned and just way), as well as the Supreme Court of Canada’s move to include “The principle of good faith and duty to act honestly” in Contract Law, while well-intentioned objectives, all were absent from the realities I encountered.

In my recently Blogged letter to the advisory board of the NSRLP in Ontario, I explain:
“Jan continues:
My experience has taught me that before there is “commitment to advancing access to justice in Canada” the “urgency of system change” must occur at the very core of the system. For me this means that before there is better access to procedure, we must make sense of the Rules. Any system created and governed by its employed participants is bound to raise barriers for outsiders. Over the last seven years I have experienced numerous examples of permitted anomalies and what seemed to me to be apparently illegal behavior by the legal system. In the end, I feel that the system managed to devour me and then spit me out, after a tedious and long-drawn game.”

The system your office created, Madame Anton, expresses itself as if running like any other ‘business.’ In their efforts to satisfy their clients, my experience showed integrated law firms riding shotgun over Masters and Judges. Due diligence, fairness, good faith, as well as adherence to the facts at issue, were missing from proper rule application. Like chess, directives were about positioning, the aim towards ‘winning.’

This then takes me to the responsibilities of your office.

Though you may have inherited what you are in control of, truth is, with the above said your system is the average citizen’s bane. Human foible as it is, unless serious issues are addressed, the legal system, i.e. our system of ‘Justice’ will continue to be a parody of its intentions. While actual Justice eludes the average citizen’s legal rights, it will continue to serve the flush and well connected. Nothing has changed for hundreds of years.

As parents and grandparents, surely our consciences are prepared to take on this challenge by making every effort necessary to rectify what has gone so seriously awry. To bring back some faith and honorability to both your office as well as the very manner in which the justice system is being practiced is our duty. In turning lie to truth, hundreds of thousands of fellow Canadians would sigh a welcome relief and applaud you.

A claim will be filed against your office for damages suffered at the hand of one of your officers, Madame Justice Justine Saunders. My BC claim for contractual non-compliance for the creation of a website by an Ottawa domiciled web company was erroneously dismissed for “lack of Jurisdiction.” I will indicate how the ‘OR’ rule for filing in BC indicates the necessary provisos for an applicable and acceptable filing. I will have case law to validate the above. The Ontario default Rule for filing states to file “where the claim originates.” Had I filed in Ontario, a judge could more justly have dismissed it.

Justice Saunders erred a second time for allowing me to appeal. Defence Counsel brought this to my attention in an Application to a Judge a number of months after I had filed same. A technicality allows an appeal after a Trial, not a Hearing. Ours had been a Hearing; hence no appeal was allowed. This became the argument.

The JUSTICE OF THE PEACE CODE OF ETHICS Rule 2.01 indicates: “Justices should remain up to date on changes in the law relevant to their judicial function.” This aggravating phase alone took up some 6 months of my life.

(Quoting your website)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Justice Reform Initiatives
The B.C. government is modernizing and transforming justice services in a way that meets the needs of British Columbians. In particular, it is aiming to create a transparent justice system capable of delivering timely, well-balanced services.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
While I will do everything in my powers to recover what has been lost both financially, emotionally as well as in time investment, as a fourty year domiciled British Columbian, I offer my due diligence in helping my government achieve the above transparency.

Understanding parliament will be taking a summer break soon, I am sending this connect today with the hope your office will both acknowledge receipt, as well as allow for an indication when my claim filing would be best timed.

In the meantime I remain,
Sincerely Yours,
Evert-Jan Steen 




Tuesday, 26 May 2015

194. My new Reality

VIEWS@12854

This past week is guiding me towards a new reality, a need to turn the page.
Cognitive of you the readers who read, yet do not connect, I feel ultimately alone in the presence of strangers. And although, as voyeurs, you are entitled to your anonymity, and to some extent with your ongoing 'views' fulfill a need to carry on, I am comprehending a certain sense of futility of efforts.

So together with my realization that life is finite, I am finding myself of late re-assessing my priorities. My age and the awareness that younger generations are in charge now, is leading me to re-consider.

Yes! I will take my legal issues up with those in charge of these affairs. I am sufficiently curious to await their responses. Will they, within their powers, find quick ways to dispense with me? Will they skirt the issues I present them with? Are they in their inimitable way mere agents of opportunity, placed in their positions based on their abilities to perpetuate the rhetoric of political pretence?
This I am sufficiently intrigued to encounter and experience.

I will be gentle in my attack. Should they be interested, I will offer my services to help bring about what is conscionable and correct. But if they decide to cut me down like any other pesky fodder, I will likely come to my senses with the belief that life in their fast lane is a complete farce. That the running core of mankind is evil, and that evil has become the acceptable norm of our kind.

Should that happen, I will grin and bare my losses, and with acceptance, I will fight no more. I shall withdraw into my cocoon, my envelope of self-worth, and seek fulfillment by enjoying the simpler life that still struggles around me with its evolutionary sense of equilibrium.
Hey, I do live as near to heaven as anyone could wish. Why complain?

Maybe at 76 it's time to put this bogeyman to bed.
It's your turn now!

Tuesday, 19 May 2015

193. Life Out of Bed!

VIEWS@12,737

Away from my woods, I Just returned from visiting a metropolis. A metropolis in which my offspring lives. Job-related, it offers a clearer format to interpret the total experience called 'life.'

To get out of bed, know what to do and where to go, is defining. It becomes the umbrella you have come to understand and accept. If not, the hyenas will self-deservedly get you.

My own lot is similarly sealed. But somehow I managed to live it, as interpreted by others, by not adhering to certain set and given rules and realities.

Based on my early roots, afar in a distant former colony, I too meandered towards discovering my identity. But unlike others who sojourn in to being motivated to perform indescribable acts, I continue to question our species in a more gentle fashion. My character is wont to question and lash out through rhetoric. Is it more accepting; in any way more effective? So far, it does not seem so.

Each to our own, it is ultimately a basic choice for seeking expression of self in an over-crowded world. Go and do where they will feed you. All is a day to day existence. In essence nothing has changed. Board the inflatable of maybe, to drown bobbing towards the ocean of hope.

Purpose is in the eye of the beholder. Face it. Nobody needs you. All action is self-driven. Survive or die. All lies in the pretence of purpose. Life is fickle; life is cheap.

And yet, those of us who managed to hang in by segueing to conquer those basics of survival, through leisure time, may have acquired an appreciation for conscience - that urge to improve upon the general lot of the lesser.

Although this ethic may have a Christian foundation, "do not do on to others"... "Love thy neighbour as you would" etc. ...
Reality proves that energies towards achieving the more noble, with age, lessen.

As I descended from my dreaming loft this morning, upon having my 2 cups of Organic while catching up on email connectives, I came to the conclusion to narrow my varying objectives.
It will become a one on one now.

Is our democracy really run by self-serving, indulgent yes men? Where are those pillars of society hiding? Are there even any? Is reality in truth a farce of being? Is real life become an accepted circus?

Before I descend in to my final sack down under, I insist on finding that answer.
For now it is Justice 101.




Thursday, 14 May 2015

192. A Caring and Insightful Reader's response...

VIEWS@12,658

With my responses in Bold Italic, I am posting the following lengthy, much appreciated response:

"The lawyer you quote is correct about justice ..... But in reality should have phrased it slightly differently. He or she said to you "There is no justice in court" or words to this effect. 
(actual phrase: "The courts are not about Justice, Jan.")

That is not quite true. 
There is no justice for the defendant in the court or for the self representing plaintiff in the courtroom. 
(in my case the defendant won big-time, since with their counter-claim they managed to take control of procedures, while having jurisdiction in their favour; i.e Ontario)

Enter this realm at your own peril.
You have just left your rights behind, on land.
 
There is a kind of justice, albeit only for the other players, since they share the booty, they uphold merchant law and they abide by Admiralty Law.
There is simply no justice for the outsider who unwittingly enters and becomes subject to the essentially foreign jurisdiction once inside the courtroom. 
(As indicated above)

Think of it as a border. 
Once you cross the Mexican border you can end up in a Mexican jail with no recourse. Why? Like Quebec, Mexico operates under Napoleonic laws. 
In a sense you are guilty until proven innocent. Good luck with that.
 
The courtroom and the world of law is a world beyond the one in which you live and have rights.
The players are lawyers and judges. 
They work together. In fact they lunch together. 

You may try to represent yourself and yet be robbed, or, conversely, you could pay a lawyer to hold your hand while the court robs you. 
Bu virtue of entering their world, the laws under which they operate assure that they get to keep what was yours as their booty. They are allowed to take what is yours because you have left your country and boarded their ship and it matters not one wit whether or not you are aware that you are now subject to different laws once you do so.
In court they will invariably at some point ask you if you, JAN STEEN, "understand". What they mean is "Do you agree to stand under their edicts?"  It is pure ritual. YOU have already handed over your agreement by crossing over into this jurisdiction.

ORIGIN Middle English : from Old French jurediction, from Latin jurisdictio(n-)from jus, jur- ‘law’ dictio saying’ (from dicere say’ ).
THE RIGHT WORDThe authority of our elected and appointed officials refers to their power (often conferred by rank or office) to give orders, require obedience, or make decisions.Their authority is normally limited by their jurisdiction, which is a legally predetermined division of a larger whole, within which someone has a right to rule or decide (the matter was beyond his jurisdiction).(This excuse was used by the second, senior Master when informing me he had no jurisdiction over prior decisions/ orders made by his 'fellow' in-house Master)
You may even end up walking their plank, too. This is how justice works, once you place yourself under the Law of the Sea which rules the courtroom and all who work there.

Those in that courtroom are not under the Law of the Land, the one from which you may naively expect justice. That is a costly illusion. Your assets, your property, your family and your self have no protection in this new land.

There are a few rare judges out there who buck the system, to some extent, but most will not violate their oath to uphold the terms of the laws under which a courtroom functions, and almost none would risk doing so. Judges and lawyers, like politicians, uphold their oath to the Queen of Canada, which is written right into the oath they take. How many think the Queen is in every meaningful sense the Queen of Canada? How many understand that when she comes here she is here to collect booty during a "royal" visit? 
Those judges who do set a new precedent, often do so in favour of the court. Occasionally they may set one in favour of the litigant or the defendant and by extension the rest of us.
More likely, however, it will be the litigant who sets the precedent, by outwitting the system to their own benefit.
(again, in my case, as an out-of-jurisdiction, distant Plaintiff, it was the Defendant/Counter Claimant who managed to manipulate both the laws and the willing Masters of the Court. They saw eye-2-eye so to speak.)  
Then everyone may benefit.
Or not, depending on which precedent is set. 

Case law precedent has recently been set to the benefit of utility customers due to changes in the law regarding the rights afforded a customer by a contract made in good faith. 
This is good news.
(Really? Although it may be so in certain circumstances, I have furious issues about Case Law. The laws state every case is unique! Case Law nullifies that ) 

Meanwhile, however, the terms of a courtroom are there to sustain that jurisdiction, not the one you are from, and not the one where your complaint exists. 
Think of it as theatre with serious clout. 
The courtroom is a stage for a separate world unto itself, it uses elevated platforms, according to rank, costumes, bibles, long black gowns, rituals similar to those used in religious rituals, all very kafkaesque. 

I think I have mentioned common law and how it protects us before. However,  I had the sense that at that point perhaps you were too far inside what you refer to as the so called "justice" system to "see" what was and is right there out in the open.

When you decided to self represent, were you familiar with Admiralty Law, Merchant Law, the laws under which courts operate under, as distinct from the laws which represents you? 
(The writer now ventures in to a specific area of a more local concern)

That is why (I hope) you still have retained your very own electromechanical meter, because, whether or not you knew it, when your used the documents that retained that meter you used a process of common law, which is law of a higher order which supersedes statutory laws used by governments, courts, judges, lawyers, corporations,  all working within the ironically named "justice" system. 
Each one who operates in this realm swears an oath, not to Canada, no, only to the Queen of Canada, an oath to uphold common law. However they can do pretty much as they wish when not inside common law, as long as they play by their own rules. 
(AH! "as long as they play by their own Rules" This continues to be my most personal beef: To have experienced, the not so subtle manipulation of the ACTUAL Rules, to suit their own objectives) 

If you appear in court and refuse to answer to the name by which the judge and other members of the court address you, if you remained at the back of the gallery and did not stand up when spoken to you using your PUBLIC name, you would not be subject to court laws. Of course it is not that easy, but it is doable.

I may be wrong but, as far as I can make out, your struggle to find justice appears to have operated entirely on foreign turf and foreign terms, all dealt with just as if you went to a foreign "country", which is essentially what you did. 

In this foreign country, just as when Alice goes down the rabbit hole and enters Wonderland. a place where what is logical is turned on its head and where justice is arbitrary ("Off With Her Head") , this place you cross over into by passing through what is actually called The Divider" or "Bar" (see pictures) is designed in such a way that it purposely creates all its own rules and takes over and defines the terms and conditions by which you must abide. 

In every sense of the word you become merely a visitor to a different country and are now subject to its rules. 

While those rules may appear to you to defy all logic and are unlike any rules of any pre-existing  understanding and/or ideals you or anyone else who is not within the inner circle may have had about what comprises justice, that is only because you are not let in on the game, since  no one tells you that you have left behind the common law land laws that are there to protect you, no one informs you that metaphorically you have departed, and you are now figuratively "at sea". 
See?

Merchant law was designed for ships. Admiralty law began as pirate "law", actually outlaw.
Pirate law evolved to become privateer law. 
It remains the Law of the Sea.

In search of "justice", you left your own jurisdiction, wherein you had certain rights and powers. Now you are in/under their jurisdiction and are subject to their rules and decisions. 

Just as the City of London is a City within a city and has its own laws, just as the Vatican is a City within a city and also operates on its own laws, just as banks also exempt themselves from laws and leave you wondering how they get away with it, so, too, do those inside courtrooms and those who operate by different rules as lawyers and judges.  

So while you may enter this world uninformed of the switchover, you then compound the error and succumb to it, mostly because no one tells you, or you never thought to ask.
And it almost never occurs to the defendant to question or ask, nor to the sole self representing plaintiff to ask where they just landed. 
Certainly the self representative thinks they are there to represent themselves when they enter this new jurisdiction. In reality, it is literally a case of "when in Rome". The rules are all predetermined and those who seek to represent themselves are no longer representing themselves once they enter inside the borders of this other country.  

Worse still, those who enter give away their  power to a hierarchical  system run by self declared "authorities", a system that is not there to represent you, only itself. That system answers to no one else but the Queen. She is not your friend. In essential matters of she is no different from Queen Isabella who sent Christopher Columbus off to conquer the new world, to rape, pillage, murder and bring back booty for the enrichment of Spain.
He swore an oath to her, he plundered the continent,  he declared it a New World simply because he landed there, he ignored the population's prior rights of claim, he and his men took everything from any and all indigenous people and slaughtered them. 
He stole all the gold for his Queen. But hey, he upheld his oath to his Queen, right?  

To beat this game, the world you need to operate inside is your own world. Common law was created to implement checks and balances on privateers and their self anointed roles and self serving systems. It is there for the aware to use, but no one tells you this. You can only use the laws that favour you if you know they exist and want to know how to use them to your own advantage without getting trapped.  

Pirate law is a separate world.
Are you a pirate at sea?
Are you a privateer? 
Hardly.
Are you a corporation. 
I hope not.

And unlike an aboriginal, you cannot argue any treaty agreement.
Your only treaty to protect your lands is limited to any foothold on your own land that you learn how to protect and maintain, so for those not under treaty there is no overarching treaty to protect you OTHER THAN common law. 
That said, common law is bountiful and wonderful.
Use it or lose it.

However,when you enter the courts either metaphorically or physically you become the willing prisoner of privateers who have sworn an oath to the Queen, not to Canada as a sovereign nation,  only to the Queen and God. 
Yes, they are modern pirates, called privateers. This is considered absolutely legitimate inside that world. It has rules you are not let in on and which do not apply to you. Only the persistently curious come to understand how to use discipline to level this playing field in their own favour.
The players in this world sign oaths to a monarch you imagine does not rule the country you live in. Nor do you imagine she has claims on everything your are and everything you do or make or earn, including a claim on your children.

All of this is based on plunder and booty. If you enter the world of pirates you cannot turn around and hold them to account for the Laws of the Land. This is why they stay on the ship, and then lure you onboard.

Anyone who unwittingly boards that ship might as well push a boulder up a hill forever, since that ship is its own foreign country and is intended to work outside of your own land based inherent rights. 
To board that ship turns those on board into your intermediaries and, worse yet, essentially you consent to make them into your trustees, since to enter court is in effect to declare yourself incompetent to handle your own affairs, business affairs, property issues, etc. 
You have instead chosen to try to operate inside that law of the sea, aboard that ship, a foreign domain which uses your consent by way of entry, your agreement to be governed, and turns it all against you.
This is a realm that depends upon your unwitting forfeiture of essential rights, your belief that any justice is only to be found inside their separate system. 

This foreign realm is based on one single foundation, consent. The governed must grant their consent, you must hand over your compliance with court terms, your willingness to enter a world that operates inside their rights over you, once you are within Admiralty Law settings practicing statutory law, using their laws, not yours.

In that world you are JAN STEEN, not Jan Steen. 
Look at your birth certificate registration back to the authorities, it uses your PUBLIC name, as does "your" driver's license registration back to those authorities, and, if you "own" land, as does "your" certificate of title for your "own" land, also registered back to the authorities.
All of these are not rights, they are non unalienable. Like "your" pension, they are merely government sanctioned benefits and privileges, just as easily taken away as given since none of them are unalienable rights.
Anything which renders you beholden to others is not yours to own.
In that world, unless you challenge it, the fact of your very birth serves as collateral for a debt they invent and which you owe. In that world you yourself and all you own have been registered back to the Queen as serfs, slaves, as hers to own. You serve as collateral for yourself, since your parents have already offered you up as collateral for your own birth, ditto for your driver's license, which grants you permission to use roads you fund to build but do not own the right to use, a "permission" or "benefit" or "privilege" as distinct from a right.

At any moment those who uphold Admiralty Law can arbitrarily revoke that same or any of a long list of "privileges" and can do so for almost any arbitrary reason. This includes a kind of implicit "lease back" arrangement concerning  your property, wherein you are merely a tenant of the Queen, living on property which, like your body, your wages, your income (tax),  also all serve as collateral for a debt you actually do not owe to the queen or government.
And those who realize that they owe no debt definitely represent a threat to the status quo. 
And in that world's view, you have no property, no rights , since all forms of registration involve you handing back what is yours to those who own it and you once you do so. 

In order to properly represent your own private rights under the Law of the Land, essentially you must correctly assert that NO ONE can serve as intermediary between you and the Universe.
You must actively remind them of what they swore an oath to, that is that your own common law rights are of a higher order than the courts rules, and that your property and private life are yours. 

For example, the documents you used to refuse the contractual offer of a smart meter intentionally were designed in such a way that as a private man on private property (not a "premises")  you have used common law documents for which every single word was very carefully hand picked, then given to you for free, whether or not you grasp the import of what is there to use, done so that you could prove that you did NOT enter their realm of Admiralty Law ( Law of the Sea ) and that you (versus YOU) are not subject to plunder of your booty, (your metadata, your meter base, your property).  

Instead those precious documents you use operate under Common Law. They were created to protect you from self declared "authorities" who only use statutory law which, in turn, was created to protect self declared "authorities" from you. 
Common law includes and protects you via trespass law, electrical code law, and, most important of all, contract law, all of which operate under common law.
 
As for the surveillance grid, the Notices you have used to refuse the smart meter represent your repeat refusal of a series of new contractual offers made by a corporation.
It is that simple.
You have every right to demand that they adhere to the original terms of your contract and to refuse to allow them to sever your bond of ownership by removal of your meter, no matter which uninsurable corporate commercial radar transceiver antenna device they seek to put in place of what you own, BEFORE they also separately leave after they STEAL your very own meter.

The common law documents you use protect your private rights under the Law of the Land.
The use of those bc-freedom COR and NOD-MCP documents constitute your lawful assertion of your private rights to adhere to the terms of your original commercial contract on your own terms. 
Not to mention these documents claim your possession of the meter this corporation wants to steal away. 

What many are successfully using now is an NOL, a Notice of Liability addressed not to an abstraction called a corporation, but to those men and women behind that corporate banner, those who assumed that they could hide behind that abstraction and commit plunder. 

Meanwhile smart grid precipitated sickness, fires and deaths occurred, all because pirate utility corporations in bed with pirate governments all over the world had largely outwitted the majority of energy customers and had transferred all liability for their own actions back on to the customers. 

Now? 
Game on. 
Everywhere everyone is now issuing  Notice of Personal Liability addressed to actual individuals, who are culpable for the smart grid and Technological Trespass on private property, such as your body, your home, and your life. And this NOL  has already forced them to not act on threats of disconnection and has already prevented actual disconnections.

You know how in most any courtroom there is that physical barricade that one is expected to cross through in order to engage with those on the other side? Often it has a gate or a set of gates  between those in the courtroom and the players on the otherwise of that barricade? 
That delineation, that barricade and gateway, may appear to be merely symbolic but it is very real.

Likewise, when you are addressed in the room as JAN STEEN versus Jan Steen, if you reply and stand up, in that moment you forfeit your private rights, the minute you agree to be the former, not the latter. 
If you say you are acting as an Authorized Representative of Jan Steen, that is different. At that moment you begin to claim a higher jurisdiction than the judge in the courtroom. Many judges have fled the courtroom when this is done by those in the know. But of course one must know exactly what one is doing and how to do every minute of it or this will fail.  
Never underestimate the power which that barricade represents if you acknowledge it, or stand under it, (understand means just that)  or cross through that border, symbolizing your legal consent and your compliance to the terms of this foreign country, which gives all who live there the power to extinguish your access to justice - in the name of "justice".
  
The barricade is there on purpose. It  stands as the division line between your rights and the singularly other rights of the courts, judges, lawyers, corporations, all which override and sever your rights the minute you "under-stand" or answer to your full name JAN STEEN or cross over into the inner sanctum of any courtroom. 

That "bar" represents the railing of a pirate ship. As soon as you cross over you forfeit your own jurisdiction under the Law of the Land and you come under an entirely different jurisdiction, Admiralty Law.

Remember that while every judge and every lawyer swears an oath to the Queen of Canada and to God to uphold the laws of Admiralty and Merchant Law, but they also swear to acknowledge Common Law.
If you remain ignorant, they can do as they wish and you will have no recourse once you enter their terms."

Jan Steen thanks you so very much for your grandiose effort, and informed views!  
May we, together, turn this powder-kegged, infested ship around!


Tuesday, 12 May 2015

191. The 'PROTECTION' Racket > Smell their Coffee!

VIEWS@12,606

Through this amazing media tool, we are able to sojourn our thoughts with the click of a button. Wanna know something? Enter the phrase and GOD-gle willingly displays its biblical stored residue, regardless your position. This kind of 'equality' is both awesome and unheard of, until of late. Again, thanks to the allowers. (not a word > yet) Can we keep it this way? Or will the more powerful put a stop to it, when it is realized we have unleashed a beast; the beast called > the masses!  
Let's step back for a moment to assess our species more objectively. This will allow for a clearer understanding of why things work the way they do. Understanding that every living matter exists in its own conducive environment until supplies diminish for perpetuation, we must recognize that the more aware, anticipating possible shortage, will take measures to protect supplies. This is so, in all of Nature.
Mankind, superior only in its adaptability by cunning manipulation, for thousands of years has had its most fittest calculate, that, like a worker ant, by delegation to menial tasks, could control its sub-ordinates and fare better. This method of application continues insidiously, but can you blame them?
It is, after all, survival of the fittest! So, why complain about the most basic essence of life itself? Well, it is not that the throngs over the millennia have not complained; it's just that it has fallen on deaf ears:)> !  Here a bomb, there a bullet, hey, that's all there's to it. Eventually the naysayers accept, and drop out.
Take the club of Rome's early ideas of a 'Limit to Growth.'
"there is no other viable alternative to the future survival of mankind than a new global community under a single form of government."
All well and good all this, and the clear signs we are on a destined path towards self-destruction, this will not STOP what is in place > until mass destruction will deal with all of us. Until such time, the privileged will blindly perpetuate whatever is needed to maintain their status quo. That's just the nature of the beast. 
Can you you blame them? "NO," you'll answer, you just want 'some' of it too! 'Some' of their privileges, some of their money, some of their 'RIGHTS.' The 'rights' as they see them interpreted! And 'AYE' there's the rub! There's only SO much to go around, so it must be PROTECTED!
=======================================================================   
"A protection racket is a scheme where a person extorts money from a victim by suggesting that she needs “protection” from property damage or attacks. In exchange for money, the perpetrator promises to keep the victim safe, recover any stolen property, and collect reparations for damaged property. The person the victim needs protection from is usually the person running the scheme. If people refuse to pay up, they may experience harassment, property destruction, and other problems.
The origins of the protection racket are very old and this practice is particularly common in areas with high levels of organized crime. Usually, individual gangs or criminal groups stake out their own territory, expecting others to stay out of it. The engineer of the protection racket sends representatives around to a community to intimidate business owners, making it clear that they should pay for “protection” or suffer the consequences."
========================================================================
And so there are 'organized systems' in place everywhere. Well organized systems are run properly; they last, because they are proven. Controls are implemented clearly and upheld cleanly: Dress, posture, language, entree allowance, dues, all according to adhere to the rituals installed. Any trespassers will be duly reprimanded. To teach the lesson, not to meddle, or ask questions. DO as we tell you! And at times it will be severe!
They are most severe when the un-assumers imagine to interfere with its structure! That's where you and me, the lay-folk, come in. Our problem is that we foolishly misinterpret the objective. We take their text literally. We think their bible is our bible too. That their language is our language! Does it not state so?
WRONG! We are fooled, at all times! This process, "due process" it's called, in our case the 'legal' process, is all about being fooled. And It is in the process of being fooled that their gains are made, your monies taken, your misery accomplished. There can ever only be ONE winner, and it can not be YOU! or ME! For 'WE' are the fodder that feeds the machine, the pellets that burn their stove. They are the birds and we are their prey.
7 years in you say? And you haven't had enough? What kind of fool are you? 
All is Fair in Love and War. Since this is not Love, it must be War!   
=======================================================================
   "Surely it is time for the law to be available to those it is meant to govern.”
(Quote from NSRLP)






Sunday, 10 May 2015

190. Signing a Pact with the Devil!

VIEWS@12,589


Today is Mother’s Day, May 10th, 2015. I visited her grave and made a promise to her bones.

On April 14th, 7 years to the day of signing my contract in 2008 with a web-developer to have a user-friendly, custom-built website constructed for some $43,000 (it never happened), I signed a final contract, of 'closure' so to speak; this one, a full, and most complete Release, wherein:

…“the Parties hereby irrevocably release and forever discharge each other, its directors, officers, employees, agents, successors, assigns, heirs, insurers, solicitors, executors and administrators from any and all manner of actions, causes of action, suits, proceedings, liabilities, debts, sums of money, obligations, duties, accounts, interest, covenants, contracts, claims, counterclaims, damages and demands” etcetera.  

I signed that Release realizing that years of seeking a fair and just trial had proven utterly futile.  That “under the circumstances” a jurisdictionally challenged SRL Plaintiff, me, had proven incapable of getting to “the relevant issues at hand”; that all had been a chess game; that the phrase “under the circumstances” contained myriad innuendos of inexplicable legal baggage; that there was, in fact, no direct answer or explanation for the phrase. That time and place (geographic jurisdiction, with direct access to the Courts), and their $$, with me on the phone at the other end of the world (a large rock in the Georgia Straight), I never stood a chance in Hell to get anywhere, let alone my deserved day in court! 

That “under the circumstances all questions are relevant and the plaintiff shall answer them!” had become a phrase to be respected, and reckoned with, like ‘lack of jurisdiction,’ or a ‘basket Motion,’ or any other convoluted legalese rhetoric prefaced with a Heretofore, a Furthermore or Notwithstanding.

What has been achieved is the reality of knowing that under the guise of ‘democracy,’ the system is an elitist, well-oiled, functioning hypocrisy, a farce of truth, a continuum of pretense, ruining the lives of many solid, deserving citizens, by leeching their hard-earned life’s coffers, before spitting them out as so much fodder.

In addition, I have come to realize that mankind, being what it is, will take advantage of the vulnerable. Such is nature. That to make a change to at least make more direct sense of a system, the required need is to challenge the very core of that system.


So it is that I have decided to prepare a suit and file it with the Department of Justice. And the department in charge of, and responsible for, the laws of our Home and Native Land, is the Attorney General of Canada, seated in our capitol Ottawa. That department is ultimately responsible for everything that occurs in our legal system: Its Rules of Civil Procedure, the appointment and conduct of its officers, as well as its general court structure.