189. Up Ur Selfie! Feeling GOOD about BEING BAD!

VIEWS@12,541

Almost a month after the big, john doe-signed release > still waiting for theirs, the winning party >
I herewith, further more, onto forth, notwithstanding, indubitably, covenant, annul and forgive, and further desist for being so darn in your face incessantly looking for any sense of anything, etc, >> all the aforesaid as well as the aftermath and allow everyone on that side to continue their nefarious existence > in PEACE!

And yet, I continue NOT to fathom how people can be so corrupt. Is this the new, acceptable way of the modern world? To feel GOOD about getting away by being BAD!?
Is this the nouvelle vague of the 21st Century? Bad and Evil Reign supreme?
Is this the selfie of the selfless, mirrored?
If you get away with it, why not? smile :)> Hi, it's me...

I am becoming more and more intrigued, not so much by the small evil doers screwing you with their Tom fooleries of 'Buyer Beware,' but more and more now about the accepted legitimacy of the systems' that back them.

I am speaking of the Defence Attorneys who, though they know in their hearts they are aiding and abetting the guilty, still function daily to support them, based on the acceptable premise that it is merely Business as Usual! How can our Masters and Judges stoop so low, while living like lords and ladies in their untouchable hierarchy as the "Pinnacles of our Society?"

How can you separate 'Doing Business' from living with your conscience? HOW do you DO that?
Is there a synapse you can turn off, while retaining sufficient amounts of human purity and empathy?
Are all the efforts that have and continue to go in to organized religious teachings about good versus evil, a total waste of time and effort?

It would seem so. Maybe, in the greater vision of time and evolution, this spit of being called mankind, this wannabe newbie species with its heart on its sleeve, will self-destruct as a tiny nova cum laude!

And leave all that remains, awesome, to return to its deserved equilibrium.
Here's up our selfies!

188. There is MORE than just a rumbling a foot....

VIEWS@12455

From the highly active OpenLawLab.com I receive input almost daily. 

"Legal Help is a labyrinth ...   It's not a Network."

The suggestion of a single site showing legal services with XML format is smart; let's get er done! 

1. "Extensible Markup Language (XML) is a markup language that defines a set of rules for encoding documents in a format which is both human-readable and machine-readable."
   Remember my suggestion of a software program that can interpret contracts?

After all, it's expressed in words, ain't it? Why allow human subjectivity to influence and mis-interpret it? 

1. 

187. If That's Just the Way it Is! > Let's change it...

VIEWS@12427

I just changed the Heading from 'A JUSTICE system without JUSTICE!' to 'That's just the Way it Is.' Usually my Title takes me little time, but since the April14th signing of the Final Release, my mind has been awhirl.

To the day, 7 years! There's history about the seven-year itch in a marriage; can it apply to a nightmare? You are locked in, with a determined drive. You signed the contract. You put your whole being in to focusing on the plan, as understood.

Then when things go quickly wonky, you wonder what's going on? You start getting up in the dark. Since there is a 3 hour time zone difference, you want to add additional connective and feedback. You don't quite realize it fully yet, but you have entered the nightmare. The obsession lasts exactly 7 years, to the day! Is there ultimately a greater plan? Or does coincidence merely fool you in to believing so?

I watched Michael Moore's brilliant documentary last night. "Capitalism - a love story!"
"There's no in between no more; either u got it all, or you got nothin!"
I watched the utter madness of "The Queen of Versailles" the other night, then "Wall street - an Insane Casino."

What more do I need to verify our species is gravely caput and on the verge of implosion? Why do I continue to bother? How naive to think I can make a difference? Nothing has changed in thousands of years, and I take myself through this? WHY? Am I a masochist? Bored for stuff to do?

'The World according to Psychopaths' > 'A Question of Ethics' > 'Barking Up a Hollow Tree' > 'The Haves Versus the Wannabes' > 'A Clarity of Vision' >

Ah! The Clarity of Vision should tell me I have been treading water now for 7 years. In the camps for 5 years, as a child, I had no choice. There were guards with guns. But this time, I had a vision, a vision of making an integrated difference to my society. The time was MINE to do with. It was my CHOICE to do so! Though few believed, NO one forced me.

"I coulda told ye Dad!" Why is my child so wise? Maybe because he has his mother's genes as well!
Any question asked her would meet with a: "That's just the way it is!"
She was brilliant then, and must be brilliant still!

A JUSTICE system without JUSTICE! Well, that's JUST the way it IS! The haves have, and the nots > NOT!

Now it's NOT about who is to blame. But in order to maybe give this one final kick at the can, let's look at who is responsible? With the Mike Duffy Ottawa Senate debate, we are seeing the un-earthing of factors that have been relied on and applied for many thousands of years now.
What?... 'Rules?' No RED lights here! Well, for now a few cameras, but will there be any changes?
For the GOOD? Not very likely! Why now? All is pretence; all is entertainment > all is a game!

BUT, if I could gather a number of appellants, or claimants, with rock-solid cases from across the country, we could organize a class-action suit and file a case, calling on changes to improve the system where the problems originate, at its very foundation, the Rules!

Since they are so ill-defined, every one of its officers interprets them as he/she/they see fit.
Mankind being what it is: That's just the way it is! 

Let's demand to FIX the Rules; then observe the system adhere to them; no more, no less!
Please contact me...

186. 'DANGER!' > PROCEED AT OWN RISK > MORPHING SPECIES AHEAD!

VIEWS@ 12300

I will never stop admiring TIMING! The happenstance of ingredients, seemingly un-organized events, coalescing as if part of a larger concept.

Last night, listening to Rex Murphy on the CBC National, he spoke of the disappearance of 'Character' and 'Conscience.' I maintain our species is rapidly morphing. It is as if there is only so much 'Conscience' to go around.

It is, as if, with the exploding global population, man's emotions are becoming a luxury. Survival, which lies at the core of existence, is making its demands.
'Feelings,' as we so cherished, Human Feelings, we thought, set us apart from all other species (except of course the realization that a nursing, caring mother wildebeest, or such like, would show a certain concern for the protection of her offspring.)

But, ultimately, we, as humans, set ourselves apart from all other Nature. We had that something 'special,' the something, je ne sais quoi > 'Godly.'  

In the eighties we interpreted the 'ME' generation. Reconsider though, with today's 'Selfie,' those were still the cool days of 'ME.' But, in the West, we're still okay by expanding our Selves by bringing in a friend or two, or a celebrity, if we're lucky, and share in a 'Selfie' and High-Five. But be not fooled, the overall take is about ME! Me! The ME in the centre!

Looking outwards, Eastward, certain Selfies are covered, hooded, anonymous! They're on a rampage, up to no good, sowing mayhem wherever they can.

Looking inwards, right here, the stuff Rex Murphy speaks of, is full-face ME, the plain clothed 'Selfie.' The one smiling at you, embracing you at the party, while stabbing you, later, when the urge shows. When the party is over, I get my adrenalin kick from video wars; my blood and guts are virtual. Clothed in 'acceptance,' my guise is surreptitious, not in view > full-frontal. I smile by day, and kill at night.

So here's where I am going. They are the same, only the execution differs. And its commonality lies in the general drying up of the emotions.
Together with Character, and Conscience, Sympathy, Empathy, Sorrow, Pity, Sadness, Trust, Surprise, Joy, Shame, Love, Kindness, Friendship, Courage, Happiness, Wonder, Patience, Respect, Confusion, Hope, Awe, these are the more complex emotions that lead us to look outward and share the experience of life.

But! Only if we can afford them! When there is Fear, Anger, Disgust, and Envy it leads to the temperament of explosion with the need to destroy.

We are all hypocrites, to an extent. If we WANT Goodness, we must MAKE it, to BE it, from within.

"The Canadian armed forces are fighting to defend our democratic values." Are they really?
"Our Rules of Civil Procedure are there to serve our people's rights." Are they 'Civil'? Do we have 'Rights?' Are the Rules ruling? Are they in fact 'RULES?'
rule |ro͞ol| noun1 one of a set of explicit or understood regulations or principles governing conduct within a particular activity or sphere: the rules of the game were understood.• a principle that operates within a particular sphere of knowledge, describing or prescribing what is possible or allowable: the rules of grammar.

Oh for the good old days of Trust, Honour, and a clear, affordable Conscience >:)
Bring on the clones...:((((>>>

183. Digging up some facts...

VIEWS@12248

I didn't manage to complete below, the missing (Draft) #183 Posting

So that we may fully comprehend as to who and what lies at the heart of this badly broken, one-sided 'legal' system, before we take a serious look at The Rules of Civil Procedure (as presently in place and  effective) let's begin by interpreting where it is all coming from, and who is, in fact, ultimately responsible.

This information renders a more detailed understanding of the Role the Attorneys General fulfill in the provinces, as well as the Role of the Honourable Mr. Peter MacKay, who, at present, is both the Minister of Justice as well as the Attorney General of Canada. It is his, and their departments who are the flagships of the system. They are ultimately the ones who carry responsibility for what is legally practiced and thus allowable.

===============================================================  

'Thank you ....Wikipedia...

The court system of Canada is made up of many courts differing in levels of legal superiority and separated by jurisdiction. Some of the courts are federal in nature while others are provincial or territorial.

The Canadian constitution gives the federal government the exclusive right to legislate criminal law while the provinces have exclusive control over civil law. The provinces have jurisdiction over the administration of justice in their territory. Almost all cases, whether criminal or civil, start in provincial courts and may be eventually appealed to higher level courts. The quite small system of federal courts only hear cases concerned with matters which are under exclusive federal control, such as federal taxation, federal administrative agencies, intellectual property and certain aspects of national security. The federal government appoints and pays for both the judges of the federal courts and the judges of the superior and appellate level courts of each province. The provincial governments are responsible for appointing judges of the lower provincial courts.

This intricate interweaving of federal and provincial powers is typical of the Canadian constitution.
==================================================================

Roles and Responsibilities of the Attorney General

• The Attorney General has a unique role to play as a Minister.

One part of the Attorney General's role is that of a Cabinet Minister. In this capacity the Minister is responsible for representing the interests and perspectives of the Ministry at Cabinet, while simultaneously representing the interests and perspectives of Cabinet and consequently the Government to the Ministry and the Ministry's communities of interest.

The Attorney General is the chief law officer of the Executive Council. The responsibilities stemming from this role are unlike those of any other Cabinet member. The role has been referred to as "judicial-like" and as the "guardian of the public interest".

Much has been written on the subject of ministerial responsibilities and the unique role of the Attorney General.

There are various components of the Attorney General's role. The Attorney General has unique responsibilities to the Crown, the courts, the Legislature and the executive branch of government. While there are different emphases and nuances attached to these there is a general theme throughout all the various aspects of the Attorney General's responsibilities that the office has a constitutional and traditional responsibility beyond that of a political minister.

The statutory responsibilities of the office are found in section 5 of the Ministry of the Attorney General Act. Section 5 states:
The Attorney General,
(a) is the Law Officer of the Executive Council;
(b) shall see that the administration of public affairs is in accordance with the law;
(c) shall superintend all matters connected with the administration of justice in Ontario;
(d) shall perform the duties and have the powers that belong to the Attorney General and Solicitor General of England by law and usage, so far as those powers and duties are applicable to Ontario, and also shall perform the duties and powers that, until the Constitution Act, 1867 came into effect, belonged to the offices of the Attorney General and Solicitor General in the provinces of Canada and Upper Canada and which, under the provisions of that Act, are within the scope of the powers of the Legislature;
(e) shall advise the Government upon all matters of law connected with legislative enactments and upon all matters of law referred to him or her by the Government;
(f) shall advise the Government upon all matters of a legislative nature and superintend all Government measures of a legislative nature;
(g) shall advise the heads of ministries and agencies of Government upon all matters of law connected with such ministries and agencies;
(h) shall conduct and regulate all litigation for and against the Crown or any ministry or agency of government in respect of any subject within the authority or jurisdiction of the Legislature;
(i) shall superintend all matters connected with judicial offices;
(j) shall perform such other functions as are assigned to him or her by the Legislature or by the Lieutenant Governor in Council. "

What follows is an overview of the various components of the Attorney General's roles and responsibilities, primarily as outlined in the Act.

Chief Law Officer of the Executive Council (s. 5(a))

The role of chief law officer might be referred to as the Attorney General's overall responsibility as the independent legal advisor to the Cabinet - and some have even suggested that the role possibly extends to the Legislature as well. The importance of the independence of the role is fundamental to the position and well established in common law, statutes and tradition.

As chief law officer, the Attorney General has a special responsibility to be the guardian of that most elusive concept - the rule of law. The rule of law is a well established legal principle, but hard to easily define. It is the rule of law that protects individuals, and society as a whole, from arbitrary measures and safeguards personal liberties.

The Attorney General has a special role to play in advising Cabinet to ensure the rule of law is maintained and that Cabinet actions are legally and constitutionally valid.

In providing such advice it is important to keep in mind the distinction between the Attorney General's policy advice and preference and the legal advice being presented to Cabinet. The Attorney General's legal advice or constitutional advice should not be lightly disregarded. The Attorney General's policy advice has the same weight as that of other ministers.

Criminal prosecutions (s.5(d))

One of the most publicly scrutinized aspects of the Attorney General's role is the responsibility for criminal prosecutions encompassed in section 5 (d) and s. 92 of the Constitution Act, 1867. Section 92 gives the provinces authority to legislate in matters related to the administration of criminal justice and thereby gives the provincial Attorney General authority to prosecute offences under the Criminal Code.

The Attorney General does not, however, direct or cause charges to be laid. While the Attorney General and the Attorney General's agents may provide legal advice to the police, the ultimate decision whether or not to lay charges is for the police. Once the charge is laid the decision as to whether the prosecution should proceed, and in what manner, is for the Attorney General and the Crown Attorney.

It is now an accepted and important constitutional principle that the Attorney General must carry out the Minister's criminal prosecution responsibilities independent of Cabinet and of any partisan political pressures. The Attorney General's responsibility for individual criminal prosecutions must be undertaken - and seen to be undertaken - on strictly objective and legal criteria, free of any political considerations. Whether to initiate or stay a criminal proceeding is not an issue of government policy. This responsibility has been characterized as a matter of the Attorney General acting as the Queen's Attorney - not as a Minister of the government of the day.

This is not to suggest that decisions regarding criminal prosecutions are made in a complete vacuum. A wide range of policy considerations may be weighed in executing this responsibility, and the Attorney General may choose to consult the Cabinet on some of these considerations. However any decisions relating to the conduct of individual prosecutions must be the Attorney General's alone and independent of the traditional Cabinet decision making process. In practice, in the vast majority of cases, these decisions are made by the Attorney General's agents, the Crown Attorneys.

An important part of the Crown's - and thus the Attorney General's - responsibility in conducting criminal prosecutions is associated with the responsibility to represent the public interest - which includes not only the community as a whole and the victim, but also the accused. The Crown has a distinct responsibility to the court to present all the credible evidence available.

The responsibility is to present the case fairly - not necessarily to convict. This is a fundamental precept of criminal law, even if it is not a particularly well-understood concept among the general public. One of the Attorney General's responsibilities in fostering public respect for the rule of law, is to assist the public in understanding the nature and limits of the prosecutorial function.

Ultimately the Attorney General is accountable to the people of the province, through the Legislature, for decisions relating to criminal prosecutions. Such accountability can only occur, of course, once the prosecution is completed or when a final decision has been made not to prosecute. The sub judicae rule bars any comment on a matter before the courts that is likely to influence the matter. The sub judicae rule strictly prohibits the Attorney General from commenting on prosecutions that are before the courts. Given the stature of the Attorney General's position, any public comment coming from the office would be seen as an attempt to influence the case.

Although the Attorney general can become involved in decision-making in relation to individual criminal cases, such a practice would leave the Minister vulnerable to accusations of political interference. Accordingly, it is traditional to leave the day-to-day decision-making in the hands of the Attorney General's agents, the Crown Attorneys, except in cases of exceptional importance where the public would expect the Attorney General to be briefed.

Legislative Responsibilities (s. 5(e) and (f))

The Attorney General has broad responsibilities associated with Government legislation. These responsibilities have been described as twofold. One is to oversee that all legislative enactments are in accordance with principles of natural justice and civil rights (see also s. 5(b) above). This is obviously an important and broad area of responsibility. The second aspect of this responsibility is to advise on the constitutionality and legality of legislation.

The Attorney General's legislative responsibilities are played out in a variety roles. The Office of Legislative Counsel reports to the Attorney General. Legislative Counsel plays a key role in ensuring the legal integrity of Government legislation. Although the Legislative Counsel's reporting relationship to the Attorney General does allow the Attorney General to provide guidance and set standards, individual pieces of legislation are drafted on instructions from client ministries and are not within the sole control of Legislative Counsel or the Attorney General. It should also be noted that Legislative Counsel also has a direct responsibility to the Legislature as the Office also drafts all private member's bills.

The Attorney General has a further role to play as part of whatever Cabinet Committee is formed to review legislation and regulations. Here the Minister has an opportunity to comment on the technical issues related to legislation and regulations prior to Cabinet consideration.

The Attorney General's role on legislative matters is as an adviser to the Cabinet. Although unlikely, Cabinet could, in theory, receive the Attorney General's legal opinion on legislation and choose to disregard it. The Attorney General's role is not independent of Cabinet decision making as in the area of criminal prosecutions. As was noted earlier, the Attorney General must make careful distinctions about the legal opinions and policy or political preferences being offered about legislation.

Civil Litigation (s.5(h) and (d))

In addition to the specific responsibilities to conduct civil litigation on behalf of the Government and its agencies (s. 5(h)), the Attorney General has broader litigation responsibilities flowing from the historical powers of the Attorney General referred to in s. 5(d) of the Act. These powers are based on the Crown's parens patriae (parental) authority. The Attorney General's authority, therefore, is not only to conduct litigation in cases directly affecting the government or its agencies but also to litigate cases where there is a clear matter of public interest or public rights at stake.

This has been characterized as a constitutional responsibility to ensure that the public interest is well and independently represented. It may involve interventions in private litigation or Charter challenges to legislation, even if the arguments conclude that the legislation does contravene constitutionally protected rights.
(emboldened by me)

Responsibility for Court Administration (s. 5(c))

A key component of the Attorney General's responsibilities to ensure the administration of justice in the province is the administration of the courts and as a result the responsibility for maintaining liaison with the judiciary.

Given the fundamental importance of the independence of the judiciary, the responsibility for courts administration is often a very sensitive and delicate issue. Great care and respect for the principles of judicial independence must be exercised in this area.

The Ministry

• Justice Ontario
  • How do I find a lawyer or a paralegal?
  • Family Law
  • Criminal Law
  • Lawsuits & Disputes
  • Human Rights
  • Wills & Estates
  • Tickets & Fines
• Better Justice Together
• Court Services
• Victims of Crime
• Family Justice
• Public Guardian & Trustee
• Office of the Children's Lawyer
• Justice on Target

 Contacts

Follow the Ministry

•   Twitter  RSS
•   Facebook
•   Flickr (photo gallery)

CONTACT US | HELP | ACCESSIBILITY | PRIVACY STATEMENT |

© QUEEN'S PRINTER FOR ONTARIO, 2008 - 2010
LAST MODIFIED: MONDAY, FEBRUARY 09, 2015

185. Only thing to Fear is FEAR itself!

VIEWS@12180

Someone commented on my latest posting the other day. By the way, there have been VERY few over these trying years. Concern was voiced about my inclusion of the 'word' ISIS in conjunction with 'other words.' 

Upon reflection, after some discussion about 'what I thought I was trying to do', I realized how incredibly sensitive the general public has become. 

Remember US President, Franklin D. Roosevelt's speech, March 4, 1933 (and I mean this was a man saying this on March 4, 1933):    

Addressing himself to the causes of the economic crisis and its moral dimensions, Roosevelt placed blame squarely on the greed and shortsightedness of bankers and businessmen, as seen in the following excerpts: 

"So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life a leadership of frankness and of vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory. And I am convinced that you will again give that support to leadership in these critical days."

Addressing himself to the causes of the economic crisis and its moral dimensions, Roosevelt placed blame squarely on the greed and shortsightedness of bankers and businessmen, as seen in the following excerpts (I have emboldened some text):

"..rulers of the exchange of mankind's goods have failed through their own stubbornness and their own incompetence, have admitted their failure, and have abdicated. Practices of the unscrupulous money changers stand indicted in the court of public opinion, rejected by the hearts and minds of men.

The money changers have fled from their high seats in the temple of our civilization. We may now restore that temple to the ancient truths. The measure of the restoration lies in the extent to which we apply social values more noble than mere monetary profit.

Recognition of the falsity of material wealth as the standard of success goes hand in hand with the abandonment of the false belief that public office and high political position are to be valued only by the standards of pride of place and personal profit; and there must be an end to a conduct in banking and in business which too often has given to a sacred trust the likeness of callous and selfish wrongdoing.

Restoration calls, however, not for changes in ethics alone. This Nation asks for action, and action now.

Mankind has forever taken advantage of the vulnerable. After all, so does all of Nature. This, in a full view's objective, may be acceptable. Sensible or not, to cleanly fight an opponent in any ring is a choice, But, under the guise of 'Justice' it becomes a double edged sword.  There is paradox everywhere...

The age-old child's prayer looms strangely over a young developing brain when it needs to digest its full meaning:
"Now I lay me down to sleep,
I pray the Lord my soul to keep,
If I shall die before I wake,
I pray the Lord my soul to take.
 Amen."

How in Heaven's name can you fall asleep with that little ditty on your brain?
YIP! Life's indeed like a box of chocolats: "You never know what yer going to get..."

Boy! That Forrest Gump was smart :)

184. The BIG Release (RU 4 IT, or AGIN IT?)

VIEWS@12121

Well, to the day, April 14, 2008, EXACT-ly 7 years ago, I signed the fateful contract.  This past April 14th, I signed the all encompassing release, with its proviso I won't post any disparaging remarks about the clients, or else....:(>

"Hi Jan:

They have, I am told reluctantly, accepted the Release as attached. Please sign it and fax it to me as soon as possible. 

Ms. Alexander would like you to know, however, that should you publicize (i.e. on the internet) any disparaging remarks about her clients and/or their company, they could pursue a new legal action against you. That is, of course, correct, as is could, were it to happen, be a separate actionable wrong." 

As I replied, I have long outgrown the need to be 'disparaging.' Both my anger and bewilderment have gradually subsided.  After rigour mortis sets in, you come to a point when you need to pull away from the body subjective.  When all the parrying has been done; after the coffin has been lowered; dirt applied to cover the sins; all horror buried; there's need to stand back, assess, and ultimately understand the greater picture. If you don't, you'll go crazy.

The hardest fix is to come to the realization that all was a complete waste of time. The erroneous belief to have thought that such a grand and age-old institution is in fact a farce, a sham, a pretence of the highest order. That it has been, and continues to, lavish great damage upon the ordinary citizens, who are forced in to playing along; all under the guise of 'JUSTICE!' 

So you go for a walk; watch birds fly; observe eagles, desperate to catch the last fish. You re-assess your mankind, and face the fact he is not so pretty. You realize that lies are lived under the guise of 'Justice.' That Mr. Dress-Up is alive and shaping your existence, under your very nose!

Hey dude, I have no jurisdiction over what the other guy ordered you; he said that under the circumstances all questions are relevant. So stop asking questions; Stop being so nosy. Bloody well answer them, or we'll pulverize you!
These are the honourable pillars of our society - in costume, on their stage! De LAW is in dis HOUSE!  
Don't you GET IT? THAT's reality! 

This realization now gives me the shivers, and I find it utterly scary. 
Smart Meters, Monsanto, Bill C-51, ISIS is amongst us... invasion of our privacy?
WHAT privacy? WHAT democracy? Am I a terrorist for questioning?

Look inward and ask that question! DEAL with REALITY, or, be a pon, a slave; a slave to the ultimate pillars of your society. We are on a runaway train, and it is speeding down-hill exponentially. 
Are you for us? or agin us?