Free Speech under attack in Canada

SilenceEqualsDeath

Today a news report came across my feed about a former MP who launched a class action lawsuit against a religious man who passed out pamphlets at the gay pride parade in Toronto.

The pamphlets being ultra religious, stated inflammatory information, like all gay people are aids carriers etc.    Much of it was disgusting, according to those who attended the parade.

However, when I asked the person who launched the Lawsuit, if the pamphlets contained calls for people to beat up gay people or to kill gay people?   He avoided answering.    Trying to deflect the question by stating that he wasn’t about to post anything what was in the pamphlets because he found it distasteful and disgusting.

I took that evasion to mean, that no, the preacher man didn’t have anything that called for the extermination of gay people or the harming of gay people.

Freedom of speech does not mean you only get to hear or read things that you like.  If that was the case, I would not be able to write my articles.  No news reporters would be able to actively report the truth.   People could be arrested for having the wrong views or opinions.  Books would be banned.  Movies, Television would be heavily censored.

Now while in Canada, we tend to be a more socialist nation than one of democracy.  In fact I have written on this numerous times.  I have also written how we don’t have free speech  in this country.  And we really don’t.  We have limits here on what we can say.

Only now I believe it’s time for everyone, in Canada , to wake up and put a stop to people trying to silence you because you might hurt their feelings, or because they are offended, or find whatever you saying distasteful.   You have every single right to voice your opinion, to speak your mind and to say what you want. As  long as you don’t call for violence against anyone.

We need to fight people who try to attack free speech.  We do this by using logic, reasoning and not be shamed or silenced by those who would silence our speech.

I sincerely hope the court system does the right thing and throws this case out with the trash, otherwise there could be serious repercussions for everyone, including those who would silence us.

Lawsuit story here:
http://www.cp24.com/mobile/news/class-action-lawsuit-filed-over-distribution-of-anti-gay-literature-at-pride-parade-1.3026515

What happened to our homes are our castles?

Bodiam Castle, East Sussex, UK
Bodiam Castle, East Sussex, UK

What happens when your home is no longer your castle?  What does it feel like when you, get told that you have no rights on who enters your home or when?

I found out today that in Canada, we do not have any rights to our property.  At least the government believes we don’t.    In the interest of safety, they have created laws that empower their  agents to think they can tell us that they can, without any warrant, to enter our homes.

Now the reason may sound reasonable to some, but the reason does not matter to me.  It is the rights they trample over.

Today during a neighborhood association meeting, we had a representative from the fire department.   She was quite nice and I had a great respect for that branch.   Until today that is.     She had been there to represent the local fire department and with a smile, informed us that the Carbon Monoxide detectors had almost been installed in all the homes in my area, except for a few.   She then proceeded to inform us that in those homes that they were unable to gain access to, they would ticket the homeowners and basically enter the home, without a warrant to install these Carbon Monoxide detectors/inspect the home.

Of course being who I am, this raised huge red flags to me.   Our homes are supposed to be our sanctuaries and no one, should be allowed to enter except in emergency or with a warrant if suspected of a crime.

According to the fire department however, they can and will enter people’s homes if the home owners refuse them entry when they come knocking for the carbon monoxide detectors.

The legal implications for this is huge.    The first implication is that you have no say on who enters the home if they are a government agent.   The police are supposed to get a warrant to enter someone’s home, but the fire department doesn’t if there is no apparent emergency?

If the fire department can be granted these powers, with no due process, then what else has the Canadian governments created?

Needless to say this made me instantly angry.   Here was a government representative, telling us homeowners that we had no say.   No authority.     Well needless to say that I promptly informed her that no law can decide who enters my home and If they tried I will fight them in court and defend my home from intrusion, because without a warrant, I consider anyone entering my home as a home invader.  Uniform or not.     She then tried to threaten me with getting a police officer to come in to “explain” the law to me.

This kind of heavy strong arm tactic is the same type that dictatorships use and if you don’t capitulate they throw you in jail or kill you.    No cop can enter your home without your permission or a warrant, or unless there is some emergency like a 911 call from inside the home, fire, or break in.

They cannot, ever enter without a warrant.   To do so, they would be violating your rights to privacy and your home.    Think of all those people who have been victims of a home invasion and imagine the home invaders being the government.    The feelings you would feel would be no different.    Many people who have experienced this from cops or any government agency have described their feelings after as the same as those who have had a home invasion by criminals.     No difference.

Now, someone at the meeting cited that police can enter with just cause, and the answer is a swift no they can’t.   They need to get a warrant to enter.  If they have “just cause” then they can bring that to a judge, while just cause is not usually enough to get an arrest warrant, it can be enough to justify a warrant to enter someone’s home, but to give any other agencies sweeping powers to enter your home with any due process is a violation of a person’s rights.

We need to stop letting these people get away with this.  We need to stop being so passive when it comes to government and law enforcement.

Maybe they are misunderstanding the law?   Maybe they have been told by their superiors they can do this and let the lawyers handle any blowback?   Who knows, but this is not what living in a free country means.

Truth about the Birth Registry System.

canada_birth

(Above:Sample Birth Registry Form)

Many people assume they have rights over the government when it comes to their children.  After all, you are the parents, the ones who love your children, gave birth or raise them.

What if I told you this is only a half truth?   What If I told you that you had no real rights to your child and the rules for raising them?

You would laugh and tell me I’m a moron right?   Don’t worry, I know.  I’ve been called many names over the years for my discovery of this tidbit of information.  Doesn’t make me wrong though.  So far there is no evidence to disprove me.

What you think of your “Parental Rights” is actually usage rights.  Usage rights, doesn’t really mean you have the right to use something as you see fit.   Or own something outright.  It means you can use the item, or in this case raise the child, within the confines of the rules of the government.

You scoff?   Think on this.  How does Children’s Aid societies across the country have so much power?   Why?    They can take your children without warrant or notice for the most trivial of reasons.   So how do they get this power?

This all has to do with law.  This is also why the abortion laws are the way they are.   Before I get into what makes it there.  I will explain a bit about old maritime law.

You see in the time of the big sail ships, that hauled cargo around the world there was certain agreed upon rules that every country followed with foreign cargo vessels.   These rules eventually became Maritime Law and were adopted procedures in law for other things, including registering a child’s birth.

Here is how the old maritime law works.

A ship laden with cargo in it’s hold would come to port of a nation.  The captain would register the cargo and the ship with the harbormaster.   The harbor master would take possession of the cargo into the harbor’s warehouses for safekeeping until the captain could find a buyer for the goods and sell it.  Until then it was kept in trust, and protection by the harbormaster.   So the captain did not have to worry about anyone else stealing that cargo or selling it behind his back.  It also ensured the good behavior of the captain and crew, because if they did anything wrong like break a local law they could confiscate that cargo and jail the crew or captain.

Now I’ll translate this into modern times.

A ship laden with cargo (Pregnant Mother), would come to port of a nation (Government Licensed Hospital), the captain (Father) would register the ship and it’s cargo (Mother is registered at hospital to give birth), The Harbormaster (Government Licensed Doctor), then removes cargo (Baby) from the ship (mother), and it is registered with the harbormaster (Government).  At this point the cargo (Baby) is under the control and protection (Ward) of the harbormaster (Government), until such time as the captain (Father) could find a buyer (Marriage) for the cargo (Baby).  Until that time, the cargo (Baby) remains in the care of the harbormaster (Ward of the state).   The captain (Father)has to follow the rules for trade (Rules for raising the child) within the land (in the country) and if they do something that goes against the local laws, the harbormaster (Government child protection services) then could confiscate the cargo (child) and jail the captain (father) and her crew if warranted.

Now this is 2015 and we live in a so called “Modern society” but this is still true, as it hasn’t changed in centuries.   This is also explains a few other things in our lives that most people don’t even think about.   This is also why the Queen is also known as the “Queen Mum” .  Not because she is old and has children of her own, but because technically according to the propaganda the Queen is the head of state of Canada and England and we are all her children via the registry system.

Why women are “Handed off” to a groom at a wedding.  The captain is selling his cargo and transferring ownership.   And also why fathers had a huge say in the past on who their daughter would marry.  It’s not the only reason by far but its a big one.   And why as well children are considered property or dependents until they reach the age of maturity.

England was the original country this practice was used on human beings and now to this day to the bankers influence on the world, almost everyone is registered.

This is also huge because as parents you don’t really have real rights to your property.  And yes the child is a human being, I understand this, but you created that child.  Your DNA, created it.  That means they had to find a way to trick you into giving up the rights to your property.  So the birth registry is the way.   This is also why in Canada you get a “Baby Bonus” cheque.   They tell you it is to help you pay for expenses for the child.  In reality that this a partial truth.  It is for the expenses of the child, but it is also payment for taking care of the ward of the state that you gave them.  They are paying you to take care of  the child you gave up ownership rights to.

If you hadn’t registered that child, it would be one hundred percent your child.  There have been a few rare cases where a parent did not register their child at birth and one case I read the mother had three children and one was not registered.  Children’s Aid society (child protective services) came and removed the children from the home because the mother didn’t comply with demands from the school for some legal reason.   The next day after the children had been removed, the police brought the one child who wasn’t registered back stating “This one isn’t ours, it’s yours”.   And left.

There are other cases where children are appearing at the age of 16 trying to obtain jobs and can’t because they don’t exist in the government’s eyes because they were never registered, and since people in this country think you have to hire only people with a SIN card, these people are unable to obtain work legally.

(Side note: Think of all the items you register in your life with the government.  The same applies to each one.  Your car, your boat, your home.   None of it is yours after.  It’s all theirs and they can make rules for it all because you got tricked into thinking you had to register your property with them).

Now when you realize  the above as truth, the rest of what happens makes sense.  The ability of the government to legally force you to send your child to their schools to strangers each day.   The ability of the government to decide what medical treatment options are available for children.  The rules for raising them, for feeding them, for housing them, for disciplining them, for nurturing them.

And why when one of these rules is perceived to be broken, Child Protection comes in and removes the child depending on which rule gets broken.

In some court rooms if a father makes a statement that he wants his property returned to him immediately, and has a judge that knows the history and background of the laws and understands them properly, will immediately recognize the father as the property owner and return the child to his custody.    I wouldn’t recommend trying it though, it is usually done in summary judgement otherwise known as Queen’s Bench, and you really have to be able to defend yourself and know your rights in that court.

I was taught all this in grade school and back then I never gave it a thought, because I was a child and didn’t understand the vast implications of a system like this.  The teacher at the time proudly taught us this with a smile, because in her eyes this is a great system.

I guess she didn’t see the lies in it.

(PS: If your a doctor reading this, and have ever gotten new parents to sign the registry document, or had your nurses get the parents do to it, this is exactly what you’ve been doing)

Zuckerburg is a criminal. Facebook is now Censoring more.

Today I found on my news feed on Facebook, that it had changed it’s rules and guidelines, basically telling us what we can and cannot post.   With very little detail and very ambiguous, it can now ban pretty much ban you for anything.  That is, anything they feel, they don’t like.    Like for example:

Articles about:

Any group the government targets … like terrorist groups.

However, what the government considers terrorist groups is not the same as what the average person does.

Here are some listed terrorist groups:

Environmentalists

Freedom of Speech Groups

Anti Abortion Groups

Human Rights Groups (yes that’s right).

Pro Freedom Groups

Anti Government or Smaller Government Groups

Facebook and Zuckerburg feel that it is okay to censor people’s voices.  That anything that doesn’t follow the american government’s ideas, is against them and therefor a target.

The recent past few months with the debate on vaccinations will be a thing of the past with these new rules.   They will allow Czar Zuckerburg to ban anyone who joins an anti-vaccination group, any group that is against the american government, who are against any government agenda.

The reason is simply, they don’t want the people to have freedoms.   Zuckerburg has created a social media culture where it’s okay to censor people.   I know, I see it all the time when I comment on friend’s posts.

One in particular claims he loves our discussions, but will delete my comments almost every time, because we tend to disagree on the topic he posts.   No real discussion can be had under that type of environment.   No opposing views allowed.  I’ve had friends that I’ve known personally in real life for years, all of a sudden delete and block me for a simple status message or an article that was posted.

The idea you can just delete a person whenever you wish is the kind of idea that leads to censorship and today facebook just added another way people can censor another, and more importantly, facebook themselves.

Now all the groups we see on facebook, that are against vaccinations, abortions, that are for environmental protections, clean energy, clean drinking water, raw milk, GMO labeling, Medical Pot, and more are all, at risk.   No more do we have true freedom of speech.   No more are the days when you can speak your mind about your views or opinions or even actually back your views with links to proof and real facts.  Instead, facebook can delete and block you if they don’t like your view.

In fact, you can say Zuckerburg has committed treason to the human race.

Here are the crimes he has committed against the human global race.

Censorship of Freedom of Speech

Selling our private information for profit.

Partnering with a  government spy agency to spy on it’s own people and others around the world.

Giving unrestricted access to government agencies to mine and collect our data to create profiles of each and every one of us.

Adding hidden programming in the phone apps that allow them to track where you are at all times via your phone’s GPS and through the cell towers.

Sharing your private communications with governments and using the contents to create advertisements targeting you specifically.

I had a conversation with someone about this and they laughed saying the american government doesn’t do these things.   When the person said that I couldn’t believe what I heard.   How could anyone in this day and age believe that?   The american government, Canadian governments both admit to it.  They admit to watching us, gathering information.  Obama has bragged on record for being able to kidnap american citizens without trial or warrant and execute them on a whim.   And yet he laughed and said it can’t happen.

When our freedoms are eroded so much, all you have to do is look at the people.  The people, the so called majority have become apathetic zombies.  Stuck on their reality shows, Facebook, and superficial lives.   Our society has been molded into an unthinking society of sheep, who refuse to question perceived authority.

This has to stop.  Before we are herded off into cattle cars and are marched naked into ovens en masse.

Sources:
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/03/16/facebook-explains-what-it-bans-and-why/?_r=0
http://thefifthcolumnnews.com/2015/03/new-facebook-rules-sharing-this-article-might-get-you-banned/

Vaccines vs No Vaccines

Let me start off by saying I’m for a healthy society.   I don’t want children to die or get sick, but the fact is I know how the immune system works and how are bodies work.  So the truth is, we need to get sick.

Our bodies are created with an immune system for a reason.  We live in a  world with disease, germs, virus’ and bacteria.   Life started on this planet due to bacteria.

We also know from science that these things can disappear for hundreds even millions of years and then come back in outbreaks.

Right there, mainly due to the mass hysteria brought on by overprotective parents in the United States and Canada, around the recent measles cases in both countries.   What they are calling an outbreak, I would call a few sick kids, by that is besides the point.

Let me talk about measles for a moment.

Measles isn’t that scary.  I have mom’s on my facebook lists who scream and shout that anti vaxxers are child abusers etc.   I find this behavior reactionary, and fear based.  When discussing the issue with them they claim to have “done their research” but when you question or discuss the issue you will find their research consists of getting five minutes worth of info from their doctor, memes from their mommy and me facebook group and an article written in a pop culture magazine.

Here is a tiny bit of history which will give you an idea of what measles was like back in history.

1800s:   During this era the chance of death was approximately 48% for people who contracted measles.
In those years they didn’t have sanitation infrastructure, they went to the bathroom in a pail and dumped it’s contents out onto the street.   You also wiped your buttocks with a rag or your hand.
They would bath at most once a month and at the very least once a year.
Hand-washing was rare, and food cross contamination was an every day occurrence as well as under cooked foods and unwashed vegetables.
People wore the same clothes for months at a time.  In wealthy house holds they would have 4 sets of clothing for each season and would change their clothes per season, not each day.

Due to all of the above, disease would be rampant and many would die.

Fast forward to the invention of sanitation sewer systems and we saw a decline in disease, and illness.  Modern water pipes brought in water into the homes, and allowed people to bathe more frequently, not every day but once a week or so.   Washing our vegetables became routine and washing clothes was done more often.

1960s:  This was the era when vaccines were introduced.   Measles was almost gone at this time.  Less than a percent of the people in the united states had measles less than a percent of a percent of a percent died from it.   We had daily bathes, wore clean clothes everyday, cooked our foods properly and had modern sanitation and sewage infrastructure in all the major cities, small towns.

Now:   We have very tiny outbreaks of measles, in pocket areas.  In all cases, in the past 10 years it was found that an adult who was vaccinated was the patient zero and caused the outbreaks.    Zero infant deaths in the past 10-15 years have happened due to measles.
us-measles
Most doctors don’t know what is in the measles vaccines.  They couldn’t tell you the individual ingredients, they don’t even read the insert the Pharma companies include in the box.   And the things that insert tells you, should be enough to make you pause and look deeper.  Most don’t.

The CDC has written documents, that say after a vaccine your child is very infectious and should not be around any other children for a period of time.  The Pharma companies put inserts for these vaccines have really strong warnings.   Here is the MMR2 vaccine insert (http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/m/mmr_ii/mmr_ii_pi.pdf)

This says right on the warning that anyone who is allergic to eggs, has any fever based illness,  Under the adverse reactions on page six, it gets interesting where it states you can get “Diabetes”   (  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diabetes_mellitus )

Some other “adverse effects are:”

Anaphylaxis – Severe allergic reaction which can cause death.  (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anaphylaxis)

Arthritis; arthralgia; myalgia – Severe Joint, and muscle pain.   Less so with children and as the age of the person increases so does the chances of acquiring it along with the pain levels increasing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthralgia  and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myalgia

Encephalitis – Brain swelling which can cause seizures, febrile convulsions, afebrile
convulsions or seizures; ataxia; polyneuritis; polyneuropathy; ocular palsies; paresthesia

At this point you should be getting a picture of what dangers lie within the vaccine itself.

There is much more in there.  Read for yourself.  Use google to figure out some of the reactions and you will find what is listed as reactions are not reactions but illness and even death.  Some are lifetime illness’.  And that is right on the insert that comes with the measles vaccine.   That should scare anyone.  It does me.  And yet many parents would rather risk their child’s health on these “adverse reactions” than a 1-1000-3000 chance of death (which hasn’t happened in decades).

In other words, fear.   Fear of death,,  That looming word, brings images of a small coffin and no one wants that.  Instead they inject their baby with a toxin that can cause all sorts of “adverse effects” that will last a lifetime.   And then they scratch their heads and wonder what happened and blame un-vaccinated children or parents of said children.

Now I have to ask anyone out there, is it really worth is to risk a child health like this knowing this information?

Here is what it boils down to:

No Vaccine:  Child gets sick for a week or so, has rash and fever.   Recovers and has a lifetime of antibodies and in women can pass those down to her children for the first 15 months of their lives.

Vaccine:  Adverse side effects, chance of lifetime illness’, like diabetes, muscle issues, autoimmune issues etc, seizures.   For a period of maximum 10 years cloned antibodies that are not guaranteed to stop the disease and can be shed from the body and be highly contagious if the vaccine is a live virus vaccine.

To me the answer is clear.  Not to get or give the vaccine to anyone.

The other point I would like to touch on, is about freedom.  I believe if we are truly free then we have the freedom to say no to our government.  That should be a huge concern for everyone.    This is why we have the judicial system were we have a jury of our peers to decide to remove those freedoms if a crime has been committed.  Personal freedoms or individual freedoms for myself is untouchable.   A government does not decide what my rights are.   They can’t.  A right is inherent.  A privileged is given.  A right can only be violated.  A privileged can only be taken away.

Forcing a medical procedure against my will or consent is tantamount to assault, rape and an attack on myself or my family.  No one has the right to choose for me or my family.  None.  If you don’t have that choice then you are not free.   If your government, mandates that vaccines are mandatory, then I think everyone should take up arms and start a rebellion.   A vaccine for me is the same as trying to inject HIV directly into my body.   And I will never agree to that.     You can choose to get these vaccines, I will even defend that right, but don’t ever try to take away my right to choose.

Law Society

The law society is a society.  It’s member’s practice law.  They are the ones we call when we have a legal issue and need someone in court.

Remember what I said about societies in my first post?   This is a society.  It was created by and owned by, you guessed it.  The banking family.  The ownership of every company called a law society in the world in any country that was conquered, acquired or colonized by England has one.   The law society has it’s own members who pay their dues and in return they get the protection of their society and as well, they have their own language.   They don’t admit to it,  and after many conversations with lawyers who think I’m incorrect, I’ve found out they don’t even teach their new lawyers about law dictionaries anymore.  Many believe that book form law dictionaries like “Black’s Law Dictionary” is a myth or a hoax.

I call these so called lawyers, ill informed.   And what’s worse, is they won’t believe you, even if you show them the truth.  I had a few months long discussion with one, and I kept citing the law dictionary and he refused to believe it because according to him, the law dictionaries have no basis in law.  Even though they define the words he uses in law everyday.

The law society is a twisted concept, that on it’s face seems noble and honorable.  It is, the arm that holds society back.   It enforces it’s will on all who come within it’s walls and it’s not for the benefit of the people but the crown corporation.

The words they use are a twisted form of English to make people think they are speaking English.  They have redefined simple common place words, to have a slightly different meaning so they can have an advantage.

Driver is my favorite.  As they keep changing it’s definition to try to gain the advantage in court.   Every new edition of a law dictionary has a new definition of this word because people keep fighting this in court.   For my example I will use the original definition and I will go on to explain why this is important.

The original definition said

One employed in conducting a coach, carriage, wagon, or other vehicle,with horses, mules, or other animals, or a bicycle, tricycle, or motor car, though not a street railroad car. See Davis v. Petrinovich, 112 Ala. 654, 21 South. 344, 36 L. R. A.615; Gen. St. Conn. 1902,

Law Dictionary: What is DRIVER? definition of DRIVER (Black’s Law Dictionary)

Now, the key words here is employed to conduct.   Employed (Hired or working) to conduct .. meaning to transport either goods or people.

This makes sense since the government by it’s own words is supposed to manage the resources of the lands and manage trade within and without the lands.   A driver then under that definition would be a commercial driver.  One who is using the roads (public roads) for personal gain.  So it makes sense to me that a “Driver” should be licensed and taxed for the money they make using the public roads that I as a non driver pay for via the gas tax.

So anyone really who makes a living transporting goods or people using the roads is a driver. At least under that legal definition.   This definition comes directly from the law society.

Yet we are forced to pay for driver licenses and taxed on it every year on our birthdays.   Many people don’t think of this that way and that is due to the twisting of the language.   Another thing in law they don’t tell you is the word MAY is synonymous with the word MUST.   Basically in law you can switch the one word for the other.   So when you read on the provincial government websites for drivers licenses you will see it say you MUST get a drivers license.   This is legalese again.  They use this to trick you into believing that you have to get a commercial license to use the roads you already pay for.

The public misconception is that a drivers licence magically makes you safe on the roads and competent to drive a vehicle.  Despite the fact there are thousands of accidents every day, by allegedly “competent drivers”.    Despite the fact that, up until the early sixties, people didn’t need a licence to drive a car on the roads for personal use.   It wasn’t until they used legalese in their wording on the documents that people began to believe the myth that a plastic card made you safe on the roads.    By that simple legalese trickery by substituting the word MAY with MUST, they ensured a billion plus dollars every year, plus fines from tickets, because tickets by the way are commercial bills in their nature.  I will get into that in another post.

The law society dictates what the words mean in their legalese.  Seemingly common words we take for granted have vastly different meanings or multiple meanings they use at will without our knowledge.    Look at it this way, in Quebec they speak a more guttural and slang version of french.  In Paris they speak a true form of french.   We speak English and the law society speaks a bastardized version of it.

Due to the fact the law society is a registered corporation and is also owned by the same people who own the government, they use that advantage to manipulate the people that they get true justice in all levels of court.  The lower court system isn’t about fairness or justice.  It’s about making money.  That branch brings in money in fines, fees and judgement’s in favor of the crown.  Not the Queen, the crown corporation.   They are a court of contracts.  This is why all lower court judges won’t answer the question if they are working for the crown corporation or the queen.  The can’t because then no one would listen to them anymore.

Another thing many people don’t realize about the law society, or rather they are beginning to suspect, is that they protect their own.  A judge is just a lawyer in a black dress.  He oversees cases and makes judgement on them in lower courts.   The usual penalty is a fine.  Which goes to the crown corporation.   That’s his job.  It’s not to ensure justice. It’s making money.  The judge, the crown prosecutor and the lawyer you hire, are all members of the same society.  They work together.   In many circumstances, judges are also chosen from the city attorney pool, usually a crown prosecutor will get promoted to judge.  And that is based on how many convictions he has gotten in his favor.  That means the more he wins and the more fines the crown makes, the better his chances at a promotion.   The judge, because they usually come from the prosecution side of the equation, are biased and tend to judge in favor of the crown.  This way he gets his bonus’s and raises.  They both get paid from the same source as well.

This is the system the law society set up.    Next blog post will be on the court rooms and the scams they do there.

Some words to look up are

Person

Driver

Monster

Some dictionaries you can find online are Black’s Law dictionary, Canadian Law dictionary.    You can also find these law dictionaries in ebook form and to buy in book stores.   Be aware, according to the current crop of lawyers out there, these books are a myth, hoax or don’t mean anything.

Canada is not a true democracy.

Canada is not a true democracy.  A true democracy includes those who don’t vote.   One of the fundamental cornerstones or truths in democracy is:

Consent of the governed.

We give our consent to be governed by participating in voting and voting for the person we wish to govern on our behalf.

This is a fundamental truth that the government of Canada will even agree on.  (I called and asked them).

Now here is the simple way to prove we are not a democracy.  The people who do not vote in Canada do not count.  If you speak with elections Canada and ask them what happens when the majority of the population don’t vote, they will tell you that it doesn’t matter, that even if only a thousand people voted then whoever got the most votes wins.

If we are truly giving our consent to be governed, we are removing that consent by not voting.   It doesn’t matter the reason either.   Once we remove that consent that should be it.  The government should dissolve and a new system should take it’s place.   However, according to the government, that isn’t the case.   The government goes one, without the consent.   Therefor, it is not a democracy.  It is a tyranny.  When a small group of people get to decide for the rest and use force to push their rules on them, then that is a tyranny.

In the city were I live, we had our local elections this year.   Only 35% of the population voted.  That means 65% removed their consent.   If this was a democracy, our city government would have disbanded and a new one should have replaced it. Instead we have the people that a small group decided on.    That is tyranny.   You can claim it isn’t all you want but when the majority say no by removing their consent and the government continues then that isn’t a true democracy.

Canada – What it really is.

I decided to start off my second blog, with information about the government of Canada.  In my searching I found some very eye opening information.   I, like many people, used to think that the government was some mass organization that is for the benefit of the people.  As the propaganda states, it is there for the protection of the people and it’s lands.  This is a half truth.

In order to understand what the government is, you have to go back before it was even created.  Back in the time when the first explorers came to the lands and interacted with the natives.    They created that famous first trading post in Hudson’s bay to exchange furs and such.

We all know the story and it’s very serene, sounds nice and is taught to everyone.   Have you ever wondered who financed that expedition?  Where the money came from?   Everyone assumes it’s the monarchy.   The English monarch definitely did approve of the expedition but she didn’t negotiate any deals herself.  She sent her envoys, who in return got sole rights to the management of the lands in the treaties.  This is what they don’t teach you in School.

They used to teach us that the Hudson’s bay company formed from that trading post and after more treaties were signed for the management of the land and approval of the people to colonize, that the government arose from the Hudson’s bay company.  Hudson’s bay dealt with trade between the natives and England and the government managed the lands and resources on behalf of the people and conducted trade with other countries.   After speaking with some teens and checking some current history books they don’t teach this anymore.  Apparently history changed.

So continuing on, the people who negotiated the treaties and created the government, worked for the banking family of the day in England, who happened to own the Crown Corporation of England and the City of London which is a small patch of land in the center of the larger city of England. A hidden inner city so to speak.   In this city because of it’s strange history, none of the reigning monarchs in England can set foot on that land without permission from the mayor.  It’s been that way for hundreds of years, and to this day the queen must ask permission to enter the inner city.

When I found out this information I did some research on the bankers themselves.  Back then there was about 9 banking families, all fighting for dominance.    The Rothchilds were the predominant and still are to this day.   They sent their people to negotiate the treaties with the natives and that included the rights to manage the lands, and it’s people.  So after the ink was dry on that treaty they created the government.  Which was and still is to this day owned by the Crown Corporation of London.   In Canada, our government is called the Crown Corporation of Canada.   We have the Bank of Canada, and they have the Bank of England.   (Do you see resemblances?).

Many people in Canada, believe and are taught without any kind of proof but a history book that the lands are held in trust by the Queen on behalf of the natives.   This is again a half truth.  The queen in this case is a figure head.  She approved the deal because the people she hired created the treaties.  In return for her support and her family, they get a continuous stream of wealth.   The real creators of the government is the bankers.   The Crown Corporation of Canada is listed as a corporation SOLE.  This can be verified by doing a simple credit report search on them, you can do it from TransUnion, Equafax, or Dun and Bradstreet.

For those that don’t know, a corporation sole is a company that is owned by a single individual or company.    In the Crown Corporation’s case, it is owned by the Crown Corporation of London.

Many people have gotten angry when I pointed this out. That the government is in reality a corporation.  That simple statement has caused people to go into a frenzy of trying to disprove me with regurgitation of the history books (which don’t tell us everything), down to name calling in an attempt to discredit me.   Please if you don’t believe what I said just go do some research and dig into this.  It took me about six months of digging to find out a fraction of this information.

The other thing that makes people believe the government was created by the queen was the name.  The Crown Corporation of Canada.  The government pushes this perception easily because let’s face it, when we think of the word “Crown” we think the queen.  So the government has created this image that the queen owns the Crown Corporation.  She doesn’t.   The name was chosen precisely to fool the people into thinking this.  Same reason the FED in the united states was called what it was.   The Bank of Canada, the same. It is a privately owned company.  All owned by the same people.

The title of the business fools the reader into believing that there is something noble and good about the government.  After all the crown created it so it must be good.   This isn’t the case.   The system was created a very long time ago to fool people they had freedom. And to instill the belief that the government was working on it’s behalf for the greater good.

The Crown Corporation is a corporation.  Owned by bankers and run by idiots.   I would estimate that maybe, three maybe four people in the entire high branches of the government are even aware who their real bosses are.   It is definitely not the people.

If you don’t believe this, then ask a judge this.  Do you work for the “Crown, her Majesty in Right of Canada” or do you work for the “Crown Corporation of Canada”.   A judge will NEVER answer this.  They cannot because the answer would bring out the lie.   In the thousands of hours of videos of court cases, and in all the times that question has been asked, the judge has always, always had a response that makes you blink.   In one video I watched a judge flee the room, in another, he flew into a fit of rage, in another he dismissed a case without going through the case.

There is a major difference between the Crown Corporation and the Crown.  One represents the Queen and one Represents the Bankers.

The other perception put forth by the Government is that your vote counts.  That it means something.  And that the leader you vote in is the one running the country.  This is an outright lie.

If you go look at the governor general’s act of Canada on line 2 it specifies the Governor General is the CEO of the crown corporation.   Not the PM.   The prime minister is then just a figurehead or rather, a sales person.   He is there to sell the people the perception that he’s in charge.   He makes the appearances, talks to other heads of state and manages the members of parliament.   He is the front-man.  Now I’m not saying he doesn’t have any authority, he has to if the act is to be authentic.  If he didn’t then, people would have figured this out a very long time ago.  No, he has the authority in Parliament and with his cabinet.    I would put him as the CEO’s top sales person.  Or assistant.   The people elect him.  The Governor General does not get elected by the people.  That is just one reason why your vote doesn’t count.

Now at this time I have been unable to find alternate information on the governor general, specifically if the queen really appoints him/her to the position or if it is the head office (crown corp of London.) .   This bothers me.  There is no historical information on this. I have doubts that the queen appoints the person but if it is true then it can mean that they run things on behalf of the queen in partnership with the bankers.  Sort of a partner in the business.   This makes sense to me, because it’s the royal family’s name at stake and if more people found out in the general public, there would be a lynching.  At least that is a personal belief and at this time I cannot find any evidence to prove otherwise either.