when will Canadians vote to ratify a constitution?

[M.Dancer]

Why?

Your premises are irrelevent. My guess is you are either Eldon Warman and are simply spamming in hope that some clueless yokel will pay the fee for offshore banking and get suckered and end up in court, or perhaps you are one of the above mentioned suckers.

Now we know Mr Warman is somewhat.....

[4] On March 31, 2005, Eldon Warman was personally served with documents from the Commission. There was something of an altercation. The affidavit from the process server states that he served Eldon Warman with documents and began to walk away.

The said Respondent then picked up a rock about the size of his hand. I turned and advised him that if he touched me that I would charge him with assault. He then stated "you couldn't charge me with assault because I'm going to fucking kill you". I then ran to my car and left the area.

This seems to reflect Mr. Warman's attitude towards the present proceedings.

http://www.chrt-tcdp.gc.ca/search/view_htm...ing=1&lg=_e

But here is my favourite.......

Detax redux

Hey Snafool or whatever your name is,

I read your story on detaxers and I have one very important question. If Eldon Warman, the detax guru, is not in jail after 15 years of being detaxed, doesn't that speak more loudly than the fear-inducing article you wrote? (See CAmagazine , Detax man cometh, March 2002).

I have met some detaxers who are enjoying a prosperous and happy life, and have been doing so for the past 10 years, obviously not sharing a cell with Bubba.

Perhaps you should have looked a little deeper into the detax system on Warman's site where you would have found the answers. Again, I ask you this question: why is Eldon Warman not in jail?

Detax Sympathizer Somewhere in Canada

Dear Sympathizer,

Many detaxers are not in jail because the justice system doesn't see the benefit in incarcerating nut bars. At one time, there were institutions devoted to keeping such people out of circulation where they could be observed, and medicated under supervision. Sadly, such highly useful places are in bad odour today, and many lunatics are allowed to roam the streets in the false belief that this is better for society. The unfortunate case of the detaxers shows most convincingly that it is not. If you are seriously considering becoming a detaxer, I am obliged to warn you: the leviathan moves slowly, but it does eventually get its prey. The CCRA has an appetite for devouring detaxers, so you may find yourself sharing that cell with the big fellow. And I am most reliably informed that he isn't a kind and loving "partner."

And of course there is this.....

http://members.iphouse.com/fredg/detax_unmasked/

A good bases on why the man is a fraud ......

[no queenslave]

Why?

Your premises are irrelevent. My guess is you are either Eldon Warman and are simply spamming in hope that some clueless yokel will pay the fee for offshore banking and get suckered and end up in court, or perhaps you are one of the above mentioned suckers.

Now we know Mr Warman is somewhat.....

http://www.chrt-tcdp.gc.ca/search/view_htm...ing=1&lg=_e

But here is my favourite.......

And of course there is this.....

http://members.iphouse.com/fredg/detax_unmasked/

A good bases on why the man is a fraud ......

We know that is the best you can do; as you have not posted anything which is contrary to the findings of R.Rogers Smith or Walter F. kuhl .

You seem to follow the action of jbg

QUOTE " The queen pays me to post.... I am not going to take any position contrary to the one I,m paid to take.

If you do not want to get the information from one website ; get it from hansard from your government. I know that is not what you will do because your politician will not help you, and you have no interest in facts..

How is your constitution charter rights working in tax court; with it' s guilty first assumption? You and your government supporters of their corrupt system are worried about what happens to dictators as was demonstrated in IRAQ and will employ all means to maintain the corrupt system. Your threaths do not scare me at all. You want to be a defendant in the next court case with your propaganda?.

[M.Dancer]

How is your constitution charter rights working in tax court; with it' s guilty first assumption?

I have never needed to go to tax court. The only problems I have ever had were cleared up with a few documents and a letter from my accountant. I have never experianced anything except helpful advice from them, but I do have to admit my experiance may not be typical, people find my voice soothing and go out of there way to be kind and helpful.

....and not being a nutbar helps

[no queenslave]

I have never needed to go to tax court. The only problems I have ever had were cleared up with a few documents and a letter from my accountant. I have never experianced anything except helpful advice from them, but I do have to admit my experiance may not be typical, people find my voice soothing and go out of there way to be kind and helpful.

....and not being a nutbar helps

One law for government people and another for people who question the governments authority. Thanks for clearing that up. Since you have never been to tax court you haven't any clue as to how it works. No M.P.has ever been audited and had to go to tax court.; they just want others to.Have you ever heard of a income tax court case of an M.P.

Edited December 6, 2007 by no queenslave

[jbg]

....and not being a nutbar helps

I would assume that NQS is quite deferential and mannerly with the staff at Tax Court, and works effectively with them.

[M.Dancer]

Have you ever heard of a income tax court case of an M.P.

You live under a rock or something?

Besides fraud, have you ever heard of an M.P. so stupid as to suggest that tax laws don't apply to him? No, mainly because most M.P.s if not honest, aren't granola nutbars.....

[g_bambino]

Thanks for posting you do not understand what the purpose of the Statute of Westminster was for. Your indoctrination of government propaganda is all you demonstrate.

"(2)NO LAW and no provision of any law made after the commencement of this act by the parliament of a dominion ( also 7.(2)province and the powers of the legislatures of such provinces.) shall be void (without law) or inoperative on the ground that it is repugnant to the law of England, or to the provisions of any existing or future act of the parliament of the United Kingdom . SO THE PEOPLE WERE GIVEN THEIR SOVEREIGNTY , FREEDOM TO DO WHATEVER THEY WANTED . TO HAVE A LAW OF THE LAND < THE PEOPLE HAVE TO HAVE A CONSTITUTION RATIFIED BY THE PEOPLE> THIS WAS NEVER DONE. So british law no longer applied and their is only a dictatorship in canada governing without any authority from the people; just like other dictatorships which assumed power.

You stated the Constitution Act, 1867, is not applicable. I asked you for proof of this. You directed me to the Statute of Westminster. The Statute of Westminster, as you outline above, does nothing to prove your statement r.e. the Constitution Act, 1867.

What part of "Nothing in this Act shall be deemed to apply to the repeal, amendment or alteration of the British North America Acts, 1867 to 1930" are you not getting?

[jbg]

What part of "Nothing in this Act shall be deemed to apply to the repeal, amendment or alteration of the British North America Acts, 1867 to 1930" are you not getting?

That inconvenient fact doesn't suit its agenda.