Bursting Bubbles of Gov't Deception

[PolyNewbie]

Crapola. Professional bodies in Canada almost universally include lay-people on their governing councils.

Yes, one regular person to 8 - 12 of theirs the lay person is chosen by them.

Have you ever made a complaint to a professional society ? Have you taken their courses on ethics ?

[PolyNewbie]

ROTFL. Your 'references' contradicted your own claims. The only thing you 'proved' is that your reading comprehension skills are non-existent.

Of course. You just keep saying crap like that but you have seen my refenerences on money creation and structural engineers - you can't discredit them in any way - you just say "taken out of context". You could probably keep repeating "the moon is made of cheese, the moon is made of cheese" but it doesn't mean anything.

[PolyNewbie]

...and why would they lay out buildings to be exactly like swastikas?

I can't say for sure but I think its because they are NAZI's. Have you heard of Operation Paper Clip. Have you thought about the Military Comissions Act, Patriot Act, the ridiculous propoganda ? There is not an awful lot that the neocons do not share in common with the NAZI's.

[Riverwind]

Of course. You just keep saying crap like that but you have seen my references on money creation and structural engineers - you can't discredit them in any way - you just say "taken out of context".

I have completely discredited them but you choose not to listen. You claimed that a structural engineer supports your view but he clearly does not if you read what he said. You posted links to websites that explain money creation in exactly the same way I did yet you ignore those explanation and instead focus on a single ambiguous quote which you think negates the much more detailed explanation provided by the same author. You are a piece of work. You tell lawyers they don't understand law, you tell accountants they don't understand the money system and you tell engineers they don't understand science. I guess it is a sign of how out of touch with reality you are.

[Figleaf]

Have you ever made a complaint to a professional society ?

Have you ever been shafted by someone in an unregulated occupation? Who could you complain to then?

[Riverwind]

...and why would they lay out buildings to be exactly like swastikas?

Because it a convenient way to maximize the number of offices with windows when building on a square plot of land.

Here is a link.

I doubt anyone really thought it looked like a swastika when it was built. It you look at the image it appears to be four seperate buildings.

[geoffrey]

...and why would they lay out buildings to be exactly like swastikas?

I think I've lost all faith in the world.

[PolyNewbie]

If they act like NAZI's (military commissions act, torture, aggressive wars, "New World Order") and act like NAZi's (google earth "32 40'34.08" N 117 09'27.53" W") they must be ...NAZI's !!

[FTA Lawyer]

Crapola. Professional bodies in Canada almost universally include lay-people on their governing councils.

Yes, one regular person to 8 - 12 of theirs the lay person is chosen by them.

Have you ever made a complaint to a professional society ? Have you taken their courses on ethics ?

From the Law Society of Alberta website:

The Law Society of Alberta is governed by a 24 member board of directors, made up of 20 benchers and four lay benchers. Benchers are Alberta lawyers, who are elected by Alberta lawyers, and serve for a three year period up to a maximum of nine years. It is a voluntary role and only the president of the LSA receives an honorarium.

Lay benchers are public members appointed by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Alberta. Lay benchers serve a three year term, have full voting rights, and participate in all bencher matters.

Benchers and lay benchers meet as a whole five times a year. They participate on many LSA committees and also sit on panels that make decisions involving individual lawyers, such as discipline, membership and credentials matters.

Law Society of Alberta

So, for us, it's 5 lawyers for every 1 layperson...and no, we don't get to pick the non-lawyers. And, even if we did, how does that make it a "secret society" when 4 "outsiders" are benchers?

FTA

[geoffrey]

Same thing with the ICAA, there is three non-accountants on the board at all times, it's a much smaller board than the law society, at 12 members.

[FTA Lawyer]

So this is what I am doing.

I found an investor for my concept which I am calling Shepherd's Haven. I will be opening a little cafe and therein I will sell beer, wine and pot to those who have secured Freeman status.

Call it what you want. To make a long story short: you will refuse to pay taxes.

Now, do not get me wrong. Trust me, I believe you are in the right and I will not fault you for refusing to pay taxes.

However, your "business plan" is unoriginal. I am sure there are many people who do the same. My suspicion is that their success is a function of how private their highly original plans are kept.

I have one question for you: Why the fanfare?

While I am at it. This:

See, if I didn't know better ('cause I already wathced your video) I'd think you were a police officer the way you are ranting and attempting to intimidate me.

is a peculiar statement.

Do you know something about how police officers operate that we do not know?

I certainly am interested to see how FreemanMenard's venture works out. I hope that he will keep us posted.

As to the other comment, I only wish that I could tell all of you everything that I have learned / observed about police officer's behaviour in the course of my job. Unfortunately, much of my knowledge is privileged or is otherwise not able to be released due to ongoing matters.

I can enlighten you about one particular story where my 19 year old client, born in Afghanistan, lived here since infancy, no criminal record, found himself in the middle of a road-rage induced brawl. He was charged with a multitude of very serious indictable offences including assault causing bodily harm for using his car to run down one of the white combatants.

There was no evidence of these crimes mind you, other than the fact that my client's car was indeed at the scene. In fact, eyewitnesses described a completely different set of facts from what the complainants had told the police...but the poor kid was charged anyway.

The Crown would later stay the charges after I implored him to actually listen to the audiotape of the interrogation that my client was subjected to. Among other things, the officers screamed at my client that they had a flight waiting to take f--king terrorists back to Guantanamo and that he was going to be on it if he didn't confess to what he had done. They told him that because of him his mom and dad and grandmother (all Canadian citizens) were going to be deported back to Afghanistan, and that they had already spoken to immigration officials in this regard (complete lie). And on it went. Thankfully, my guy managed to maintain his composure and not make a confession.

Oh, and plus, the complainants later recanted their bullshit stories and fled the jurisdiction...so actually, my guy was innocent.

I also know of a case that the police fabricated a 911 call in order to gain entry to a home that they suspected of being a drug house. It was a drug house, I'll be fair about that, but one officer actually took the lie so far as to describe on the witness stand, under oath how he passed EMS staff leaving as they walked up to the front door.

The problem...EMS has some pretty damn good records of where their people are and what they are doing at all times. You can make up a 911 call, but you can't make paramedics who clearly were never there appear out of thin air.

Crown stayed these charges literally immediately before the lying officer was going to be forced to explain why there were no EMS personnel ever dispatched to that location, and why he placed his service revolver to the head of the accused's dog and threatened to kill it if he didn't admit that the drugs in the house were his.

I've posted on other threads that I will still call the police if I need help, and I accept that most officers are honest and just trying their best to do a very difficult and thankless job. That being said, the number of situations like the above that I keep seeing are on the rise, and it causes me to get pretty critical about police threat / intimidation tactics.

That's a small sample of what was behind my comment.

FTA

[FreemanMenard]

So this is what I am doing.

I found an investor for my concept which I am calling Shepherd's Haven. I will be opening a little cafe and therein I will sell beer, wine and pot to those who have secured Freeman status.

Call it what you want. To make a long story short: you will refuse to pay taxes.

Now, do not get me wrong. Trust me, I believe you are in the right and I will not fault you for refusing to pay taxes.

However, your "business plan" is unoriginal. I am sure there are many people who do the same. My suspicion is that their success is a function of how private their highly original plans are kept.

I have one question for you: Why the fanfare?

While I am at it. This:

See, if I didn't know better ('cause I already wathced your video) I'd think you were a police officer the way you are ranting and attempting to intimidate me.

is a peculiar statement.

Do you know something about how police officers operate that we do not know?

I certainly am interested to see how FreemanMenard's venture works out. I hope that he will keep us posted.

As to the other comment, I only wish that I could tell all of you everything that I have learned / observed about police officer's behaviour in the course of my job. Unfortunately, much of my knowledge is privileged or is otherwise not able to be released due to ongoing matters.

I can enlighten you about one particular story where my 19 year old client, born in Afghanistan, lived here since infancy, no criminal record, found himself in the middle of a road-rage induced brawl. He was charged with a multitude of very serious indictable offences including assault causing bodily harm for using his car to run down one of the white combatants.

There was no evidence of these crimes mind you, other than the fact that my client's car was indeed at the scene. In fact, eyewitnesses described a completely different set of facts from what the complainants had told the police...but the poor kid was charged anyway.

The Crown would later stay the charges after I implored him to actually listen to the audiotape of the interrogation that my client was subjected to. Among other things, the officers screamed at my client that they had a flight waiting to take f--king terrorists back to Guantanamo and that he was going to be on it if he didn't confess to what he had done. They told him that because of him his mom and dad and grandmother (all Canadian citizens) were going to be deported back to Afghanistan, and that they had already spoken to immigration officials in this regard (complete lie). And on it went. Thankfully, my guy managed to maintain his composure and not make a confession.

Oh, and plus, the complainants later recanted their bullshit stories and fled the jurisdiction...so actually, my guy was innocent.

I also know of a case that the police fabricated a 911 call in order to gain entry to a home that they suspected of being a drug house. It was a drug house, I'll be fair about that, but one officer actually took the lie so far as to describe on the witness stand, under oath how he passed EMS staff leaving as they walked up to the front door.

The problem...EMS has some pretty damn good records of where their people are and what they are doing at all times. You can make up a 911 call, but you can't make paramedics who clearly were never there appear out of thin air.

Crown stayed these charges literally immediately before the lying officer was going to be forced to explain why there were no EMS personnel ever dispatched to that location, and why he placed his service revolver to the head of the accused's dog and threatened to kill it if he didn't admit that the drugs in the house were his.

I've posted on other threads that I will still call the police if I need help, and I accept that most officers are honest and just trying their best to do a very difficult and thankless job. That being said, the number of situations like the above that I keep seeing are on the rise, and it causes me to get pretty critical about police threat / intimidation tactics.

That's a small sample of what was behind my comment.

FTA

Wow that's horrible! Especially the first story. My sister the lawyer (who now works for Immigration Canada) would freak if she heard about it. Recently I have had two cases come my way concerning the same type thing.

Doing what I do I knew that I would be facing armed men wishing to impose their masters will. I gave it much thought and finally realized that the situation was made threatening and dangerous not only by their actions but by my inaction. What could I do to remove from them their belief that they had either the right or need to initiate violence when making an arrest?

I decided to create and serve a Notarized Promise of Peace and Goodwill. It is attached to a Fee Schedule. If facing arrest I don't resist and accept their orders under protest and duress and upon that fee schedule. This POP was served upon the SG and Chief of Police. It is my belief that it does in fact remove from them the color of right to use violence when arresting me. Whether this happens as a function of law or merely human nature I don't know, but I found an immediate difference in the way they would act when dealing with me.

The next time I faced arrest (On a BS un-endorsed warrant. They kept trying to intimidate me and I kept refusing to let them. This was about four years ago when I first started on this path. Now they don't) they officer merely touched me gently and told me I was under arrest. I said under protest and duress and on my fee schedule I peacefully accept. He said 'Noted' and did so in his little book, showing me his notation. We then waited very civilly drinking coffee until the paddy wagon showed up and then he placed the cuffs on me as lightly as possible.

Since then we have spoken numerous times and we act with respect towards each other. I consider peace officers who are capable of and willing to distinguish between statutes and law, persons and people, legal and lawful to be my best friends. When they can see that the right to use violence in the fulfillment of their mandate does not necessarily generate the need to do so, there may be hope. I have seen a nice change in the VPD and although it may be only me who sees it, maybe everyone would if they too promised peace. Now I live in North Vancouver and the RCMP's here all seem cool and many are hotties. My buddy thinks it's because they mainly issue tickets and people are less likely to get aggressive with a woman who looks like a model.

Now whenever I have to deal with a peace officer I immediately offer them God's Peace. If they refuse that offer they will have some 'splainin' to do. It really seems to put them in check. They are so used to dealing with anger and rebelliousness that it is almost a slap in their face and they don't know how to take it. Plus no body seems to want me in court. It's weird.

The last encounter I had a West Vancouver Police Officer thought he had the right to enforce statutes against me. After he ran my name through his computer he told me "Mr.Menard the West Vancouver Police Department would deeply appreciate it if you would refrain from drinking alcohol in public. Thank you have a good night." Minutes previously he was talking about confiscating it and issuing a violation ticket.

Your second story I think highlights why so many people are growing so distrustful of the justice system. (Many refer to it disparagingly as the Just-Us System) Do you think the Crown knew the officer was lying and stayed only when he saw the jig was up? Or did he stay the charges as soon as he realized the officer was lying? And if so is the officer facing charges?

Assuming there is a growing trend to manufacture evidence and lie outright under oath, as you and many others say, how would you suggest we address it? History tells us that is the kind of thing that is far easier to nip in the bud.

As for my 'venture', I would likely call it more of an adventure as I am off to Calgary this weekend to meet potential investors and maybe put on a little seminar.

Peace, eh?

Rob

[Figleaf]

I certainly am interested to see how FreemanMenard's venture works out. I hope that he will keep us posted.

Gadzouks! don't encourage them. Let them promote their content-challenged manias and worthless $150 Fremen Kits somewhere else.

Crown stayed these charges literally immediately before the lying officer was going to be forced to explain why there were no EMS personnel ever dispatched to that location, and why he placed his service revolver to the head of the accused's dog and threatened to kill it if he didn't admit that the drugs in the house were his.

And I'll bet you the crown did nothing with the pile of evidence of wrongdoing s/he had against this officer, am I right?

That's a small sample of what was behind my comment.

Thanks for telling us about these matters. It's important that citizens maintain scrutiny over their governments and hearing this stuff reminds us of that.

[Shepherd]

Hi, I am new to this forum and this was a really long thread to cut my teeth on!

So, in case I missed it, was oath of FTALawyer ever posted? I am curious, I would like to see the oath also.

Les Active...what a can of worms!

[M.Dancer]

Hi, I am new to this forum and this was a really long thread to cut my teeth on!

So, in case I missed it, was oath of FTALawyer ever posted? I am curious, I would like to see the oath also.

Les Active...what a can of worms!

Well, cheers, you started on the stupidest thread here and you survived.

[Charles Anthony]

So, in case I missed it, was oath of FTALawyer ever posted?

Yes:

Lawyer's Oath (Alberta) -- Intended to provoke debate...not jokes...

[onesentient]

That is only YOUR point of view M.Dancer

[M.Dancer]

That is only YOUR point of view M.Dancer

True, but similar points of view are shared by the non-aluminium haberdashery members........

[geoffrey]

Let this thread die, please.

[M.Dancer]

DIE THREAD, DIE!!!

[LesActive]

DIE THREAD, DIE!!!

Ignoring the problem won't make it go away, besides, the longer this thread stays toward the top the more people may question what's going on and that at least IS a good thing. Enjoy the status quo while it lasts.

Go ahead, reply.............. GO THREAD, GO!!!

[M.Dancer]

DIE THREAD, DIE!!!

Ignoring the problem won't make it go away, besides, the longer this thread stays toward the top the more people may question what's going on and that at least IS a good thing. Enjoy the status quo while it lasts.

Go ahead, reply.............. GO THREAD, GO!!!

Stock Quote AL 91.700 -0.800 -0.86 1,857,433 T

[LesActive]

Stock Quote AL 91.700 -0.800 -0.86 1,857,433 T

If you would deign to demonstrate (on yourself, illustrations would suffice) how you would go about completely encompassing your head without cutting it off I would love to see it. Really weak M.

[geoffrey]

Stock Quote AL 91.700 -0.800 -0.86 1,857,433 T

That made this whole thread worth while.

[M.Dancer]

Stock Quote AL 91.700 -0.800 -0.86 1,857,433 T

That made this whole thread worth while.

My associate bought 400 of Alcan around 18 months ago. He sold last friday. He said he could have walked the razor, banking on everyones greed, but why bother when your equity has nearly doubled?

Cash out and relax......