big bunch of info strikes home

My video link is at the end and the last link amongst the dozens of others that will open your eyes! Private agreements are always best if you are the one with the facts. Blessings I am glad you saw the video! These links below may help you as well If one continues to surf the site where you find Canada as a trading Corporation listed with the US security; then you will also find "Ontario Province of": http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0000074615&owner=include&count=40 "Quebec Province of" http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0000722803&owner=include&count=40 "British Columbia Province of" http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=14306 You will see by the *short list* of documents, although voluminous, partially indicates the diligence that has been extended to bring as many private men and women into awareness of our faith as *possible to avert and abate assumption we are corporate entities subject to corporate law.* ** *I have dozens of other communications but suffice to say I think you can see a crime taking place and if not in the knowledge of one involved it absolves him from responsibility, take note that once in the awareness of the crime those participating must stop or misfeasance of public office malicious prosecution, bad faith and criminal intent is implied.* ** http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3993/is_200411/ai_n9467708 A TOPlC RARELY TALKED about in public procurement, or even within governments generally, is the possibility of a government official abusing the powers of their office for improper reasons. Given the currency of the topic, however, in this article we seek to shed some light on what could become tomorrow's headline, the tort of misfeasance in public office. In common law, persons who exercise the legal powers of the Crown (called public officers or public officials) are subject to a tort (civil wrong) action if they abuse their powers. Called in law misfeasance in a public office, this tort was first created in England in a case called Ashby v. White (1703) 92 E.R. 126, where a person, maliciously and fraudulently deprived of their right to vote by an election official, sued the election official for damages and won. The tort came to Canada in a case called Roncarelli v. Duplesis [1959] S.C.R. 121, where the Quebec premier improperly ordered the manager of the Quebec Liquor Commission to revoke Roncarelli's liquor license because Roncarelli had provided bail money to several Jehovah's Witnesses whom Duplessis had had arrested. The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) found the premier had no grounds for ordering this, did not even have the power to make such an order, and had done so only out of malice. That malice is being demonstrated by the private men and women acting as Judges Police and ministers in ignorance of the communications to them. They have all been served with the private knowledge and had a duty via 180 of the criminal code and as senior officials had a duty to inform others not to intimidate men and women of faith nor obstruct their ability to practice their faith as per 176 and 423 of the code that applies to them.. ** *Minister Donald Christopher Carter has already communicated to Mr. Lufty as of 2003* as you will see when open his document that was sent registered mail to over 70 officials in their private capacity. *It appears we have a deliberate conspiracy taking place*. *This email will be used as evidence of awareness on the part of senior staffers of this fraud and criminal activity that is transpiring on the part of revenue justice and Federal Court judges and clerks alike or anyone who comes into awareness of a crime and ignores their duty to act.* ** I am including a set of links and a Video of myself at the end explaining the situation and educating about God's law his people and what he decreed happen to those who stiff necked refused to follow his law. An Archist is one who follows mans laws. A deist is one who follows God's laws. A or An as a prefix to a word such a moral means the opposite or in the case of Archist an Anarchist ,which means in English opposed to mans laws, like Yahushua, the hebrew name for Christ, was.. Since you spoke of fictions I will refer you to Deuteronomy the great book of law in chapter 1 verse 17 and chapter 10 verse 17 then I will guide you to Acts 10:34 and Romans 2:11 then finally and definitively to James 2:9. *I or our faiths members can not show respect to or be persons!* I know the meaning of the word persona is with sound. I also know it meant and was used to refer to a mask worn by a player in a stage...a fiction. I am a man not an individual as both person and individual, as written in corporate law , refer to corporate members as in a parternership or a business like commercial relationship. Matthew 6:24 says to not partake of mammon which is commerce which is the corporate dead. We are not to have communion with the dead flesh or formed dead thing . God forbids it!. God makes this clear in the action of Saul in bringing up the dead spirit of Samuel. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=9&chapter=28&version=31 Please take your time read all of this below to grasp how powerful it is and why Canadian treasury was briefed about this by Cameron McEwan senior analyst for Treasury who still works there albeit in a reduced capacity.. They agreed with all of the facts as being irrefutable as of the Queen's letter to them saying she was in receipt of the petition. This is powerful history and some of you may have prejudices that may wish to reject this but the facts got treasury to say uncle!! I in quest of truth have been following the freedom movement since 1999 and have seen some amazing things take place in the battle for supremacy. Of all the most influential was the fact that the Queen, head of all the justice systems with the Governor General as head under her, is sworn to be defending the laws of God. That along with the facts I show you that the laws of the government of Canada or the commonweath do not apply to you are quite startling I hope you will not be blinded by these shockers.. They prove you do not have to go to defacto courts to have problems solved You can only come out of Babylon if you are aware. Now once aware of the following irrefutable facts and you still wish to submit to impostors you may wish to question your logic. Blessings. From Minister Belanger Slavery , and how to stop Codex Alimentarius and removal of Farmers seed by Minister of Christ Edward-Jay-Robin: Belanger Monday June 28, 2004 at 06:58 AM owlmonone@yahoo.ca or owlmon@gmail.com What is Slavery??? What is forced taxation??? How can parlimentarians sworn allegiant to a Christian Monarch, who is defender of the Christian faith and Biblical law, support gay marriage? How about taking away God's herbs?....... How about making you bow to false law or god????? Is this with God's scriptural approval? Will they proceed to force you to bow to a false god in court if they know of your faith beforehand??> Will the Queen be amused??? Did she as a Christain Monarch take an oath to defend the laws of God of the King James Bible? http://www.oremus.org/liturgy/coronation/cor1953b.html Was it based upon the words of the 1689 version? Or was it minutely altered with no legal method to do so? http://www.worldfreeinternet .net/parliament/oath.htm< http://www.worldfreeinternet.net/parliament/oath.htm > http://www.jacobite.ca/documents/16890409.htm Is their a law regarding that faith and the defense thereof by those who took an oath to the King's and Queens? http://www.reformed.org/documents/index.html?mainframe=westminster_conf_of_faith.html see section 22 This story is proof positive of what i am saying will take place if you stand in your faith if assaulted by unlawful forces!!! http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/1948.html This actually happened as I am first hand witness to the events. The prosecutor backed down immediately!!!! Do not be prejudiced as of God's gift lest you blaspheme his creation Can they our so called sworn allegiant's to the defender of the faith really ban the ability to store seed? Our farmers own seed? The simple answer is yes if we allow it! We allow it by not claiming it as God's gift! All herbs bearing seed are a gift of God with no repentance required. Romans 11:29. How can God's gift to man and woman be outlawed or removed from your ability to possess it in those countries that have Bibles in their courts? Do we get say about this? From whence do they get their authority in those countries that recognise God as Supreme? From the Bible if they are dejure. From thin air if they are de facto! Who will stand for their faith the way Christ himself showed us? I will show you how with registered mail to private men and women as per Matthew 18:15-20 that everything can change in a short time. Class actions against private men and women in charge of bringing in Codex will wake them up as to their inability to get corporate defense. They will also be suffering from an inability to get competent(R. v Mckibbon 1988 Ezekiel 33:6) private defense. Genesis 1:29 and Romans 11:29 ensures the rule of law is clear! The King James Bible has Standing in commonwealth courts! That means it cannot be argued with! That link will expose the underbelly of the beast that drives Codex! Who is responsible for the charging of interest or what God refers to as usury?? Are we compelled to violate God's command and pay interest?? http://www.tentmaker.org/lists/UsuryScriptureList.html http://www.iahushua.com/WOI/conman2.html Is the world bank owned by ethnic affiliation??? http://www.wealth4freedom.com/Rothschild.html http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-20/SOR-84-431/71221.html#rid-71224 Is the Talmud ruling the world and law? http://www.come-and-hear.com/editor/index.html I strongly encourage you to read as much as you can on this site as it will show you how powerful Talmud is and how to circumvent it's power over you.It already has invoked taxes upon you and now is pushing for the Medpharm control of it all with Codex. Yes Talmud was responsible for all that. Are you supposed to bow to false authority??? Exodus 20:3-5 God's word is final . Deuteronomy 4:15-19; 5:7-10; 12:2-3 Are you a child of Israel or a slave?? http://mindprod.com/kjv/Leviticus/25.html25:44 Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. 25:45 Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. 25:46 And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour. God is telling us if we are strangers to his law and do not follow after his law as if we fail to follow we will be enslaved. Have you been bought and sold as a* person*? This below is touted as a Canadian petroleum and gas producers act. Your body produces oil and gas. Why is their a listed value to your life listed there if it is about petroleum ? Please keep in mind the Canadian treasury Board was briefed on this and said I was correct. Notice the buying a selling of persons and the definitions http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-20/32270.html control status" means, with respect to a person, whether or not the person is Canadian controlled as determined under this Act and the regulations; "direct equity percentage" �pourcentage de participation directe� "direct equity percentage" means, with respect to formal equity owned by a person in any particular person, (a) where the particular person does not have more than one class of formal equity within the meaning of the regulations, the percentage of the formal equity of the particular person that is owned by the person , and "owned" �poss�der� "owned" means, subject to the regulations, beneficially owned, and the words "owner" and "ownership" have corresponding meanings; "person" �personne� *"person" means an individual, a corporation, a partnership, a trust, a government, an agency of government, a segregated fund within the meaning of the regulations and an organization that is prescribed as being a person or that falls into a class of organizations prescribed as being persons;* *Individual what? Individual fictions?* *Did you read the word "man" in there? *** Is their a value to your life? http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-20/SOR-84-431/71221.html#rid -71224 < http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-20/SOR-84-431/71221.html#rid-71224 > Remember 12.7% a year is what is collected on the annuity of your bond. *That bond is what gives value to the currency in circulation as you in a bonded form are used* a*s surety for the* *negotiable instrument of value* internationally. Who or what is a false God ? Exodus 20:3-5 One who writes law in excess of or in derogation to God or acts like a God overwriting YeHoVaH's law, is a false god. Acts 12:21-23 Deuteronomy 4:2 the eleventh commandment and 12:32 chiming in commands what to not do with his law. Does the government of Canada have a legitimate Governor General or an imposter* that has usuped the power*???? Lets examine that. http://www.gg.ca/governor_*general*/role_e.asp < http://www.gg.ca/governor_general/role_e.asp> look for defacto What does de facto mean??? Why must we know? Ignorance is no excuse Hosea 4:6 section 19 of mans criminal code! http://www.canlii.org/ca/sta/c-46/sec19.html http://www.lawinfo.com/lawdictionary/dict-d.htm http://www.pixi.com/~kingdom/defacto.html The creditor for Canada defines defacto http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/Institutional/Manuals/OpManual.nsf/0/5CE3BA026987F1C78525672C007D07E0?OpenDocument http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/Institutional/Manuals/OpManual.nsf/0/4b8a4e22c6560e808525672c007d07ce?OpenDocument Can one word like defacto, mean we are under the power of an illegitimate false god usurped government?? Are we supposed to bow to their godless commands? What did Shadrack Meshak and Abednigo do in Daniel Chapter 3? they refused to bow! Did Daniel eat the Kings food? He refused as of God's food ordinance! Daniel Chapter 1 Why does *Michaelle Jean* say she is de facto??? Is she being Honest and truthful? Why does the world bank say de facto means usurped authority and an abrogated constitution ? http://wbln0018.worldbank.org /Institutional/Manuals/OpManual.nsf/%200/5CE3BA026987F1C78525672C007D07E0?OpenDocument Will you bow to a false god regime???? Will you violate God's first command? Exodus 20:3-5. Have you been royally conned just like millions before you? 2Peter 2:3 Do the provinces tell Church's if they register they have to give up God's law? Yes they do!! This is hard to believe but is true http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/family/pgt/nfpinc/charities.asp#special_religious < http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/family/pgt/nfpinc/charities.asp#special_religious > See section 6.5 Did you know the word constitutor defined in Blacks law dictionary, and others as well, means *one who by simple agreement becomes responsible for anothers debt*? Did you agree to pay anothers debt? When? How? Whose debt was it? Was it lawfully obtained? http://usa-the-republic.com/revenue/Britian-Pontiff.html Does Canada's parliament makes laws in excess of God's law? Deuteronomy 4:2;12:32 says no! They do it Every day they sit! I still cannot find the Income tax act in the Bible. * Can't find it in the parliamentary Clerks office nor the Clerk of the Senates Office. Still looking. no original posting in the Canada Gazette either!!!* Ezra 7:23-26 and Numbers 15:15 may help with whose law applies while were looking! Do they as lawmakers also make laws that take away from God's law? Big Drug Case removed the Lord's Day Act http://www.chrc-ccdp.ca/en/timePortals/milestones/116mile.asp Then their is abortion..... Are taxes via usury *and *fraud lawful? What does God say? http://www.reformation.org/moneychangers.html What did Jesus really mean when he said "render unto Caesar" http://sw.jeffotto.com/render.htm Did you know that section 32 of the Canadian supreme law the charter of rights and freedoms says it only applies to the government and that it does not apply to private individuals? ?? Mans law does not apply unless you are government!! http://www.pch.gc.ca/progs/pdp -hrp/canada/guide/application _e.cfm < http://www.pch.gc.ca/progs/pdp-hrp/canada/guide/application_e.cfm > Are you defacto government?? Are you an individual? Are you a Person , *or God's creation of a man or woman . Choose one*. From the federal court act" person" ? personne ? "person" includes ( means *only what is shown*)a tribunal, an unincorporated association and a partnership. (personne) "plaintiff" ? demandeur ? "plaintiff" includes a person on whose behalf an action is commenced. (demandeur) Do you know where the origin of the word person comes from? Latin. Persona : from greek per=with, sona=sound. A hollow mask worn by a player on a stage used to reverberate and throw the sound of an actors voice to the distant audience; a fiction. Are you a mask? Are you a fiction? Did God create you as man? What does God have to say about persons? Deuteronomy 1:17; 10:17;Acts 10:34; Romans 2:11; James 2:9 tells us God has no respect for persons and if we should show respect to persons we commit sin!! What law applies to those who are not deemed government?? Are you government? Do you fit this definition? http://canada.justice.gc.ca/en/ps/yj/repository/6legisln /02cc/60211800.html< http://canada.justice.gc.ca/en/ps/yj/repository/6legisln/02cc/60211800.html> Numbers 15:15 is the law that applies Re read the preamble at the beginning of Canada's supreme law ,the Canadian Constitution, as you are made an offer there. God's rule of law as supreme!! http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/index.html#charte CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS "Whereas Canada is founded upon the principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law:" Will you accept the offerOr the other offer of mans law below it......You know sections 1-52 This next, is Canada's master enactment for commerce. The Canadian BIll of Exchange act, mans law ,only applys to government and says in section 55 that if you were under intimidation as in threat and duress Holder in Due Course Holder in due course 55. (1) A holder in due course is a holder who has taken a bill, complete and regular on the face of it, under the following conditions, namely, (a) that he became the holder of it before it was overdue and without notice that it had been previously dishonoured, if such was the fact; and (b) that he took the bill in good faith and for value, and that at the time the bill was negotiated to him he had no notice of any defect in the title of the person who negotiated it. Title defective (2) In particular, the title of a person who negotiates a bill is defective within the meaning of this Act when he obtained the bill, or the acceptance thereof, by fraud, duress or force and fear, or other unlawful means, or for an illegal consideration, or when he negotiates it in breach of faith, or under such circumstances as amount to a fraud. ( altering your name on any bill without your permission for a financial purpose is fraud. You simply were never taught to caplitalize your name nor reverse it and no law of grammer or man allows it! They cannot proceed against God's creation as of their oath to the Queen so they proceed against a fiction hoping you will volunteer yourself by accepting the name change without a quibble.) Tacit consent is nihil dicit he says nothing and is consenting. Look at your drivers license! Everything the government sends is a bill of exchange! R.S., c. B-5, s. 56. Right of subsequent holder 56. A holder, whether for value or not, who derives his title to a bill through a holder in due course, and who is not himself a party to any fraud or illegality affecting it , has all the rights of that holder in due course as regards the acceptor and all parties to the bill prior to that holder. R.S., c. B-5, s. 57. Presumption of value 57. (1) Every party whose signature appears on a bill is, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, deemed to have become a party thereto for value. Presumed holder in due course (2) Every holder of a bill is, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, deemed to be a holder in due course, but if, in an action on a bill, it is admitted or proved that the acceptance, issue or subsequent negotiation of the bill is affected with fraud, duress or force and fear, or illegality, the burden of proof that he is the holder in due course is on him, unless and until he proves that, subsequent to the alleged fraud or illegality, value has in good faith been given for the bill by some other holder in due course . R.S., c. B-5, s. 58. 152. (1) Where a bill has been protested for non-payment, any person may intervene and pay it under protest for the honour of any party liable thereon or for the honour of the person for whose account the bill is drawn. If more than one offer (2) Where two or more persons offer to pay a bill for the honour of different parties, the person whose payment will discharge most parties to the bill has the preference. Refusal to receive payment (3) Where the holder of a bill refuses to receive payment under protest, he loses his right of recourse against any party who would have been discharged by that payment . ( you read it here first, Wow Eh?) Entitled to bill (4) The payer for honour, on paying to the holder the amount of the bill and the notarial expenses incidental to its dishonour, is entitled to receive both the bill itself and the protest. Liability for refusing (5) Where the holder does not on demand in a case described in subsection (4) deliver up the bill and protest, he is liable to the payer for honour in damages. Can you intimidate or obstruct a man or woman with civil law from doing God's business according to mans law the criminal code? Lets see! Obstructing or violence to or arrest of officiating clergyman 176. (1) Every one who (a) by threats or force, unlawfully obstructs or prevents or endeavours to obstruct or prevent a clergyman or minister from celebrating divine service or performing any other function in connection with his calling , or(RonCarelli Vs Duplessis 1959) SupremeCourtCanada http://www.summitconnects.com/Articles_Columns/PDF_Documents/200412_12.pdf ) (b) knowing that a clergyman or minister is about to perform, is on his way to perform or is returning from the performance of any of the duties or functions mentioned in paragraph (a) (i) assaults or offers any violence to him, or (ii) arrests him on a civil process, or under the pretence of executing a civil process , is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years. Disturbing religious worship or certain meetings (2) Every one who wilfully disturbs or interrupts an assemblage of persons met for religious worship or for a moral, social or benevolent purpose is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction. (3) Every one who, at or near a meeting referred to in subsection (2), wilfully does anything that disturbs the order or solemnity of the meeting is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction. R.S., c. C-34, s. 172. Idem Intimidation Common nuisance Definition 423. (1) Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than five years or is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction who, wrongfully and without lawful authority, for the purpose of compelling another person to abstain from doing anything that he or she has a lawful right to do, or to do anything that he or she has a lawful right to abstain from doing, (a) uses violence or threats of violence to that person or his or her spouse or common-law partner or children, or injures his or her property ; (b) intimidates or attempts to intimidate that person or a relative of that person by threats that, in Canada or elsewhere, violence or other injury will be done to or punishment inflicted on him or her or a relative of his or hers, or that the property of any of them will be damaged; Common nuisance 180. (1) Every one who commits a common nuisance and thereby (a) endangers the lives, safety or health of the public, or (b) causes physical injury to any person, is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years. Definition (2) For the purposes of this section, every one commits a common nuisance who does an unlawful act or fails to discharge a legal duty and thereby (a) endangers the lives, safety, health, property or comfort of the public; or (b) obstructs the public in the exercise or enjoyment of any right that is common to all the subjects of Her Majesty in Canada. R.S., c. C-34, s. 176. http://www.reformed.org/documents/westminster_conf_of_faith.html#chap22 The law regarding lawful oaths that is still in force but not being enforced,,,why??? CHAPTER XXII. Of Lawful Oaths and Vows. I. A lawful oath is a part of religious wors hip, wherein upon just occasion, the person swearing solemnly calleth God to witness what he asserteth or promiseth; and to judge him according to the truth or falsehood of what he sweareth. II. The name of God only is that by which men ought to swear, and therein it is to be used with all holy fear and reverence; therefore to swear vainly or rashly by that glorious and dreadful name, or to swear at all by any other thing, is sinful, and to be abhorred. Yet, as, in matters of weight and moment, an oath is warranted by the Word of God, under the New Testament, as well as under the Old, so a lawful oath, being imposed by lawful authority, in such matters ought to be taken. III. Whosoever taketh an oath ought duly to consider the weightiness of so solemn an act, and therein to avouch nothing but what he is fully persuaded is the truth. Neither may any man bind himself by oath to any thing but what is good and just, and what he believeth so to be, and what he is able and resolved to perform. Yet it is a sin to refuse an oath touching any thing that is good and just, being imposed by lawful authority. IV. An oath is to be taken in the plain and common sense of the words, without equivocation or mental reservation. It can not oblige to sin; but in any thing not sinful, being taken, it binds to performance, although to a man's own hurt: nor is it to be violated, although made to heretics or infidels. V. A vow is of the like nature with a promissory oath, and ought to be made with the like religious care , and to be performed with the like faithfulness. VI. It is not to be made to any creature, but to God alone: and that it may be accepted, it is to be made voluntarily, out of faith and conscience of duty, in way of thankfulness for mercy received, or for obtaining of what we want; whereby we more strictly bind ourselves to necessary duties, or to other things, so far and so long as they may fitly conduce thereunto. VII. No man may vow to do any thing forbidden in the Word of God, or what would hinder any duty therein commanded, or which is not in his own power, and for the performance of which he hath no promise or ability from God. In which respects, monastical vows of perpetual single life, professed poverty, and regular obedience, are so far from being degrees of higher perfection, that they are superstitious and sinful snares, in which no Christian may entangle himself. So you can follow the Advise of Ephesians 6:10-20 and Jesus at Matthew 18:15-20 and you will be almost there. Blessings So who has used this defense? I have. here a few letters from others. http://melbimc.nomasters.org/news/2003/10/55720.php http://vancouver.indymedia.org /news/?comments=yes&medium=text&keyword=Radau http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache:DPMK0yaFZD0J:www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2002/12 /49131.html+Golden+Jubilee+Petition+Edward-Jay-Robin:+Belanger&hl=en John 5:39, 46-47. Search the scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. ... For had ye believed Moses, you would have believed me: for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words? God is telling us if we are strangers to his law and do not follow after his law we will be enslaved. Have you been bought and sold as a person? This below is touted as a Canadian petroleum and gas producers act. Your body produces oil and gas. Why is their a listed value to your life listed there if it is about petroleum ? Please keep in mind the Canadian treasury Board was briefed on this and said I was correct. Notice the buying a selling of persons and the definitions http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-20/32270.html control status" means, with respect to a person, whether or not the person is Canadian controlled as determined under this Act and the regulations; "direct equity percentage" �pourcentage de participation directe� "direct equity percentage" means, with respect to formal equity owned by a person in any particular person, (a) where the particular person does not have more than one class of formal equity within the meaning of the regulations, the percentage of the formal equity of the particular person that is owned by the person , and "owned" �poss�der� "owned" means, subject to the regulations, beneficially owned, and the words "owner" and "ownership" have corresponding meanings; "person" �personne� "person" means an individual, a corporation, a partnership, a trust, a government, an agency of government, a segregated fund within the meaning of the regulations and an organization that is prescribed as being a person or that falls into a class of organizations prescribed as being persons; Is their a value to your life? http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-20/SOR-84-431/71221.html#rid-71224 Remember 12.7% a year is what is collected on the annuity of your bond. That bond is what gives value to the currency in circulation as you in a bonded form are used a negotiable instrument of value internationally. Who or what is a false God ? Exodus 20:3-5 One who writes law in excess of or in derogation to God or acts like a God overwriting YeHoVaH's law, is a false god. Acts 12:21-23 Deuteronomy 4:2 the eleventh commandment and 12:32 chiming in commands what to not do with his law. Does the government of Canada have a legitimate Governor General or an imposter???? Lets examine that. http://www.gg.ca/governor_general/role_e.asp look for defacto What does de facto mean??? Why must we know? Ignorance is no excuse Hosea 4:6 section 19 of mans criminal code! http://www.canlii.org/ca/sta/c-46/sec19.html http://www.lawinfo.com/lawdictionary/dict-d.htm http://www.pixi.com/~kingdom /defacto.html The creditor for Canada defines defacto http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/Institutional/Manuals/OpManual.nsf/0/5CE3BA026987F1C78525672C007D07E0?OpenDocument http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/Institutional/Manuals/OpManual.nsf/0/4b8a4e22c6560e808525672c007d07ce?OpenDocument Can one word like defacto, mean we are under the power of an illegitimate false god usurped government?? Are we supposed to bow to their godless commands? What did Shadrack Meshak and Abednigo do in Daniel Chapter 3? they refused to bow! Did Daniel eat the Kings food? He refused as of God's food ordinance! Daniel Chapter 1 Why does Adrienne Clarkson say she is de facto??? Is she being Honest and truthful? Why does the world bank say de facto means usurped authority and an abrogated constitution ? http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/Institutional/Manuals/OpManual.nsf/%200/5CE3BA026987F1C78525672C007D07E0?OpenDocument Will you bow to a false god regime???? Will you violate God's first command? Exodus 20:3-5. Have you been royally conned just like millions before you? 2Peter 2:3 Do the provinces tell Church's if they register they have to give up God's law? Yes they do!! This is hard to believe but is true http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/family/pgt/nfpinc/charities.asp#special_religious See section 6.5 Did you know the word constitutor defined in Blacks law dictionary, and others as well, means one who by simple agreement becomes responsible for anothers debt? Did you agree to pay anothers debt? When? How? Whose debt was it? Was it lawfully obtained? http://usa-the-republic.com/revenue/Britian-Pontiff.html Does Canada's parliament makes laws in excess of God's law? Deuteronomy 4:2;12:32 says no! They do it Every day they sit! I still cannot find the Income tax act in the Bible. Can't find it in the parliamentary Clerks office nor the Clerk of the Senates Office. Still looking. God condemns homosexuality! http://www.myfortress.org/Sodomite.html Ezra 7:23-26 and Numbers 15:15 may help with whose law applies while were looking! Do they as lawmakers also make laws that take away from God's law? Big Drug Case removed the Lord's Day Act http://www.chrc-ccdp.ca/en/timePortals/milestones/116mile.asp Then their is abortion..... Are taxes via usury fraud and lawful? What does God say? http://www.reformation.org/moneychangers.html What did Jesus really mean when he said "render unto Caesar" http://sw.jeffotto.com/render .htm Did you know that section 32 of the Canadian supreme law the charter of rights and freedoms says it only applies to the government and that it does not apply to private individuals? ?? Mans law does not apply unless you are government!! http://www.pch.gc.ca/progs/pdp-hrp/canada/guide/application_e.cfm Are you defacto government?? Are you an individual? Are you a Person , or God's creation of a man or woman . Choose one. From the federal court act" person" ? personne ? "person" includes ( means only as show)a tribunal, an unincorporated association and a partnership. (personne) "plaintiff" ? demandeur ? "plaintiff" includes a person on whose behalf an action is commenced. (demandeur) Do you know where the origin of the word person comes from? Latin. Persona : from greek per=with, sona=sound. A hollow mask worn by a player on a stage used to reverberate and throw the sound of an actors voice to the distant audience; a fiction. Are you a mask? Are you a fiction? Did God create you as man? What does God have to say about persons? Deuteronomy 1:17; 10:17;Acts 10:34; Romans 2:11; James 2:9 tells us God has no respect for persons and if we should show respect to persons we commit sin!! What law applies to those who are not deemed government?? Are you government? Do you fit this definition? http://canada.justice.gc.ca/en/ps/yj/repository/6legisln/02cc/60211800.html Numbers 15:15 is the law that applies Re read the preamble at the beginning of Canada's supreme law ,the Canadian Constitution, as you are made an offer there. God's rule of law as supreme!! http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/index.html#charte CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS "Whereas Canada is founded upon the principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law:" Will you accept the offerOr the other offer of mans law below it......You know sections 1-52 This next, is Canada's master enactment for commerce. The Canadian BIll of Exchange act, mans law ,only applys to government and says in section 55 that if you were under intimidation as in threat and duress Holder in Due Course Holder in due course 55. (1) A holder in due course is a holder who has taken a bill, complete and regular on the face of it, under the following conditions, namely, (a) that he became the holder of it before it was overdue and without notice that it had been previously dishonoured, if such was the fact; and (b) that he took the bill in good faith and for value, and that at the time the bill was negotiated to him he had no notice of any defect in the title of the person who negotiated it. Title defective (2) In particular, the title of a person who negotiates a bill is defective within the meaning of this Act when he obtained the bill, or the acceptance thereof, by fraud, duress or force and fear, or other unlawful means, or for an illegal consideration, or when he negotiates it in breach of faith, or under such circumstances as amount to a fraud. ( altering your name on any bill without your permission for a financial purpose is fraud. You simply were never taught to caplitalize your name nor reverse it and no law of grammer or man allows it! They cannot proceed against God's creation as of their oath to the Queen so they proceed against a fiction hoping you will volunteer yourself by accepting the name change without a quibble.) Tacit consent is nihil dicit he says nothing and is consenting. Look at your drivers license! Everything the government sends is a bill of exchange! R.S., c. B-5, s. 56. Right of subsequent holder 56. A holder, whether for value or not, who derives his title to a bill through a holder in due course, and who is not himself a party to any fraud or illegality affecting it , has all the rights of that holder in due course as regards the acceptor and all parties to the bill prior to that holder. R.S., c. B-5, s. 57. Presumption of value 57. (1) Every party whose signature appears on a bill is, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, deemed to have become a party thereto for value. Presumed holder in due course (2) Every holder of a bill is, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, deemed to be a holder in due course, but if, in an action on a bill, it is admitted or proved that the acceptance, issue or subsequent negotiation of the bill is affected with fraud, duress or force and fear, or illegality, the burden of proof that he is the holder in due course is on him, unless and until he proves that, subsequent to the alleged fraud or illegality, value has in good faith been given for the bill by some other holder in due course . R.S., c. B-5, s. 58. 152. (1) Where a bill has been protested for non-payment, any person may intervene and pay it under protest for the honour of any party liable thereon or for the honour of the person for whose account the bill is drawn. If more than one offer (2) Where two or more persons offer to pay a bill for the honour of different parties, the person whose payment will discharge most parties to the bill has the preference. Refusal to receive payment (3) Where the holder of a bill refuses to receive payment under protest, he loses his right of recourse against any party who would have been discharged by that payment . ( you read it here first, Wow Eh?) Entitled to bill (4) The payer for honour, on paying to the holder the amount of the bill and the notarial expenses incidental to its dishonour, is entitled to receive both the bill itself and the protest. Liability for refusing (5) Where the holder does not on demand in a case described in subsection (4) deliver up the bill and protest, he is liable to the payer for honour in damages. Can you intimidate or obstruct a man or woman with civil law from doing God's business according to mans law the criminal code? Lets see! Obstructing or violence to or arrest of officiating clergyman 176. (1) Every one who (a) by threats or force, unlawfully obstructs or prevents or endeavours to obstruct or prevent a clergyman or minister from celebrating divine service or performing any other function in connection with his calling , or(RonCarelli Vs Duplessis 1959) SupremeCourtCanada http://www.summitconnects.com/Articles_Columns/PDF_Documents/200412_12.pdf ) (b) knowing that a clergyman or minister is about to perform, is on his way to perform or is returning from the performance of any of the duties or functions mentioned in paragraph (a) (i) assaults or offers any violence to him, or (ii) arrests him on a civil process, or under the pretence of executing a civil process , is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years. Disturbing religious worship or certain meetings (2) Every one who wilfully disturbs or interrupts an assemblage of persons met for religious worship or for a moral, social or benevolent purpose is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction. (3) Every one who, at or near a meeting referred to in subsection (2), wilfully does anything that disturbs the order or solemnity of the meeting is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction. R.S., c. C-34, s. 172. Idem Intimidation Common nuisance Definition 423. (1) Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than five years or is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction who, wrongfully and without lawful authority, for the purpose of compelling another person to abstain from doing anything that he or she has a lawful right to do, or to do anything that he or she has a lawful right to abstain from doing, (a) uses violence or threats of violence to that person or his or her spouse or common-law partner or children, or injures his or her property ; (b) intimidates or attempts to intimidate that person or a relative of that person by threats that, in Canada or elsewhere, violence or other injury will be done to or punishment inflicted on him or her or a relative of his or hers, or that the property of any of them will be damaged; Common nuisance 180. (1) Every one who commits a common nuisance and thereby (a) endangers the lives, safety or health of the public, or (b) causes physical injury to any person, is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years. Definition (2) For the purposes of this section, every one commits a common nuisance who does an unlawful act or fails to discharge a legal duty and thereby (a) endangers the lives, safety, health, property or comfort of the public; or (b) obstructs the public in the exercise or enjoyment of any right that is common to all the subjects of Her Majesty in Canada. R.S., c. C-34, s. 176. http://www.reformed.org/documents/westminster_conf_of _faith.html#chap22 The law regarding lawful oaths that is still in force but not being enforced,,,why??? CHAPTER XXII. Of Lawful Oaths and Vows. I. A lawful oath is a part of religious wors hip, wherein upon just occasion, the person swearing solemnly calleth God to witness what he asserteth or promiseth; and to judge him according to the truth or falsehood of what he sweareth. II. The name of God only is that by which men ought to swear, and therein it is to be used with all holy fear and reverence; therefore to swear vainly or rashly by that glorious and dreadful name, or to swear at all by any other thing, is sinful, and to be abhorred. Yet, as, in matters of weight and moment, an oath is warranted by the Word of God, under the New Testament, as well as under the Old, so a lawful oath, being imposed by lawful authority, in such matters ought to be taken. III. Whosoever taketh an oath ought duly to consider the weightiness of so solemn an act, and therein to avouch nothing but what he is fully persuaded is the truth. Neither may any man bind himself by oath to any thing but what is good and just, and what he believeth so to be, and what he is able and resolved to perform. Yet it is a sin to refuse an oath touching any thing that is good and just, being imposed by lawful authority. IV. An oath is to be taken in the plain and common sense of the words, without equivocation or mental reservation. It can not oblige to sin; but in any thing not sinful, being taken, it binds to performance, although to a man's own hurt: nor is it to be violated, although made to heretics or infidels. V. A vow is of the like nature with a promissory oath, and ought to be made with the like religious care , and to be performed with the like faithfulness. VI. It is not to be made to any creature, but to God alone: and that it may be accepted, it is to be made voluntarily, out of faith and conscience of duty, in way of thankfulness for mercy received, or for obtaining of what we want; whereby we more strictly bind ourselves to necessary duties, or to other things, so far and so long as they may fitly conduce thereunto. VII. No man may vow to do any thing forbidden in the Word of God, or what would hinder any duty therein commanded, or which is not in his own power, and for the performance of which he hath no promise or ability from God. In which respects, monastical vows of perpetual single life, professed poverty, and regular obedience, are so far from being degrees of higher perfection, that they are superstitious and sinful snares, in which no Christian may entangle himself. So you can follow the Advise of Ephesians 6:10-20 and Jesus at Matthew 18:15-20 and you will be almost there. Blessings uppn watching my video...! http://video.google.ca/videosearch?q=%22Truth+by+Deception%22