The Tender For Law

English Only

ENGLISH is the international language of law and commerce. Knowing FRENCH is useful for understanding LEGAL ENGLISH, but FRENCH is not the international language of law and commerce, so we will ignore French speakers who speak to us in the language of a conquered people.

Non.

I understand that you are a proud Québécois, but the people here have nothing but contempt for you because of decades of transfer payments and NONE OF YOU understanding what Quebec sovereignty means. None of you know who Russell Rogers Smith is, and you're too proud and arrogant to teach. Just go away and be Retardier somewhere else.

Volume 2

May 24, 2013 12:41 PM

Read Comments 163

James Allan

Is the state not a trustee of your human rights and fundamental freedoms? Does that not make you a beneficiary of said rights and freedoms? Did you not place your trust in your trustee, your trustee having far superior legal knowledge, not to take any action to induce you into any type of contract which would abrograte your human rights and freedoms absent your clearly knowingly and willingly agreeing to such abrogration? Could your conduct now of relying upon a provision of an Act (contract), which I suspect you never knowingly and willingly agreed to enter into at the expense of your human rights and freedoms, not imply that you willingly and knowingly agreed to be bound by that statute?

Shawn Folkes

Ls is the flag and the trillium really good things to have on this? I smell alot of problems from doing that. Why don't you use the Coca-Cola symbol? Or....ACME? Or the Queens? Or your own? I think Ill make one and have it aurhorized by The X-Men and the Justice League of America!

Dean Kory

"Laws are not "written" into existence. Rather, laws are discovered—in nature. To write them is only to acknowledge them.

Contrast this with legislation. Legislation CAN be written into existence. But legislation is not law. It is something different. Something lesser than law. Indeed, sometimes written legislation runs contrary to law. It is different in another way, too: in order for government-written legislation to be binding on an individual, the individual must consent to being governed. That consent must be voluntarily given. It cannot be coerced or forced or obtained fraudulently in any manner and still remain legitimate. If the individual does not consent, the legislation can have no binding effect on the individual.

The people need to realize that legislation is not law, and that the individual does not lose claim to the title of "lawful citizen" or "law-abiding citizen" if they choose to disregard legislation that they do not consent to.

For example: some people feel they must register their firearms if they want to be able to say with a straight face that they are a "law-abiding gun owner". But this is not true. They can ignore the patently unjust legislation, and still call themselves law-abiding citizens. It is only the criminally-corrupt government which will conflate law-breaking with legislation-breaking and try to label the gun owner a criminal."

- Christopher Sanborn

Shawn Folkes

"Presumptions"...can you give me a few key examples? And defining definitions is critical? What if they tell you that your ignorance of their definitions is not an excuse? Whose definitions matter? And...lose strength? (I asaume you're not saying that they possess wanton power? That the power of their definitions run unabated? Rrue, but ia THAT what youre saying? Loose/Lose...) Either it has atrength...ans validity, or it doesnt. Theres no varying degree! Its either valid or its not, it doeant decrease in validity or applicability....their preaumprions and definitions cant "kinda sorta" apply. They either do or don't.

I hope my advocacy with Saitin (metaphor for those ready to jump all stupid on my parables, analogies, and examples. Its not a literal comment, for those that love to get shit off track) proves constructive sparring. Train hard fight eaay right?

Dean Kory

Answer: In international law, the general principle is that the jurisdiction of an international tribunal in contentious matters is based on the consent of the parties to the dispute. Therefore, it is essential that they express their consent to the jurisdiction of the tribunal in order for it to be able to settle the difference that has arisen between them.

James Allan

Here are the facts. One, if you don't show up for court a warrant will be issued for your arrest will be issued. Two, if you do show up, and you know how to deny jurisdiction, they will likely proceed with scheduling a trail regardless. Three, the facts of the matter will largely determine their ability to properly gain jurisdiction regardless whether you subsequently deny it at court. Four, if you do not show for that trial they will proceed in your absence and a warrant may very well be issued for your arrest. So what do you do when the facts of the matter establish that your rights have been violated and they are proceeding against the person regardless?

Shawn Folkes

What about "indictable" convictions? Ia a Canasian court an "international tribunal"? And if so, how? And how can one party not consent to "contentious matter" if one is brought up? Is it..ah...a conflict of interest then if the court thats residing over mattee the one making the accusations. Like id I said hou kixked my cat rhen determine somehow rhat I have the power to determine hour guilt without a higher authority? That authority, according to you, is who? Certainly not the same party againat you? So who then...Admiralty court? But...who do they reside over....tribunal (judge/jury) Courts? And what legialatures or natural laws do THEY follow? Under what premises. And now you bring in this Admiralty law stuff...how does THAT aply to...ah....your kid and that I.d. above? ?

Dean Kory

All i know for sure is that everyone here has helped me exercize my mind and prepare me to go into the belly of the beast,we can play intellectual tug of war on here for days...on the day that counts i will be alone and thats what the court wants,no witnesses.we have to show the court that the public is loosing confidence in the administration of justice because of the corruption!

Sirwade Firsbey

The government (corp) Does this with our consent. Once I take away my consent they lose jurisdiction. They cant deal with the LAWFUL MAN because they no longer have a contract with the person. Statues or nothing more then company by-laws. if I am no longer a company employee I don't fall under them. When I quit a job at lets say McDonald's can McDonald's come after me for going to work for burger king? No this is foolish and they would look foolish filling claim. Only by fear do they keep us thinking we have to stay on board, if we don't we will get into a lot of trouble. This is what the notice of mistake does it removes this presumption that we still work for them it end's the contract we was tricked into.

James Allan

John, the notice of mistake helps to establish facts of the matter and rebut certain presumptions. However, and also depending upon other facts of the matter, that doesn't mean that they will withdraw the charges notwithstanding your subsquently expressed "non-consent".

James Allan

Dean, if you want to proceed to trial know that you ARE then in there as a class of person having it rights/privileges and duties conferred upon it by Her Majesty. You WILL NOT and CANNOT be recognized in there as a living man. There is a reason the Crown prosecutor has a 96% success rate.

James Allan

And doesn't section 11 of the Courts of Justice Act appear to accomodate such rights and jurisdiction whereby it state: Superior Court of Justice

11.(1)The Ontario Court (General Division) is continued as a superior court of record under the name Superior Court of Justice in English and Cour supérieure de justice in French. 1996, c. 25, s. 9 (3).

Idem

(2)The Superior Court of Justice has all the jurisdiction, power and authority historically exercised by courts of common law and equity in England and Ontario. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43, s. 11 (2); 1996, c. 25, s. 9 (17).

James Allan

If indeed your human rights have been violated, and the facts will show that, then would you not perhaps want to file an action at the Superior Court of Justice, where common law and equity CAN BE HEARD, and seek, inter alia, an order quashing the illegal proceedings at the lower court?

James Allan

np - it took us a while to get there, but instilling questions in another as opposed to merely giving answers seems to assist in the comprehension. I suggest you review a few of the other questions I posed to you. You will also need to understand the Rules of Civil Procedure which are promulgated under the Courts of Justice Act. Good luck.

Pete Daoust

Hey guys, I don't want to fuck up all these beautiful freem dumb-ass on the land theories but here is what I think :D :D :D 1). Who is ME ? 2). Who are they ? 3). What do they want. 4). What is this place where they OBLIGE ME to be in.

Pete Daoust

I THINK, maybe I'm wrong on this but I really think that if I masterize 1). Who is ME ? 2). Who are they ? 3). What do they want. 4). What is this place where they OBLIGE ME to be in. I can be very powerfull But hey, you know how dumb I can be, so verify this before you listen to me :D :D

Pete Daoust

1). Who is ME ? I’m the lawful Holder in due course of the accused PERSON, I’m the SOLE beneficiary of this PERSON, I reserve all rights.

2). Who are they ? So far, I see NOBODY, or maybe a Corporation of some types :/ but, no PERSONS has been showed up yet :/

3). What do they want. They seems to want to fuck around with MY person’s surety, and since I’m the SOLE beneficiary of this PERSON, I may want to set things straight, maybe a NOTICE OF MISTAKE will help.

4). What is this place where they OBLIGE ME to be in. A BUNKER :/

:D

Pete Daoust

So, if I get arrested and bring to jail, of course, I have no INTENTIONS on doing this, but, we never know what can happen”

If I REALLY have done something UNLAWFUL and I REALLY know it, I may plea guilty…..

in ANY other circumstances—I will shut up and keep my HANDS away from ANY pen or pencils

I will eventually have to tell them WHO I AM, and I will wait until I’m in front of a guy/woman with a balck robe, who is suppose to be competent and fair.

1). Who is ME ? I’m the lawful Holder in due course of the accused PERSON, I’m the SOLE beneficiary of this PERSON, I reserve all rights.

They will have to tell me WHO THEY ARE 2). Who are they ? So far, I see NOBODY, or maybe a Corporation of some types :/ Where is the INJURED party ? Which CONTRACT that I breached ?

They may want to ask me if I am a belligerent ? :D , if they ask this question 3 times, they are offering me FULL sovereignty ?, so by what authority they declare war on MY person ?

They will have to tell me what they want” 3). What do they want. They seems to want to fuck around with MY person’s surety, and since I’m the SOLE beneficiary of this PERSON, I may want to set things straight, maybe a NOTICE OF MISTAKE will help, or, they will have to point me WHERE is the SURETY of my PERSON. Without surety, what do we have ? NOTHING ?

Oh, and everything they may say that seems to be some STRANGERS’s rules or regulations, I will ALAWAYS say the same thing: I DON’T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE FUCK YOU ARE TALIKING ABOUT.

4). What is this place where they OBLIGE ME to be in. A BUNKER ?

OK, CAN I GO HOME NOW ?

But then again, verify ALL this with someone COMPETANT :D

Shawn Folkes

And we miss shit because we foxus in individual words and not the ENTIRE meaning of what was said. Scott just said something I found interesting, and I wonser if it was missed... West of...WHERE? hmmmm And...who is the "thief" he refers to? You idebtifed and docuses on ONE ...are there potentially others? And...what is potentially being revealed HERE (that hasnt been before) that could possibly be stolen.and misued? What identity?

Back to top