Detax Canada

[Paul]

Are you sure about that? Did you 'personally' question them on that subject?Or, are you assuming and conjecturing out of your own biased opinion?

Do you wan to argue with the Oxford English Dictionary too?

person, n.

II. A human being, and related senses.

2. a. An individual human being; a man, woman, or child.
In ordinary usage, the unmarked plural is expressed by the word people; persons emphasizes the plurality and individuality of the referent (see PEOPLE n. 2a).
In earliest use: the individual acting in a particular capacity or concerned in some respect (cf. sense 1).
b. A man or woman of high rank, distinction, or importance; a personage. Usually (and now only) with modifying word or phrase. c. In emphatic use: a human being, as distinguished from an animal, thing, etc. In later use also: an individual regarded as having human rights, dignity, or worth. Cf. sense 5.
c. In emphatic use: a human being, as distinguished from an animal, thing, etc. In later use also: an individual regarded as having human rights, dignity, or worth. Cf. sense 5.

​

Those women won nothing, other than to be elevated from a 'non-person' to a 'person' - big deal! "Whopee!" She says. "Now, I can be a bona fide slave owned by the corporate Crown."

I'm sure Dr. Emily Howard Stowe would be delighted with your elegant dismissal of her work.

Ad hominum statement noted.

That's not an Ad Hominem, perhaps you should do more research.

Learn what? That I should be thinking like a good obedient Communist slave?

Learning to think would be a start.

 

[Paul]

...the Creator's Law is your attempting to prevent or divert others from seeking their true God Given rights...

I thought you were posting on secular issues.

 

[EldonG]

Shockingly, we agree.

Now, where are the Canadian re-education centres? How about forced labour camps? Hmmm? You've been convicted of crimes in Canada, yet the state has not subjected you to these things. You, in fact, are still free to believe whatever you wish about Canadian society. The worst you got was respectful dialogue form a trial judge. Go figure.

They go by various names here in Canada: 'T.V., Mainline Media, and the formal educational system, especially Universities, Police Academies, and Benchers' Schools.

By the way, that trial judge (Hugh Stansfield) was among some 6 BC judges who's life came to a premature end when word was leaking out about the complicity of judges in the pedophile rings operating in BC. Bet you never saw that on TV.

 

[D'rok]

Are you sure about that? Did you 'personally' question them on that subject?Or, are you assuming and conjecturing out of your own biased opinion? Those women won nothing, other than to be elevated from a 'non-person' to a 'person' - big deal! "Whopee!" She says. "Now, I can be a bona fide slave owned by the corporate Crown."

Yes I'm sure about that. I've read the case. You could too if you had the slightest interest in the truth.

Ad hominum statement noted.

That was not an ad hominem.
I attacked your name game, not you personally. Here, this is an example of an ad hominem:

Your name game is crap because you are a massive jackass.

If I had said that, you would have a point.

Learn what? That I should be thinking like a good obedient Communist slave?

Heck, if you just learned what ad hominem means you will have at least made some infinitesimal progress.

 

[Kid Eager]

Ok, read it. That's a nice straw man that the author rode in on: the constitution only applying to the people who were alive at the time of its signing.

Tell me again how this has *any* relevance to any party other than the USA, and to the argument you appear to be trying to create?

 

[EldonG]

I thought you were posting on secular issues.

When we are referring to Creator God, we are referring to this Planet that He/It
created. That is physical, not ethereal beliefs that have no basis for knowing.

Do you know the difference?

 

[D'rok]

They go by various names here in Canada: 'T.V., Mainline Media, and the formal educational system, especially Universities, Police Academies, and Benchers' Schools.

Which one of those were you sentenced to?

By the way, that trial judge (Hugh Stansfield) was among some 6 BC judges who's life came to a premature end when word was leaking out about the complicity of judges in the pedophile rings operating in BC. Bet you never saw that on TV.

Ah, the judge was a pedophile (of course he wasn't), therefore we shouldn't listen to him.

So you do know what an ad hominem is after all.

 

[tsig]

Why are you so happy with what D'rok quoted? Do you like your slave status that much. Do you have a ring in your nose? Or, do you prefer a choke collar and leash?

So you're into kinky too.

 

[EldonG]

Ok, read it. That's a nice straw man that the author rode in on: the constitution only applying to the people who were alive at the time of its signing.

Tell me again how this has *any* relevance to any party other than the USA, and to the argument you appear to be trying to create?

It's all based upon the Roman/English system of corporate governance. The business office for the corporation called Canada is in Washington, DC., according to Dunn & Bradstreet. Doesn't Canada supposedly have a Constitution? Did you, or even any Provincial Legislature vote for it?

If you cannot see the relevance of Lysander Spooner's logic to Canada, then you had better go back and sit in on a few fifth grade comprehensive reading classes.

 

[EldonG]

So you're into kinky too.

Has this thread been converted to a discussion on perverted sex?

 

[D'rok]

Just to set the record straight about Eldon's vicious lies about Judge Hugh Stansfield:

The The International Institute for Child Rights and Development (IICRD) team was deeply saddened by the recent passing of the Honourable Chief Judge Hugh Stansfield on May 7, 2009 from cancer.

The Chief Judge of the British Columbia Provincial Court was strongly committed to children in the justice system, and a friend and advisor to IICRD.

With a desire to improve the family court system for children and families, Chief Judge Stansfield generously volunteered from 2002 - 2009 as an advisor to IICRD's Hear the Child project advisory team. He strongly supported children and their rights including the right to have their views heard in judicial decision-making. "It is rare for me to find that the information provided by children is not helpful" he said. In 2005 he was appointed to the position of Chief Judge of the Provincial Court and continued his commitment to the project work up until his death.

The late Chief Judge also participated in IICRD conferences including Children as Partners in 2002 and Child Rights in Practice: Tools for Social Change in 2007 where he delivered a key note address on children's rights and the justice system. A special sitting of the Court was held in Chief Judge Stansfield's Honour in Vancouver on June 4, 2009 and attended by IICRD's Legal Director.


http://www.iicrd.org/news/hughStansfield

Eldon truly has no shame.

 

[bikerdruid]

Tell me again how this has *any* relevance to any party other than the USA, and to the argument you appear to be trying to create?

actually, this is not exactly relevant to the u.s..
eldon is canadian, and these are really discussions of canadian law.

 

[Paul]

You refer to yourself, of course?

Nope.

I was referring quite specifically to you and your continued denial of reality.

It would be, if the government were at the top level of administration, and wasn't an incorporated body owned by the Holy Roman Empire.

Well, as that's palpable nonsense we seem to be in agreement.

Your limited understanding of how the present system is created and arranged leaves you with far to simplistic a view to criticize others on their superior knowledge of the subject.

Your delusional pontification and arrogant dismissal leaves you with little standing to discuss anything genuinely.

Because it was Creator God who created me and put me on Planet Earth to enjoy 'free will status'. The Government (a group of men) had nothing to do with either. And, Creator God did not creat fictional corporations, unless you consider the Pope to be god - which he thinks he is, apparently.

Fundamentalist anti-Catholic ranting is not the best way to persuade others that you have something serious to say.

You dangle your participle. That's a fact.

Your evasive use of a childish attempt at insult amuses me.

Why would you have such an outburst of ego that you think I care what you think or believe? At least, it is a form of 'reality'.

That's funny.

For someone so arrogant you would think that you could discern the meaning of a simple sentence.

 

[EldonG]

Which one of those were you sentenced to?

Asking questions of yourself again?

Ah, the judge was a pedophile (of course he wasn't), therefore we shouldn't listen to him.

For sure. Anyone who would say nice things about me must have been seeing me as one of his favorite boys.

So you do know what an ad hominem is after all.

Removed inappropriate content

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: LashL

 

[EldonG]

actually, this is not exactly relevant to the u.s..
eldon is canadian, and these are really discussions of canadian law.

Immaterial! Both are based upon English Common Law. And, since English common law is, in reality, Roman Municipal Law, and thus a type of Maritime Law, the rules of Maritime Law prevail in the corporate structure.

For those for whom this response is too complicated: "Yah! It Do!.

 

[D'rok]

Asking questions of yourself again?

Have you forgotten already? Those were your examples of how Canada is just like the Soviet Union and Communist China.

Maybe you should be sentenced to University. You might actually learn something.

 

[Paul]

When we are referring to Creator God, we are referring to this Planet that He/It
created.

You are the only one referring to god. If you have a special definition that you like to use for juvenile word games, that is your problem.

That is physical, not ethereal beliefs that have no basis for knowing.

If you don't want to include ethereal beliefs, don't start bringing deities into the discussion.

Do you know the difference?

Between what? The usual meaning and yours?

 

[Paul]

...thrown at me on this thread by the 2 or 3 posters posting with different handles...

Have you considered the reality that it's more posters with 1 handle that don't agree with you?

 

[Mashuna]

I do presume you were looking into the mirror when you wrote that statement.

I know you are, but what am I?

 

[ria_rokz]

Well, if you believe all that, (which is your free will right), then so be it. But, where you are in violation of the Creator's Law is your attempting to prevent or divert others from seeking their true God Given rights and freedom by your posts against me and my efforts at educating them on this issue, and that is likely because you don't realize that you have forfeited your rights and freedoms by your lack of knowledge.

So uh... what "rights and freedoms" do you gain with this silly little ineffective loophole of yours? I mean, besides weaseling out of taxes. Do you get to run around nekkid on the beach or something? Do you get to eat your pudding if you don't eat any meat?