Legal Shenanigans - Bill C-51
For a real education, here is some incredible information, in that it shows how, without full disclosure of intent, we have been maneuvered into signing our rights away...thus, conforming to the intents of those who run our government behind the scenes.
This Bill and similar ones are de facto proof that there is nothing democratic about our government.
Lest you think that Garry Anderson exaggerates in his letter to, the not so honorable, Tony Clement, MP below - let it be known - that much of our legal system stems from the days or yor and is based on maritime law whence the dilemma of getting around human rights to enable slavery was developed.
The cunning and deceptive use of language to snare the unsuspecting is clear when you read and watch/listen the following.
"Those who benefit from any societal mechanism rarely wish to understand that mechanism especially if it appears to grant them power, control or authority over their fellow man and understanding that mechanism would limit, diminish or remove power control or authority. They simply do not want to know.
BECAUSE
It is far easier to ignorantly control others than it is to wisely control yourself"
Extracted from:
ThinkFree.ca : Bursting Bubbles of Government Deception - 80 min - Jul 25, 2006
Divergentfilms & Elizatbeth Anne Elaine Society - www.divergentfilms.comRobert-Arthur Menard gives a seminar on The Illusion of the Person, what Words in Law mean, Consent, Acceptance, Honor & Dishonour, etc.
Those who should like to listen the audio only I have converted the above to an mp3 file here. This is a great way to learn, as I often do, while driving etc....
We are forced to follow laws and regulations that only those intent on enforcing them on us for their advantage need. If one cannot understand these laws and regulations. We may ask how then can we follow them? By default this is abuse of authority and cannot legally be binding....
Once the shenanigans of the shadow masters is understood, it becomes abundantly plane that everyone has inherent rights that cannot be taken away. For example no one can prevent us from earning a living even if wish to practice medicine, law without license etc.. This is is clearly illustrated in the following wonderful documentary. Rules and regulations only apply to those in the Medical associations, Bar Society etc.. Those outside these organizations clearly are free to practice whatever they wish and cannot be legally bound by these self serving and predatory organizations. Contrary to popular perceptions, created by the same, have little or nothing to do with public welfare and safety but are simply public relations fronts to protect their members....
"The information presented in this video may be extremely toxic to deceptive governments and lying lawyers. It should not be viewed by anyone who is happy and comfortable with their status quo or those who think questioning the government is immoral.The information presented herein is not the legal advice of a lawyer and thus is not flavored with the stench normally associated with such words.
Super concentrated truth can harm those accustomed to only lies.
Any similarity between the ideas expressed herein and the wise teachings of Jesus Christ is merely due to truth being immutable and unchanging. Nothing is coincidence when the Spirit is Active.
When those with eyes can see
AND HEAR
and those with ears can hear
AND SEE
because they are working together the deceivers will be bound by their own words.
And the Kingdom of God
IS AT HAND"
Extracted from:
ThinkFree.ca and DivergentFilms brings you the limited edition version of The Magnificent Deception, Rob Menard's newest video on the concepts of Freedom, Law, and Commerce, and how they relate to Persons, Humans, and Freesouls-On-Land. This is the preview version of the Sequel to Bursting Bubbles of Government Deception above.An mp3 file for his one is here.
Meanwhile those who have not yet read and signed the petition: Stop Bill C-51
You can view the petition here.
Chris Gupta---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Garry Anderson
Date: Thu, May 1, 2008 at 10:09 PM
Subject: Letter to Minister of Health re Bill C-51
To: Croft Woodruff
Hi Croft:Thanks for keeping up the good fight.
I am including a letter which I sent to the Minister of Health yesterday, April 30, for the second reading of Bill C-51.
I hope you have time to read it before your radio interview tomorrow. You may borrow, and/or disseminate, any or all of the information contained in my letter.
Regards,
Garry.
------------------- INCLUDED COPY BELOW --------------------------NOTICE AND CONTRACT
Notice to the Agent is notice to the Principal;
Notice to the Principal is notice to all Agents.April 30, 2008
Hon. Tony Clement, MP
MInister of Health,
70 Columbine Driveway,
Tunney's Pasture, 16th Floor,
Brook-Klaxton Building, M/S 0916A
Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0K9Dear Hon. Tony Clement:
Re: 2008 Bill C-51, An Act to Amend the Food and Drug Act
I am sending this contract by email, and by postal mail, to inform you of my concerns, and my direction to you, in respect of the above-referenced Bill C-51 ('Bill').
I have read this Bill, and I have identified several sections, sub-sections, and paragraphs which may violate my fundamental rights, the Canadian Bill of Rights, the Charter, the Criminal Code, and International Law. As it stands, the Bill creates a bad piece of legislation and said Bill needs to be corrected, amended, or abolished.
Herein I bring to your attention a summary of the provisions of the Bill which are faulty:
Definitions: The distinction must be made between the words "person", "individual", and "human" because they do not mean the same thing. As said words are not defined in this Bill, the word "person" must be interpreted from that defined in the Interpretation Act, as a corporation, however, if "person" is intended to also include an "individual", or a "human", then many violations of other laws occur. For greater certainty, "person" needs to be defined in this Bill.
Preamble: The sixth Preamble " ... recognizes that a lack of full scientific certainty is not to be used as a reason for postponing measures that prevent adverse affects on human health ... " is a flawed premise for the foundation of this Bill. Ostensibly the sixth preamble states " ... without scientific test results, we think their might be a problem ... " which provides, as a foundation, somebody's opinion as to what may happen (therefore it has to be stopped now) resulting in a wide open gate for abuse of the legislation by vested interests, faceless bureaucrats, and corporations.
Preamble: The eight Preamble " ... recognizes that it is the responsibility of regulated persons to ensure that only products that meet legislative requirements are available to the public" is a flawed premise for the foundation of this Bill. You will see that "regulated persons" ostensibly means "corporations" because only a corporation can be regulated. If you believe that an 'individual' or a 'human' can be regulated, then you are endorsing the regulation (i.e. control) of 'individuals' or the regulation of 'humans' and thereby are you are endorsing SLAVERY, the control or regulation of human behaviour, in violation of section 7 of the Charter, sub-section 1(a) of the Bill of Rights, and all International Laws (such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights) which prohibit slavery "in all their forms". So clearly you either have to define a "person" as only a corporation, which is regulated, or you endorse SLAVERY, which means you are in violation of several other laws.
Preamble: The ninth Preamble " ... recognizes that openness and transparency, including the sharing of information and the meaningful involvement of the public ... " is a flawed premise which is already being violated by your department at the moment. For example, on the issue of the harmful aerosol sprays (commonly called "chem-trails") which are being spayed into the air we breathe by the Canadian Military, the US Military, and via additives to commercial airline's fuel (and therefore exhaust) , your department is by no means "transparent" and in fact is hiding information from the public in this specific matter. There have been numerous attempts to obtain information about these so-called "chem-trails" but your department has refused to be forthright and transparent. So, as a minimum, the Bill's ninth Preamble violates the Bill's sixth Preamble; that is to say, you are not taking action to protect the health of the public based upon the possibility that spraying chemicals into the air we breath may be harmful (the sixth Preamble) and you are not being transparent with the public by sharing information about said aerosols (the ninth Preamble). Clearly you see the problem.
Hence at least three of the Preambles provide a flawed foundation for the Bill, and on that basis alone, the Bill must be rejected. In fact, if any one Preamble is flawed, you have an obligation (a duty of trust) to reject the Bill. One definition for treason is "a betrayal of trust", and as a public servant (you serve me) to continue with this Bill will be a betrayal of trust now that I have brought to your attention the matters herein.
Paragraph 3(3): The definition of "device" also includes an instrument which is manufactured for use in prevention of a disease, which also includes an instrument which I may manufacture for preventing the common cold, and thereby this Bill would affect my fundamental freedom to create and invent my own wares for use by me and my fellow humans on this planet, according to their choice and free will. Said sub-section will violate my freedoms as enunciated in the "liberty" of the Charter, the Bill of Rights, and International Law.
Paragraph 3(3): The definition of "sell" violates my freedom to engage in a private contract for sale of my 'device' to another "person" if you intend to also include 'individuals' and 'humans' in the definition of the word "person". Unless you clearly define "person" to be only a corporation, then said paragraph trespasses on my right to private contract. So, you need to define "person" as a corporation otherwise you have a problem with me via said paragraph.
Paragraph 3(3): The definition of "article to which this Act or the regulations apply includes ... a food, a therapeutic product (device) ..." violates my fundamental right to life (section 7 of the Charter, sub-section 1(a) of the Bill of Rights) because you cannot regulate a "food", which is ostensibly regulation of what I can eat to sustain my own life. I have the freedom to eat whatever food I want to sustain my life and you do not have my permission to regulate food because you are violating my right to life (by regulating what foods I am permitted, by you, to eat). If you pursue said paragraph, you will be in violation of said laws which protect my right to life.
Paragraph 3(3): The definition of "controlled activity" violates my free-will to manufacture my 'device', as heretofore enunciated.
Paragraph 3(3): The definition of "government" also includes "an international organization of states", which is a fancy way of saying the United Nations, which ostensibly means that the United Nations can use their laws to supersede Canadian Laws (a provision which is already supported by articles 26 and 27 of the Geneva Convention on the Law of Treaties) thereby requiring the Canadian government to obey Article 4 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to wit "No one shall be held in slavery or servitude. Slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms." Please be aware that you are bound by said Articles, and therefore your duty is to ensure that any attempt at SLAVERY is removed from this Bill. Now that you are with the knowledge that I have brought to you herein, you must be careful to avoid a "betrayal of trust" in respect of me and my fellow humans on this planet.
Paragraph 3(3): The definition of "therapeutic product" also includes a "device", which means that my 'device' is also included in this Bill, which is a violation of my rights as previously enunciated.
Sub-section 2.3 (Purpose): The Purpose of the Bill includes " .... prohibiting and regulating certain activities in relation to foods, therapeutic products ... " which violates my right to life, my right to private contract, and my freedoms as heretofore enunciated, and the purpose of the Bill is in clear violation of the Charter, the Bill of Rights and International Law.
Sub-section 3.2: The provision "No person shall - knowing information to be false or being reckless as to its truth - communicate ... that information ... " basically states 'No corporation shall hide disclosure about its products ... ' which has been violated by almost every pharmaceutical company, and corporation whose only objective is profit, in respect of withholding harmful test results of drugs from the government approval process. Said sub-section is not being enforced at the moment, so there is little hope that said sub-section would be enforced to protect the public. Basically said sub-section appears to be unenforceable by precedent and common practice.
Section 10: The provision "No person shall conduct a clinical trial in respect of a therapeutic product that does not have a market authorization unless ..." violates my free will to test my 'device' without first obtaining "market authorization", unless you clearly define "person" to mean only a corporation. If you require that I have any "authorization" (i.e. permission in accordance with sub-section 18.1 of the Bill) you are forcing me into SLAVERY and SERVITUDE, in violation of the laws which prohibit slavery. As a human, I do not require your authorization to test my 'device' in a clinical trial, or otherwise.
Section 13: The provision "No person shall conduct a controlled activity unless they are authorized by an establishment licence [sic] to do so" violates my freedoms, because, in addition to the points I have enunciated herein, said sub-section provides for an establishment to control me and my activities, which leads to SLAVERY again, unless you clearly define "person" to mean only a corporation. I am not your slave, however in your capacity as Minister of Health and a public servant, you have agreed (by contract) to serve the public (in servitude viz slavery), so your role and capacity is effectively my slave.
Paragraph 15.1(1)(c): The provision "No person shall sell a prescription therapeutic product unless ... the sale is to a person who belongs to a prescribed class of persons ... " is clearly discriminatory and in violation of all the laws which prohibit discrimination, such as sub-section 15(1) of the Charter and section 1 of the Bill of Rights, because it creates a prescribed "class of persons", unless you clearly define "person" to mean only a corporation. You may discriminate between corporations, which are a creation of the government, but you may not discriminate against, or between, humans or individuals.
Paragraph 15.2(a): The provision "No person shall import a prescription therapeutic product unless ... they belong to a prescribed class of persons ... " is clearly discriminatory and in violation of all the laws which prohibit discrimination, such as sub-section 15(1) of the Charter and section 1 of the Bill of Rights, because it creates a prescribed "class of persons", unless you clearly define "person" to mean only a corporation. You may discriminate between corporations, which are a creation of the government, but you may not discriminate against, or between, humans or individuals.
Paragraphs 18.1(1)(a)(b)(c): The provision "Subject to the regulations, the Minister may, on application ... register a person ... " takes SLAVERY to the ultimate level by the act of "registering" a person as belonging to the government which provides the ultimate control and ownership of a person (i.e. total SLAVERY), unless you clearly define "person" to mean only a corporation. Nothing short of the clear definition of "person" (within this Bill) as neither being a human nor not an individual, will remove you from a potential treasonous act and a breach of trust by attempting to enslave the Canadian peoples.
Paragraph 18.2(1): The provision "Subject to the regulations, the Minister may, on application, issue a clinical trial authorization to a person in respect of therapeutic products" opens the door to the criteria for acceptance and rejection, and possible discrimination, unless the word "person" is clearly defined to mean only a corporation. As a human, I do not need your authorization to conduct any test or trial of my 'device'.
Paragraph 18.7(1): The provision "Subject to the regulations, the Minister may, on application, issue a market authorization ... if the Minister is of the opinion that the person has established that the benefits that are associated with the therapeutic product outweigh the risks" provides for total DICTATORSHIP by the minister because said sub-section only requires the Minister's "opinion" without fact, evidence, or justification for said benefits versus risks, unless "person" is clearly defined to mean only a corporation over which the Minister can dictate his opinion. Dictatorship by allowing the Minister's opinion to decide what is best for me takes away my free will right to choice, and therefore leads directly to SLAVERY again. We cannot have a Canadian Dictatorship unless Canada is clearly defined as the CORPORATION CANADA, at which point we can see that no humans or individuals can be associated with the corporation without their knowledge, consent, or contract.
Paragraph 19.(1)(c): The provision " ... the Minister is of the opinion that the risks that are associated with the therapeutic product to which the authorization relates outweigh the benefits" provides, again, for the Minister's opinion to be the justification for action, clearly leading to a dictatorship, as enunciated herein.
Paragraph 19.1(2): The provision " ... the Minister is of the opinion that the holder has failed to do so" provides, again, for the Minister's opinion to replace fact and evidence as justification for his actions, clearly in violation of the rule of law by allowing the Minister's opinion to replace fact and evidence, in addition to dictatorship and slavery.
Sub-section 20.5: The provision "If the Minister is of the opinion that a food, therapeutic product ... " provides for the Minister's opinion to replace fact and evidence as justification for his actions, which is clearly a violation of not only due process, the rule of law, breach of trust, but provides for discrimination, slavery, and abuse of power. Without fact or evidence, the Minister's opinion must remain just that - his opinion.
Sub-section 20.9: The provision "The minister may disclose personal information ... without consent of the individual to whom the personal information relates ... " provides for the invasion of an individual's privacy by the Minister without consent, and creates a violation of the fundamental right of the individual to his own privacy in total violation of all laws which respect the privacy of an individual. This sub-section may be repaired by requiring notice to the individual and a court order, signed by a justice, in respect of the disclosure of personal information.
Section 21.: The provision "The minister may disclose personal information ... without consent of the individual to whom the personal information relates ... " again provides for the invasion of an individual's privacy by the Minister without consent, and creates a violation of the fundamental right of the individual to his own privacy in total violation of all laws which respect the privacy of an individual. This section may be repaired by requiring notice to the individual and a court order, signed by a justice, in respect of the disclosure of personal information.
Sub-section 23.(1): The provision " ... an inspector may ... enter a place ... in which the inspector believes on reasonable grounds ..." does not provide adequate justification for entry, without a court order, signed by a justice, in respect of permitting such entry.
Paragraph 23.(1)(c): The provision " ... an inspector may ... enter a place ... in which the inspector believes on reasonable grounds ... and take samples free of charge ..." provides for unauthorized theft unless there is adequate justification for taking samples free of charge, with a court order signed by a justice, in respect of permitting such taking of samples. Such theft is in violation of the criminal code.
Paragraph 23.(1)(i)(i): The provision " ... an inspector may ... enter a place ... in which the inspector believes on reasonable grounds ... direct the owner or person in charge ... to establish their identity to the inspector's satisfaction ..." is unlawful because there is no requirement for a human or an individual to "establish their identity", and especially not the the "inspector's satisfaction". There is no lawful requirement for a human, a natural person, or an individual to identify himself. Period. You will need to fix this paragraph.
Sub-section 23.(4): The provision "An inspector who is carrying out their functions may enter or pass through or over private property without being liable for doing so and without the owner of the property having the right to object to that use of the property" creates legislated trespass over private property in violation of the criminal code, unless the so-called "private property", over which the inspector passes does not in-fact belong to the owner but the owner merely has beneficial title to the property while the true legal-title to the property remains with crown. In order to avoid criminal trespass, the Minister needs to clarify whether or not the legal-title for any real property belongs to the crown, or the so-called "owner".
Paragraph 23.3(a): The provision "An inspector who seizes a thing under this Act may ... at the expense of the owner ... store it or move it to another place" creates legislated theft without accountability, and needs to be repaired by replacing "at the expense of the owner" with "at the expense of the crown".
Paragraph 30.(1)(v)(i): The provision "The Governor in Council may make regulations for carry the purposes and provisions of this Act into effect, including regulations ... in the case of information notices or documents that are required to be sent in electronic form specifying the persons or classes of persons who may transmit them in elec- tronic [sic] form" provides for discrimination ("classes of persons") and slavery ("who may transmit"), unless "person" is clearly defined to be neither a human, nor an individual.
Sub-section 30.(1.2): The provision "In specifying a period for the purposes of paragraph (1)(e) the Governor in Council may specify an indefinite period ... " appears to violate a fundamental tenant of contract law in that there is no time period specified because "indefinite" ostensibly means "infinite" and I believe contracts require a termination clause, therefore legislation (which is a contract between the state a the persons over which it rules) should have a termination clause. Please correct me if I am wrong on this point.
Section 31. in toto: The provisions "A person who contravenes a provision of this Act or the regulations ... is guilty of an offence and liable .... " violates the Charter, the Bill of Rights, International Law, the free will of the individual, and invokes slavery and extortion (do this or else suffer the consequences) unless "person" is clearly defined to be a corporation, thereby preserving fundamental human and individual rights.
I am sure that with more study of the Bill I will find more problems, however what I have enunciated herein provide a sample of the defects in this Bill.
Therefore, as you (the individual and human) are acting as the Minister of Health and, as a public servant you ostensibly work for me (as a member of the public), I direct you to strike-down this Bill and prevent it from becoming enacted. With said direction, which I have clearly given to you herein, I hereby and herewith create this contract between you (the natural-person) and me (the natural-person) whereby you are required to follow my direction lest you are in breach of trust, the trust I placed in you as the elected Minister of Health. If you fail to follow my direction, as stated herein, then you and I both agree that I may pursue other matters of recourse against your failing to do as I have so directed, by the authority invested in me by my God as a caretaker of my fellow man and, subsequently, by the Canadian Bill of Rights whose preamble states that "the Canadian Nation is founded upon principles that acknowledge the supremacy of God ... in a society of free men and institutions" (viz God's laws for mankind are superior to man's laws for mankind).
However, if you decide not to strike down this bill, then clearly you must define "person" to mean only a corporation in this Bill, otherwise this Bill has so many violations of law, that it cannot be enacted. You should also define Canada to be the CORPORATION OF CANADA in order to clarify paragraph 18.7(1). I await your written clarification that the word "person" means only a corporation, otherwise you would have agreed, by default and tacit agreement, that you are violating my fundamental rights and freedoms as clearly enunciated herein, and that you are in breach of trust, and that I have your permission to take any subsequent actions which may be necessary to safeguard my rights and freedoms.
I am sending this contract (this default contract of tacit acceptance) to you today via email and via Canada Post so that, in accordance with the Post Box Rule, this contract becomes effective today. I trust that you do not betray the trust of the Canadian peoples and that you do the right thing by vacating this Bill.
Yours sincerely,
Garry Anderson, human and natural-person (in law)
c/o 411 East Osborne Road
North Vancouver, British Columbia
Canada.Mobile:
--
Croft Woodruff, PhD MH"Council member of Friends of Freedom International & the Canadian Coalition for Health Freedom"
posted by Chris Gupta on Sunday May 4 2008
URL of this article:
http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/chris/2008/05/04/legal_shenanigans_bill_c51.htm
Related ArticlesArtificial Water Fluoridation: Off To A Poor Start / Fluoride Injures The Newborn
Please watch this short 5 minute video: Little Things Matter: The Impact of Toxins on the Developing Brain Toxins such as Arsenic, Lead, Mercury, Aluminum and other known and unknown chemicals, that are often above the legal limits, are deliberately added to our water to manage the disposal of toxic industrial waste chemicals under the pretense of "safe and effective" for water fluoridation mantra.Knowing and acting on the above should... [read more]
December 30, 2014 - Chris Gupta"Evidence Be Damned...Patient Outcome Is Irrelevant" - From Helke
Further to The Future of Complementary/Integrative Medicine & Patient Choice, here is an important must read and act note from Helke Ferrie, a superb Medical Science Writer and Publisher. Now that the true colours of the well known shortcomings of allopathic medicine are being discovered en mass, the screws are being tightened by the pharmaceutical masters on their medical puppets. It seems that they are prepared to stop at nothing.... [read more]
September 16, 2011 - Chris GuptaMisconduct Of Health Canada Bureaucrats
Help us force the Leadership of all four establishment parties to deal with your top ten needs in this 2011 Canadian Federal Election a message from Trueman Tuck April 18, 2011I have been a leading Peoples' Champion against Canadian Federal bureaucratic tyranny for over three decades and can prove to anyone interested in listening, that our Canadian Federal bureaucracy is out of control. If you need help go to... [read more]
April 18, 2011 - Chris Gupta
