Once you recognize the difference between a STATUTE, ACT compared to breaking common law (common sense) - don't steal, hurt another as examples. The only power "authorities have is to scare you. Mutual consent is needed in the UK, NZ, US, CAN, AUS. This is a great and powerful piece of knowledge.
Not a fan of ACTS that you feel are too violating? You can do a lot about it!
Inform the PM/MP/Premier/ any ministers that fall under that ACT that you do not give consent. That's a good start. If you are a Peaceful Human Being you should not be subject to the BS if you do not want to. Stand up for who you are and what you believe in! What you choose to do is all up to you. You are responsible for yourself in all things.
Wait, so are you saying that if we just email our MP, and say we don't consent to some particular law, that we no longer have to abide by it?
I'm saying inform.... An email can be ignored. Notarized serious questions and fact statements on a Notice can not. There is a big difference. But from your past responses we all know what you really mean.
K, if he is going to keep doing this stuff, I think he needs to be banned.
If anyone ever took him seriously that person would get arrested and locked up because Tower is either an idiot and thinks this is funny or is an idiot and actually believes it.
For anyone who is new to this stuff and is wondering what the ____ Tower is thinking/talking about, try the above site.
It cannot be stressed enough however that I DO NOT IN ANY WAY ENDORSE ANYTHING STATED IN THAT LINK AND ANYONE WHO SEEKS TO EMPLOY ANY OF THE TECHNIQUES DESCRIBED THEREIN DOES SO AT THEIR OWN RISK. LOUD NOISES!
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to fredr123 For This Useful Post:
Location: In my office, at the Ministry of Awesome!
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tower
I'm saying inform.... An email can be ignored. Notarized serious questions and fact statements on a Notice can not. There is a big difference. But from your past responses we all know what you really mean.
Peace to you.
Okay, so if I send a notarized document through registered mail, and then follow up with an in person sit down with my MP where I tell them that I don't agree with a certain law, which I video tape, and then get them to sign an afidavit that I was there and what I told them, that I then do not have to obey that law.
Does that cover all my bases?
__________________
THE SHANTZ WILL RISE AGAIN. <-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
K, if he is going to keep doing this stuff, I think he needs to be banned.
If anyone ever took him seriously that person would get arrested and locked up because Tower is either an idiot and thinks this is funny or is an idiot and actually believes it.
If you believe it great! If you don't great! That is the beauty! I strongly suggest you look into it first and do some research... But that is a broad brush stroke previously stated in the first post. Also it is freedom of speech which is in the video.
Wait, so are you saying that if we just email our MP, and say we don't consent to some particular law, that we no longer have to abide by it?
The best part of people advocating things like this is the fact that they'd never have the stones to do it themselves. And I know this, because said people would then be whining about being punished for violating a law they don't agree with.
Okay, so if I send a notarized document through registered mail, and then follow up with an in person sit down with my MP where I tell them that I don't agree with a certain law, which I video tape, and then get them to sign an afidavit that I was there and what I told them, that I then do not have to obey that law.
Does that cover all my bases?
Not correct. The Statute/Act.
There is a lot of learning involved, and it's nice to be shown the way. The video was just an example of what I am trying to say.
The woman who was kidnapped did not harm, did not steal. However she was taken away. She was bullied to be silent. She did what she believed in and really can not be charged in any way. Common Law is powerful, but it also carries a lot of responsibility. It's not a one way ticket to do what you want! It's a knowledgeable responsible way of interacting as a sovereign with peace and love for all mankind. It is respect and love for everyone. It is being open and honest though words and open discussion. The first rule IMO is do no harm.
Location: In my office, at the Ministry of Awesome!
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tower
Not correct. The Statute/Act.
There is a lot of learning involved, and it's nice to be shown the way. The video was just an example of what I am trying to say.
The woman who was kidnapped did not harm, did not steal. However she was taken away. She was bullied to be silent. She did what she believed in and really can not be charged in any way.
Why did I know you were going to make a distinciton between law and Statute/Act.
Okay, so same scenario. I do everything I said above, and I tell the MP that I don't consent to the Income Tax Act.
Am I now exempt from paying taxes?
If so, am I now exempt from paying taxes?
If so, when did you do this, and what do you do with all that extra cash you have on hand?
__________________
THE SHANTZ WILL RISE AGAIN. <-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
For anyone who is new to this stuff and is wondering what the ____ Tower is thinking/talking about, try the above site.
It cannot be stressed enough however that I DO NOT IN ANY WAY ENDORSE ANYTHING STATED IN THAT LINK AND ANYONE WHO SEEKS TO EMPLOY ANY OF THE TECHNIQUES DESCRIBED THEREIN DOES SO AT THEIR OWN RISK. LOUD NOISES!
Thanks for the link... and LOL.
Did a quick search.... seems the courts don't really think to highly of people claiming their right not to be governed by Canadian statutes.
from the direct response of the defendants, they have decided that they have the right to refuse complying with orders. The defendants in taking the various positions indicated in the material they filed, clearly and overwhelmingly show wilful and deliberate ignoring of the process plus a clear and unequivocal intent to ignore the authority of the court and it’s order. As a consequence, the only conclusion one can come to is that the plaintiffs are entitled to an order striking the defence with costs....
Why did I know you were going to make a distinciton between law and Statute/Act.
Okay, so same scenario. I do everything I said above, and I tell the MP that I don't consent to the Income Tax Act.
Am I now exempt from paying taxes?
If so, am I now exempt from paying taxes?
If so, when did you do this, and what do you do with all that extra cash you have on hand?
This whole notion is completely absurd. In no way will an MP allow someone to opt out of the Income Tax Act, regardless of whatever spurious claims they throw at him. Even if they did consent, I can see reciprocation required:
No Income tax act? Okay, fine. By removing yourself from the tax pool, you also content to giving up the following: driving, health care, CPP, police and fire protection, utilities, military protection, and pretty much any other government service paid for with tax dollars. You can keep your passport, just so you can leave the country if you want.
Common Law knowledge is spreading...
<-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
