
Issues Area Home
1215: MAGNA CARTA, JUNE 15TH Issues Summaries Abortion Veto for Dads ACTA = Anti-Counterfeiting Surveilance Adoption Veto for Dads Adopted Children Disallowed NPs Affirmative Action Age Of Consent Anti-Depressants, Drug Induced Suicide Battered Woman Syndrome BC Vital Statistics Act Misandry BC Legislature MUST Big Brother, Micro-Management Bill C-22 Best interests of the Child Breach of Trust "Case Law" is NOT Law CCA Wood and Playgrounds Child Support Tables / SOW Fraud "Child's Right" or "Parents' Right" Child Trafficking by Public Officers Common Law Perverted by Activist Judges Compulsory Drugging of Children, Thymerisol Corren Agreement Court Ordered Sexism Credit Crisis, Currency Replacment Custody Orders not Enforced Debtor's Prison Reinstituted Day Care Universal Deadbeat Dads Disabled parents DISS = Divorce Initiated Suicide Syndrome Domestic Violence Propaganda Division of Assets Enticement Seduction Ex Parte Orders False Accusations Father Hatred Propaganda Fatherlessness, State Imposed Federal Reserve / Fiat Currency Feminism = Socialism = Nazism Fitness Test for Natural Parents in Divorce Fitness Test for Students: "Transitions" FMEP = Family Maintenance Enforcement Forgiveness is NOT Compulsory Freedom of Speech Friendly Parent Rule, Max. Contact Fundamental Justice Globalism is Treason Global Warming Fraud "Climategate" Habeus Corpus Abandoned "Hate Crime" Speech Police Homofacism Homosexual Activism Homosexual Marriage "Human Rights” Commissions in Canada Human Trafficking Imputed Income Inheritance Theft: Grey & Black Widow Judicial Activism is Breach of Trust Judicial Falsification of Court Transcripts Judicial Freemasonry is Racketeering Judicial Globalization is Treason Judicial Interpretation Kinship Families & Grandparents raising Children Law Societies' Self Regulation, Corruption Lawyers Lying in Court Legal Abuse Syndrome Letters to MP Letters to MLA Letters to Editor Malicious Mother Syndrome Malicious Prosecution Misandry, Hatred of Males Monetary Crisis: "Money as Debt" Move Aways Narcissism Natiional Sovreignity Natural Parents Rights Eliminated, SSM NAU = North American Union Net Neutrality: Keep Internet Free!! No Fault Divorce NCR = Not Criminally Responsible Parliament MUST Parental Alienation Parental Kidnapping Parenting Time Presumption Passport & DL Removal Paternity Denied Natural Fathers, Birth Registration Paternity Fraud, Birth Registration Pedophiles Fear Dads!! Pedophiles Fear Dads New Pedophiles in Public Service Petitions Poofy Judges Protestant Revolution, BBC Sexual Abuse by a Public Officer Shadow Government Sole Custody is Child Abuse Special Prosecutors for Homosexuals, Judges Star Chamber's Secret Overlords SOW = Status of Women, KILL IT!!!! Stockholm Syndrome Paradigm Shift Straw Man Redemption, Free Man Supremacy of Parliament Target Legislation Teachers displacing Parents Teachers Seducing Students Tracts and Flyers "Women's Shelters" Lesbian Gulags |
|






Albrecht, Katherine : RFID Spychips Annett, Kevin: Child Trafficking in Beautiful BC Asher, Jeffrey Baskerville, Stephen: "Taken .. Custody Baxter, Dorian: Canada Courtwatch BC Conservatives Beck, Glenn Beck: World Government Bennett, Richard: Purpose Driven & Catholicism Blick, Edward: Global Warming & Marxism Blumner,Court Ordered Sexism Boys of St. Vincent <Mount Cashel>, NL Burrows, Lynette: Homo Adoption Carley, Dr. Rebecca: Vaccinations Carr, William Guy: Pawns in the Game Christie, Doug: Freedom of Speech, Assembly Chopra, Dr. Shiv: Health Canada Coulter, Ann: Free Speech Cools, Senator Anne: Lying Lawyers Coffman, Dr. Michael: Global Warming Coleman, John: Global Warming Fraud Conspiracy of Silence, Boystown Pedophiles Cromwell, Oliver: Supremacy / Parliament Cuddy, Dennis L. Cumbey, Constance : New Age Nazism Dodd, Norman: NWO Fabian Socialists Dutton, Don: RADAR, "Rethinking DV" EP-Australia Federer, Bill: Endang'd Speeches, Quran Farrell, Warren: Why Men Earn More Fischer, Greg: Family Preservation Festival Fogal, Connie: No NAU Forseth, MP Paul: FTSOTC Panelist Fromm, Paul: Free Speech, CAFE FTSOTC 48 Recom's Gage, Richard: Architects & Engineers 9/11 Gairdner William Galloway, Roger: FTSOTC Panelist Geldof, Sir Bob: The Love.. Gerrish, Brian: EU's "Common Purpose" Griffin, G. Edward: Fed Reserve Grignon, Paul: "Money As Debt" Gunderson, Ted: FBI Haeck, Lisa: Sexual Abuse Haines, Bruce, QC: Justice Review Hiebert, MP Russ: Human Rights Commission Hill, MP Jay: EP Legislation Hinton , Betty: Status of Women's "Hit List" Howse, Torm "In a Small Town" Pedophile Boy Scouts Iserbyt, Charlotte: Dumbing Down Jones, Alex Kay, Barbara, National Post Kennedy, John F: targeted, Assassination 1963 Kernberg, Dr. Otto: Personality Disorder Keyes, Alan : Kruk, Edward: Child Custody Leslie, Sarah: "Pied Pipers of Purpose" LInde, Carey: Statutory Ammendments Lively, Scott: "Pink Swastika" Luther, Martin: "Sola Scriptura" Martin, Malachi: Globalization, Occult McManus, John: Stopping NAU McKay, Dr. Marty McLean, Candis MacKenzie, Rob: "Paul Revere Ride", EP Trek 2006 McQuaid, Robert: Fix Children's Aide Society, CAS Millar, David Mills, Dennis: Former MP Targetted by Homsexuals Monckton, Lord Christopher Monarchy, David Starkey Monteith, Dr. Stanley: Tax Exempt Foundations Murtari, John: Hunger Striker for Time with Son Nash, Dave: Cross Canada Run Nazanin: Persian Beauty for a Free Iran Neufeld, Gordon: Hold - Kids Nicolosi, Joseph: Treatment of Homosexuality O'Connor, Matt: Original F4J-UK PAFE = Planetary Alliance for Fathers in Exile Palin, Sarah Paul, Dr. Ron: Sound Money Peck, Dr. Scott: "People of the Lie" Pedersen, Rob: EP Bike Trek US, 2007 Pellman, Adrian, LLB: Judicial Activism Perloff, James: Shadows of Power Phenomenon: The Lost Archives Pizzey, Erin: Women's Shelter Scam Plywood Man, NWT Quigley, Carroll: Banking, Globalization Rhodes, Carol: Friend.Court = Enemy. Family Riplinger, Gail: Luciferian Bibles Roberts, Carey Roberts, Elise Roscoe, Peter: Judicial Bigotry Russo, Aaron: NAU, CFR, Rockefellers Ruppert, Michael C Saburido, Jacqueline: Don't Drink Sacks. Glenn Secret Files of the Inquisition Schlafly, Phyllis: Global Governance Simons, Frank: Courts From Hell Schafer, Nancy: Child Trafficking at CPS Simpson, Kari: Road Kill Radio Smith, Ron: DC Rally, Drugging of Children Soever, Alar Sodhi, Eeva Somerville, Margaret:“Same-Sex Marriage” Still, Bill: "Money Masters", "The Mystery of Oz" Stopps, Gordon Vs Just Ladies, BCHRT Stormer, John: Betrayed .. Bench Story, Christopher: "Perestroika Dec. Sutton, Anhony: Wall Street & Hitler Taylor, Captain Tony: F4J-US "Fatherless Day" Trociuk Darrell, BC Birth Registration Tyndale, William, "God's Outlaw", RIP 1536 V for Vendetta / Guy Fawkes the Hero Vellacott, MP Maurice Ventura, Jesse: Conspiracy Theory Vieira, Dr. Edwin: Fiat Empire Wagener, William Warren, Elizabeth: Collapse Middle Class Watson, Paul: EU's Nazi Origins William III & Mary II: "Bill of Rights" 1689 Wooldridge, Nancy: Canadian Grans Zepezauer, Frank: Feminist Crusades |
|
Let Ex Husbands Be Fathers Perception vs Reality Some Facts... Both Parents Vital Broken Homes, Bleak Future Justice Review Fatherneed Rights of fathers Ignored? |
|
Support one of over 50 class-actions against
unconstitutional 'sole custody' by Indiana Civl Rights
Council
thetruthandjusticefoundation.org
BC Statutory Amendments |
McKenzie & Pedersen, the "Two Robs",
Equal Parenting Bike Trek US 2006, 2007...

Robb MacKenzie Equal Parenting Bike Trek - Google Search;
Robb MacKenzie Equal Parenting Bike Trek - Google Video

Rob Pederson, Equal Parenting - Google Search;
Robert Pederson, Equal Parenting - Google Video

Cycling4Children.com
Equal Parenting Bike Trek's photostream
More:
Issues:
McKenzie & Pedersen, the "Two Robs", Equal Parenting Bike
Trek US 2006, 2007...;
Issues: Smith,
Ron: DC Family Preservation Rally, Compulsory Drugging
of Children;
Issues:
Compulsory Drugging of Children, Thymerisol; |
Beware of the "Parental Rights" IMPOSTER!!!!

"Natural Parent's Rights" Vs "Parent's Rights"
Be on the lookout for the "Parent's
Rights" IMPOSTER. Insist on "Natural Parents Only",
please!
It comes as a big surprise to us that
many groups that present themselves as
"Parents Rights" groups REFUSE to defend the
NATURAL PARENT, and
and to demand RESTORATION
of
Natural Parents Rights taken from Canadians in the
Homosexual Marriage
legislation.

Instead their position to promote the
"rights" of a "Parent" in the widest sense of the
word, making NO distinction between
NATURAL PARENTS and
wannaabe
Legal Parents. They have bowed to
University of
Victoria's assertion that the SCC's
Trociuk
Decision
"endorses a Heterosexual View of the Family and must be
ignored", legitimizing the ongoing
Child
Trafficking by the State which views
Canadian
children as State Property and merchandise for sale in
the lucrative Child
Adoption Market They refuse to be hampered by prior
obligations to that pesky Natural Parent who thinks they can
Veto an Adoption.


It appears that many
"Fathers Rights" groups commonly fall in with the United
Nations and Liberal
Irwin Cotler's assertion that the
Child's Right is to be protected, but the Natural Parent
has "NO RIGHTS",
making the State, not the Natural
Parents the Protector of the Child..
Without Cause or
Consent, no Child shall be removed from a Natural Parent!!!
More:
About:
Beware of the IMPOSTER!!!! "Natural Parent's Rights"
Vs "Parent's Rights";
News: Lessard, Hester - Heterosexual view of
Parenthood must be ignored
News: Smith,
Judge Daphne, BCSC, for Child Trafficking;
Issues: Trociuk,
Darrell;
Issues:
Child Trafficking, Canadian;
Testimonials: Rick Fredrickson of Saskatoon |
Bill Graham, Pedophile Parliamentarian & Defense
Minister


Bill Graham, mp - Google Search;
Bill Graham, mp - Google Video
Lawrence Metherel - Google Search
2007-06-19 Liberal MP Bill Graham announces
resignation
"In spite of credible revelations
dating back to April 2002 about Bill Graham, a sex addicted
bi-sexual sodomizing a 15 year old male prostitute named
Lawrence Metherel,
Paul Martin allowed Graham to remain
Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister - and eventually named
him to the portfolio of Minister of Defense.
"On Sept. 28/2005 a vote was held in Parliament to raise the
age of consent from 14 (one of the lowest age of consents in
the world) to 16 (an age which many still consider too low).
"Bill Graham, Paul Martin, and Anne
McLellan, on Sept. 28th, voted against raising the age of
consent to 16


More:
News: Graham,
Bill: Pedophile Parliamentarian, Defense Minister |


















 |
|
We apologize that the
following figures have not been developed for the Province of BC
specifically. We hope to do this over time. We do know,
however that women often move to BC from Alberta and the rest of Canada
to have their divorces done here in BC where the
misandry of the Family Courts will
maximize their powers to destroy their husbands.
Children from fatherless homes account
for:
-
63% of youth suicides. (Source: US Dept.
of Health & Human Services, Bureau of the Census).
-
71% of pregnant teenagers. (Source: US
Dept. of Health & Human Services)
-
90% of all homeless and runaway
children.
-
70% of juveniles in state-operated
institutions come from fatherless homes (Source: U.S. Dept. of
Justice, Special Report, Sept 1988)
-
85% of all children that exhibit
behavioral disorders. (Source: Center for Disease Control).
-
80% of rapists motivated with displaced
anger. (Source: Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol. 14, p. 403-26,
1978).
-
71% of all high school dropouts.
(Source: National Principals Association Report on the State of High
Schools).
-
75% of all adolescent patients in
chemical abuse centers. (Source: Rainbows for all God's Children).
-
85% of all youths sitting in prisons.
(Source: Fulton Co. Georgia jail populations, Texas Dept. of
Corrections 1992).
Children from fatherless
homes are:
-
11 times more likely to exhibit violent
behavior than children from intact "married" homes.
-
5 times more likely to commit suicide.
-
32 times more likely to runaway.
-
20 times more likely to have behavioral
disorders.
-
14 times more likely to commit rape.
-
9 times more likely to drop out of high
school.
-
10 times more likely to abuse chemical
substances.
-
9 times more likely to end up in
state-operated institutions.
-
20 times more likely to end up in
prison.
"37.9% of
fathers have no access/visitation rights."
(Source: p.6, col.II, para. 6, lines 4 & 5, Census Bureau
P-60, #173, Sept 1991.)
"40% of mothers reported that they had interfered with the
non-custodial father's visitation on at least one occasion, to punish
the ex-spouse." (Source: p. 449, col. II, lines 3-6, (citing
Fulton) Frequency of visitation by Divorced Fathers; Differences in
Reports by Fathers and Mothers. Sanford Braver et al, Am. J. of
Orthopsychiatry, 1991.)
"Overall,
approximately 50% of mothers "see no value in the father's continued
contact with his children...."
(Source: Surviving the Breakup, Joan Kelly & Judith
Wallerstein, p. 125) Only 11% of mothers value their husband's input
when it comes to handling problems with their kids. Teachers & doctors
rated 45%, and close friends & relatives rated %16.(Source: EDK
Associates survey of 500 women for Redbook Magazine. Redbook, November
1994, p. 36)
"The former
spouse (mother) was the greatest obstacle to having more frequent
contact with the children." (Source:
Increasing our understanding of fathers who have infrequent contact with
their children, James Dudley, Family Relations, Vol. 4, p. 281, July
1991.)
"A clear
majority (70%) of fathers felt that they had too little time with their
children." (Source: Visitation and the
Noncustodial Father, Mary Ann Kock & Carol Lowery, Journal of Divorce,
Vol. 8, No. 2, p. 54, Winter 1984.)
"Very few of
the children were satisfied with the amount of contact with their
fathers, after divorce." (Source:
Visitation and the Noncustodial Father, Koch & Lowery, Journal of
Divorce and Remarriage, Vol. 8, No. 2, p. 50, Winter 1984.)
"Feelings of anger towards their former spouses hindered effective
involvement on the part of fathers; angry mothers would sometimes
sabotage father's efforts to visit their children." (Source:
Ahrons and Miller, Am. Journal of Orthopsychiatry, Vol. 63. p. 442, July
1993.)
"Mothers may
prevent visits to retaliate against fathers for problems in their
marital or post-marital relationship."
(Source: Seltzer, Shaeffer & Charing, Journal of Marriage & the Family,
Vol. 51, p. 1015, November 1989.)
In a study: "Visitational
Interference - A National Study" by Ms. J Annette Vanini, M.S.W. and
Edward Nichols, M.S.W., it was found that 77% of non-custodial fathers
are NOT able to "visit" their children, as ordered by the court, as a
result of "visitation interference" perpetuated by the custodial parent.
In other words, non-compliance with court ordered visitation is three
times the problem of non-compliance with court ordered child support and
impacts the children of divorce even more. Originally published Sept.
1992
Child Support
Information from multiple
sources show that only 10% of all non-custodial fathers fit the
"deadbeat dad" category: 90% of the fathers with joint custody paid the
support due. Fathers with visitation rights pay 79.1%; and 44.5% of
those with NO visitation rights still financially support their
children. (Source: Census Bureau report. Series P-23, No. 173).
Additionally, of those not paying support, 66% are not doing so because
they lack the financial resources to pay (Source: GAO report:
GAO/HRD-92-39 FS).
The following is sourced from: Technical Analysis Paper No. 42, U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Income Security
Policy, Authors: Meyer and Garansky.
-
Custodial mothers who receive a support
award: 79.6%
-
Custodial fathers who receive a support
award: 29.9%
-
Non-custodial mothers who totally
default on support: 46.9%
-
Non-custodial fathers who totally
default on support: 26.9%
source:
http://njlaw924.com/id39.html |
|
Judges and their elite
Star
Chamber entrench their power and status to rule over Canadians with
impunity and unbridled
narcissism.
Feminist and Homosexual Activists as Judges effect
their political agenda without the consent of the Canadian demographic.
They with full knowledge and intent (scripted in the sixties & seventies
by their Activist writers) circumvent due democratic process and
knowingly contravene the founding legal constructs of Canada in the BNA
& in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Activist Judges happily
and routinely breach the Trust placed in them by their employer, the
Canadian Taxpayer.
Lawyers routinely Entice into self-destruction and
financial rape vast numbers of families entering their doors.
Because of the Statutory self-regulation of the BC Law Society, we know
of no limiting factor to cap the Activism of the Judiciary other than
prosecuting Judges and Lawyers who exceed the powers granted them by
Statute.
The BC Law Society pimps BC women, and use them as
their hookers. With others (also conspicuously funded by the
Taxpayer), Law Society members instruct women to hook fathers and
families into the Courts and the financial ruin a "Legal Marriage"
entails. Children NEED this threat to their security to be
EXTERMINATED.
Faced with the entrenched Father Hatred and
Affirmative Action of the burgeoning civil service, boys and young men
despair. Having no vision for a Future or a university education,
they become prone to fulfill the Father Hatred prophecies of BC
university's Women's Studies faculties and Feminist Activists. |
|
2005-xx-xx Third
National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect
"Children of single parents were at
higher risk of physical abuse and of all types of neglect and were
overrepresented among seriously injured, moderately injured, and
endangered children. Compared with their counterparts living with both
parents, children in single parent families had:
-
a 77% greater risk of being
harmed by physical abuse (using the stringent Harm Standard) and a
63% greater risk of experiencing any countable physical abuse (using
the Endangerment Standard);
-
an 87% greater risk of being
harmed by physical neglect and a 165% greater risk of experiencing
any countable physical neglect;
-
a 74% greater risk of being
harmed by emotional neglect and a 64% greater risk of experiencing
any countable emotional neglect;
-
a 220% (or more than three
times) greater risk of being educationally neglected;
-
an approximately 80% greater
risk of suffering serious injury or harm from abuse or neglect;
-
an approximately 90% greater
risk of receiving moderate injury or harm as a result of child
maltreatment; and
-
a 120% (or more than two times)
greater risk of being endangered by some type of child abuse or
neglect."
|
|
2006-11-10
Top judges rebuke Tories Federal plan would allow police to help
appoint judiciary - workopolis.com; "Beverley
McLachlin, Canada's Chief Justice, along with a powerful council of
the country's top judges issued an unprecedented rebuke yesterday to
Justice Minister Vic Toews for hatching a plan to arbitrarily change
the way judges are chosen. The Canadian Judicial Council
expressed dismay that Mr. Toews is planning to introduce
"significant
changes to the composition and functioning of the Judicial Advisory
Committees," secret groups which are set up in each region to vet
candidates for the 1,100 federal judgeships across the country.
Chief Justice McLachlin, who chairs the council, urged Mr. Toews to
include the judiciary and key legal bodies in any discussion of
changes to the committee vetting process."
We
need in the very least some kind of JUDICIAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT
which will look something like::
-
Divide the Law Society into two groups of
Judges and Practicing Lawyers to protect the Lawyers who would
make Cases against Judges. There would be some Law Society
Members who may practice as Barristers, and some as Solicitors,
but a Judge must RETIRE from the Practice of Law and
become unable to affect the Law Society while they act as a
Judge. On removal of a Judge for
Judicial Activism,
the Law Society may deny their return to Practice from
Retirement for specified cause, such as the case made during
an unsuccessful Criminal Charge of
Breach of Trust or Treason.
-
The Judges naturally divide into two bodies,
the Provincial and Federal Judicial Societies to parallel the
Provincial and Federal Courts. Membership in both Judicial
Societies must be precluded. Federal Judges would be tried
by Provincial Judges according to the
JUDICIAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT, and the Provincial Judges would
be tried by the Federal Judges. They could be tried both
in Tort and in Criminal Court for
Breach of Trust and for
Treason.
-
Make Judicial Appointments for a FIXED TERM
of no more than five years (Jimmy Pattison where are you when we
need you?)
-
Judicial Re-Appointment must meet a Test for
Judicial Re-Appointment which demonstrates the prescribed
Impartiality (that is an Activism Free record.) and Non-Infamy
with the Electorate.
-
Automatic Temporary Suspension Without Pay
for a Judge who is going to Trial in Tort or in Criminal
Court, pending its outcome.
-
Eradication
of
Freemasonry from the Judiciary and Law Societies. Both
are granted special privileges by Parliamentary Statute which
they receive In Trust.. Judicial Candidates and sitting
Judges must be vetted for
Occult
practices resulting in Public Safety concerns such as
Pedophilia.
Pedophilia is an established part of Occult worship
(See
Malachi Martin among others) and is reported to be a
tolerated practice of some high ranking Judges.
-
Trial by Jury of Judges before non-allied and
non-associated Judges, e.g.. Federal
Judges
tried before Provincial Judges, visa versa..
-
NO SPECIAL
PROSECUTORS for Judges or other Public Servants being
tried.
Under the "federal" division of powers in the BNA
(Constitution Act, 1867)) Education falls into the Provincial
domain. A parallel Provincial Statute to amend the licensing
and Suspension of
Teachers
would be necessary to stop the present use of our Schools for
Political Indoctrination by Activists. See also
Four Missions |
|
Do we have any such provision? Who executes
the required actions in the event a Judge has to be removed?
Submit new info on Removal of Judges
Removal of judges from office, Oklahoma
Constitution
(a) In addition to other
methods and causes prescribed by the Constitution and laws,
the judges of any court, exercising judicial power under the
provisions of Article VII, or under any other provision, of
the Constitution of Oklahoma, shall be subject to removal
from office, or to compulsory retirement from office, for
causes herein specified, by proceedings in the Court on the
Judiciary.
(b) Cause for removal from
office shall be: Gross neglect of duty; corruption in
office; habitual drunkenness; commission while in office of
any offense involving moral turpitude;
gross partiality in office;
oppression in office; or other grounds as may be
specified hereafter by the legislature.
(c) Cause for compulsory
retirement from office, with or without compensation, shall
be mental or physical disability preventing the proper
performance of official duty, or incompetence to perform the
duties of the office" |
|
Habeas
Corpus : "literally, "you
may have the body". A Habeas
Corpus is a legal writ that protects an individual against arbitrary
imprisonment by requiring that any person arrested be brought before
a court for formal charge. If the charge is considered to be valid,
the person must submit to trial; if not, the person goes free. When
the law is suspended, then individuals can be imprisoned
indefinitely and without charge."
.....
More,
Glossary of
terms |
|
2006-03-10 The right to abandon your child by Mona Charen;
"This
is one of those moments when you want to grab liberals by the lapels
and demand, "Well, what did you expect?" ... A group called the
National Center for Men has filed a lawsuit they are calling "Roe v.
Wade for Men." ... More than three decades
ago Roe vs. Wade gave women control of their reproductive lives but
nothing in the law changed for men. Women can now have sexual
intimacy without sacrificing reproductive choice. Women now have the
freedom and security to enjoy lovemaking without the fear of forced
procreation. Women now have control of their lives after an
unplanned conception. But men are routinely forced to give up
control, forced to be financially responsible for choices only women
are permitted to make, forced to relinquish reproductive choice as
the price of intimacy."
COMMENT: Roe
V. Wade was a "Femi-Narcissistic" decision, looking after the
interests of the Mother only. The principal established there
established was extrapolated into a Mother's "murder rights"
expressed in minimal sentences when murdering their children.
Equal Parenting eliminates much of this. |
Father dealt difficult hand by the system
"Even last week, when the family court file of
Elaine and Leo Campione was released to the press -- in
significant measure because Mr. Campione didn't oppose the
media's bid to see it .. There is, to be frank, an
underlying perspective of feminist oppression from which all
else springs. .. Women are seen first as victims --
generally of male power and particularly of husband power -- and
presumed to be truth-tellers and good mothers until proven
otherwise. The starting point for men is that they are abusers
and deadbeat dads in the making unless they can prove the
contrary, and if it takes years for them to demonstrate that, oh
well."
|
| |
Judicial Activism is Criminal Breach of Trust.
Axe Activist Judges!!!!
Judicial Activism is Criminal Breach of Trust.
Axe Activist Judges!!!

JUDICIAL
IMMUNITY
is predicated on
JUDICIAL IMPARTIALITY
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM
is
CRIMINAL BREACH OF TRUST

JUDICIAL GLOBALIZATION
is
TREASON
The Courts and other Law professionals are
firstly Clerks and Stewards of WRITTEN and
Common Law having since
1649
NO
LEGISLATIVE POWERS.
The Courts,
the Law Societies and many other Offices
of the public service are themselves Creations of Parliament by
virtue of PARLIAMENTARY
STATUTE. They cannont be anything other than
SUBORDINATE
to Parliament. The Courts and the
Law Societies have no
Jurisdiction other than that delegated to them by Parliament.
The Court's role is to
ADMINISTER the
Statutory Laws, tested for "Fairness" against the historic
benchmark of British Common
Law, but always with
NO LEGISLATIVE POWERS
and always witout capacity to create Law.
In
recent years, Courts and Lawyers have brazenly referred to
Judges Orders as "Case Law", in what
is clearly a Criminal Breach of Trust, that has yet to be
successfully struck down by Parliament.
Parliament is "Supreme" over the Courts &
Public Servant. The Electorate is Supreme over Parliament
at the end of a Term. Within a Term,
the Electorate may
Appeal to the Constitutional Monarch (who has NO Legislative
powers) to Dissolve Parliament and Call an Election. This
is our system, forged in 1649 that the World has envied and
emulated. Since 1982, this remains unchanged with the
possible exception of a Constitutional Amendment. To
satisfy the Amending Formula, contending Provinces are invited
to go to the SCC for Mediation.
We're not sure how an Appeal to the Queen
post-1982 would work out because it has until recently been
unnecessary. But if the SCC claims to have displaced
Parliament in some fashion, it cannot claim to have assumed
parliamentary powers without also assuming parliamentary
vulnerability to removal upon Appeal of the Electorate.
A Canadian Appeal goes first, of course to the Governor General.
At any time, since 1982 the Notwithstanding Clause gives any
Province the right to unravel the 1982 changes, and essentially
revert back to the 1867 relationships. The SCC did NOT
become "supreme" in 1982.
2003-06-15 If judges want to make policy, they should
disrobe and run for office Judges must still confine
themselves to the Law as it is written by Parliamentarians, not
by Law Faculties nor by fellow Ju dges,
nor by the dreaded
Star Chamber. (which Courts claim permits them
to commit crimes with impunity,
Star Chamber. Judicial Immunity) The old Liberals created
this viral threat to Canadian Representative Democracy by
inviting the Judiciary to implement policies which would fail if
exposed to the censorship of Parliament. The old Liberal
Governments
stood
by and did NOTHING as the
SCC
began squatting on Parliament's
Supremacy in
Legislation and its
derivative Policy. Liberal Leader Bill Graham continues to
act as SCC Lackey while the Judiciary takes the reins of Power
from our Parliament, moving Canadians without Liberal opposition
towards Serfdom of the Electorate and a Judicial Neo-Feudalism.
Young Opposition MPs need to ponder why they would follow
Graham's continuing support for the SCC's squatting on
Parliamentary Supremacy. Opposition MPs must SUPPORT the
Government to remove Activist Judges
as soon as they commit the Offence,
to preserve Canadians' self government and international
autonomy.
2006-05-10 Vellacott resigns aboriginal post, <Liberals
support Supremacy of SCC>;
2006-05-10 Conservative MP Maurice Vellacott resigns as
Chairman ... Aboriginal Affairs Committee, CPAC video
|
HRH Queen Elizabeth,
Constitutional Monarch of the Commonwealth
Since the
Declaration of the Commonwealth in 1649 - an
outcome of the
English Civil War - the British Monarch has
become a "Constitutional
Monarch". Beginning with the Magna Charta , the
vocabulary of the various Agreements made during the
devolution of powers are clearly those of a Trust,
and the Positions created along the way and how they
are structured are also those of a TRUST.
The Monarch, since King Richard the Lionheart is the
TRUSTEE, Parliament, the Trustee,
and the monarch's Governors, the scrutineers of
Parliament as Trustees.
See also
Reformation Day, October_31st; and
Guy Fawkes / Bonfire Night, November
5 - Origins
As Constitutional
Monarch, our Queen, her Courts, her federal
Governor General, and her provincial
Lieutenant Governors MUST REMAIN SILENT on
political process. The totality of Legislative
powers are granted only to Parliament.
The Queen retains
the right , however to - on APPEAL regarding a
potentially corrupt or tyrannical Government -
to Order the
Dissolution of Parliament and put the
legislative process back into the hands of the
people by calling an Election.
The British
Monarch remains the Legal Guardian & Protector of
her subjects' self-government against a Parliament
or Court who for a time exercise her ABSOLUTE powers
of legislation IN TRUST by virtue of their election.
The
devolution of Monarchial powers to an elected
Parliament began in Britain during the Crusades, was
formalized in the
Magna Carta in 1215, and became absolute with
the
Declaration of the Commonwealth in 1649
following the trial and
Execution of Charles I for Treason.
(So should Activist Judges be tried!!!) These
changes were pursued largely due to the availability
and popularization in the common Languages of the
Bible. Bible reading during the
Reformation provided a documented Challenge to the
claims that the Legislators ruled by
"Divine Right". Puritans like
Cromwell sought to create a Congregational form of
civil government with which to displace the Pontiffs
of his day.
Charles I had
unfortunately insisted on pursuing the European
example in his use of the dreaded "Star
Chamber" - a secret Court which could unlawfully
impose any penalty in it's victims with impunity.
Although formally abolished in subsequent years,
lawyers tell us the
Star
Chamber continues to function within the
Canadian Judiciary today as a not-so-secret Secret
Society.
In the restored
Monarchy of William and Mary, the
English Bill of Rights, 1689, also required that
the Sovereign cannot deny certain rights, such as
Freedom of Speech in Parliament,
Freedom from Taxation
without Parliament's consent and
Freedom from Cruel and Unusual punishment.
Many fathers,
mothers & children would argue that the BC's
"Ministries" routinely deal out
"Cruel and Unusual Punishment".
|
|
2006-04-26
A Judge's Right <to Judicial Activism>, Chief Justice Beverly
McLachlin on
Divine Right of Judges, SCC.pdf;
1609-xx-xx
King James I, On Divine Right of Kings
1649-01-30
Charles I of England, Tried and beheaded for Treason;
Divine Right of <Judiciary>;
More:
Judicial Tyranny
  2006-05-13 Judges rule supreme <McLachlin claims>, Michael Coren;
"Let us be entirely candid here.
... Consider this quotation:
"The rule of law requires judges
to uphold unwritten constitutional norms, even in the face of clearly
enacted laws or hostile public opinion. I believe that judges have the duty
to insist that legislative and executive branches of government confirm to
certain established and fundamental norms, even in times of trouble."
The author? Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin
... Soon after Rosalie
Abella
was appointed
to the Supreme Court in
2004, of course,
it told the government of Canada
that opposition to gay marriage <and the expunging of NATURAL PARENTS'
RIGHTS> was unconstitutional -- effectively
forcing the hand of a Liberal party that had never once listed gay marriage
as a policy and had in fact voted against it at all previous conventions."

In
Commonwealth Countries virtually all Powers, including
that of Legislation have since 1649 been removed from the Monarch and vested in
Parliament, as Trustee for the Electorate. The vestigial powers of the Constitutional Monarch include Ordering a dissolution of Parliament on
Appeal by the Electorate, precipitating an Election. Crimes of
Treason once committed against the
person of the Monarch, are now committed jointly against Crown & Parliament,
supposing the Electorate has made no Appeal.
2006-05-xx Attack on judiciary shatters strategic silence, MP's shot
at Chief Justice brings Conservative disdain for judges back into spotlight;
Another example of a
Public Servant in Breach of Trust
calling for the resignation of a duly elected Representative MP.
Removing an MP is the job of the
Electorate, not some puffed-up Public Servant and her Cabal!
It
is SCC Chief
Beverly McLachlin, of course,
who should have been forced to
resign on
penalty of criminal prosecution when she first moved into
Judicial Activism.
|
|
The most outrageous
example of Judges usurping the role of Parliament is, of
course these
"New Priests" making the false claim that
the
Charter's protection against discrimination based
on "sex" means protection against discrimination based on
"sexual orientation".
Does the Charter
protect sexual orientations such as polygamists,
pedophiles and bestiality? Of course not!
What the
Charter DOES say is:
S.15. (1) Every
individual is equal before and under the law and has the
right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law
without discrimination and, in particular, without
discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin,
colour, religion, SEX, age or mental or physical disability.
S.28.
Notwithstanding anything in this Charter, the rights and
freedoms referred to in it are guaranteed equally to MALE
and FEMALE persons.
The Charter makes absolutely NO REFERENCE to SEXUAL
ORIENTATION. This is simply a wish of the Judiciary
they have read into the Charter, while ignoring the
clear wishes of the Electorate. On this point they
have simply been taking care of their own. See:
Egan v. Canada - Wikipedia, the free
encyclopedia
Similarly
the Family Law Judges, in BC especially, typically ignore
the Statutes of Parliament in the Divorce Act, which require
Judges to remove custodial rights of a Parent who will not
use those rights to maintain the relationship with the other
parent, usually the mother, and assign those rights to the
other parent, usually the father.
The Charter's usage of the
word "sex" is as the common usage of "gender". The
Charter's clear intent is that there to be no discrimination
between male and female, even in such questions as
Parenting. The Courts are driven inexorably
towards Equal Parenting by the Charter, the "Supreme Law of
Canada". And yet they do not comply with our
instructions to them in the Statutes of a duly elected
Parliament.
2006-xx-xx Why Shared Parenting Should Be Implemented,
Rinaldo Del Gallo
|
"... The common law states this: "The father is the owner of
the child, against the world, as against the mother".
The government of Canada states this:
15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to
the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in
particular, without discrimination based on ... sex ...., and
28. Notwithstanding anything in this Charter, the rights and freedoms referred
to in it are guaranteed equally to male and female persons.
So, the position of the law is sole paternal custody, the position of the Queen
as personified by Parliament is that no one employed by government may
discriminate based on gender, and yet, over ninety percent of the custody cases
brought to court produce sole maternal custody orders. Effectively the Courts
brought in divorce on demand and the presumption of sole maternal child custody
in express defiance of Parliament. The lawyers and judges of Canada, in
conspiracy and collusion with their professional "friends" around the world,
(the example here is from Great Britain) have stated this: "nothing should
change" from what they have decided on their own to do.
"The Courts have quite willfully frustrated the intentions Parliament. I was
actually present at a seminar when the 1984 Act, which was supposed to have
altered things, had just been produced and an eminent Barrister said that “it
was the opinion of the judiciary that nothing should change”. Just as courts had
turned the 1970 Act upside down they simply denied the spirit of the 1984 Act."
The Pellman Brief Adrian Pellman, solicitor. 2003 Pellman's, 1 Abbey Street,
Eynsham. Oxford. 0X6 1HR. Tel:01865-884400. Fax: 01865-8844.
What this adds up to is known as "Mixed War", a condition defined by Black's Law
Dictionary as that in which a portion of the government (in this case the state
paid and authorized courts) engages in hostile actions against a segment of the
population (in this case fathers and/or married men). Normally, men know no
choice but to fight against a declaration of war. The alternative is ignoble
oblivion. However, ....
Being that males have a predisposition to 'protect' women and children, they
have for far too long deferred to the predations that are being foisted upon
them. And due to the subtlety of the propaganda war that is being waged ....
Men are being yoked and chained to slavery by the courts of Canada. Their love
of their children and their own value to society are being held worthless by
these courts because ..., well ..., hey! It's just business! ...
" .. David M, Surrey, BC |
|
|
"Case Law" is not Law, it is merely "Stare Decisis"

Activist Judges are in Criminal Breach of Trust
Stare
Decisis:
Latin: "stay with what has been decided."
Case Law, Canada - Google Search:
Case Law, US - Google Search
Stare Decisis - Google Search
Judges and lawyers often refer to what is called
"Case Law"
which simply is the past decisions of judges made in other cases. In reality,
there is no such thing as "Case Law" because
Judges don't have the necessary Jurisdiction to make Law.
Only
Parliament has that
Jurisdiction.. The Courts are Agents of the Crown, and
what Jurisdiction they have has been delegated to them
BY STATUTE of Parliament.
Their role is the ADMINISTRATION
of Law created by our elected Parliament, not it's creation.
Nevertheless, your lawyer, whose career
depends upon his submission to the Judges, may tell you as we
have been told repeatedly, that
"It
doesn't matter what the Statue says..... all that matters
is what the Judge says. Common Law is whatever the
Judges are commonly saying these days.
This is a Bluff of the Activist
Judges, which you must Call.

More:
Issues: Common Law
Perverted by Activist Judges and Legal Oligarchy;
Issues:
"Judicial Interpretation" to pervert Statutes of Parliament;
Issues: Judicial Activism
is Breach of Trust;
Issues:
Judicial Globalization is Treason |
Pierre Trudeau, BIH: Pal of Gorbachev & Castro; Critic of
Thatcher & Regan

Pierre E Trudeau, BIH,
1919 – 2000

Pierre E Trudeau is listed in the
Guinness Book of Records as being the Prime Minister with
the longest time in office of any Commonwealth PMO, having a
23
year "reign of terror".. He popularized open
contempt for the Electorate with his
"Fuddle Duddle" responses to questions and his
"Trudeau Salute". Strangely, many Canadians thought
more of him for it. That tells you something about
Canadians!

By talking the Provinces into going to the Judiciary for
"Binding Arbitration" on future Constitutional Amendments during
the nefarious
"Constitution Act, 1982", Trudeau gave the Judiciary it's
first toe into the formerly closed door on
Parliamentary
Supremacy and Judicial subordination to Parliament.
Trudeau then invited Supreme Court Judges to make decisions he
couldn't survive if he took them to the Electorate; and
encouraged the Judiciary and
PACs to expand their role in Governmental decision making.
Making Activist Judges
in the SCC the norm, he successfully conned Canadians into
thinking Parliament is bound by SCC's decisions. By
this skillful lawyering. Trudeau successfully
sidestepped both Parliamentary Accountability to the Electorate,
and to their
Protector, the Queen.
Canadians
have been so slow in correcting Trudeau's displacement of
Parliament with Judicial
Oligarchy,
Judges are now openly and regularly striking down Parliamentary
Statutes, and committing with impunity
High Treason by incorporating Judgments of Foreign Judges
and legislative bodies into Canadian Orders, and writing
Legislative scripts for lackey parliamentarians like
James Moore
Affirmative Action Chief Justice
Beverley
McLachlin as Judicial Whip for insists Canadian Judges be
far more aggressive in asserting the power of Trudeaus' Judicial
Oligarchy to speedily harmonize Canadian Statute with the
Global Judiciary's
specifications..

FYI, virtually everything Trudeau accomplished in 1982 can be
undone via the
"Notwithstanding Clause"
More: News: Trudeau,
Pierre: Pals with Gorbachev & Castro, Critic of Thatcher &
Regan;
News: Fabian
Society, Communitarian "Wolves in Sheep's' Clothing";
News: John
Dewey, Educating Americans for Hegelian Communitarianism, (AKA
Marxism) |
Judicial Activism, Judicial Tyranny - Google Search
Supremacy of Parliament
2005-12-13 Criminal Code on Organized crime struck down my
BC Government Directory, Heather Holmes, BCSC Judge
|
|