Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Jean Chretien will attest to my faith as he in 2002 sent Roger Piper of the
NSI and Bob Hansen of the City of Edmonton Commercial crimes Unit to
Intimidate me from sending factual letters spreading the truth about the
fraud to all of the men and women acting as members of parliament in
officially performing the functions of my calling.
My lawful excuse for failure to appear has standing as my faith and the
commandments of God are the points that are under attack by your
commercial process that is evidently violating it’s own prime directive.
The issue of a false oath is real. Dave Hancock and Neil Skinner, his aid at
the time, both admitted I was correct and that the oath is false...several
men acting as Alberta judges have from the bench concurred...law
professors have, in awe, agreed with me!! My non appearance
aforementioned is in observance and in concurrence with Black's law
dictionary definition indicating the formal process whereby one submits
themselves to the jurisdiction of the court. Once I saw the proof herein
provided and I read the scriptures herein provided, I knew I could not
appear in the false oathed, commercially registered business of the
Alberta Courts...I have Standing in this matter as the law is opposed to my
being able to exercise my faith in demanding the laws of the Bible take
precedent over mans commercial and profit motivated business. I am so
sincere in that I wish you could feel my heart.
Is this Africa where men are criminalised for practicing Christianity and
providing proof of their beliefs?
I have diligently made you aware of the lawless actions of some of your de
facto members bearing false oaths such as the man named Caffaro and
the man named Pahl and the man named Peter Ayotte and the man named
Hugh A. Fuller and a man named Vaughn Myers who has had all record of
involvement of ever sitting on the legal fiction case erased from the
record so the fact that he sat in conflict of interest would not come to
light. None of you so diligently noticed of the facts have commented or
contacted me and have indicated silence on these filed administrative
complaints I made. (U.S. v. Tweel silence can only be equated with fraud
when there is a legal or moral duty to speak, or when an inquiry left
unanswered would be intentionally misleading) Estoppel in private liability
is also applicable in line with Tacit consent achieved when a noticed party
says nothing in rebuttal to an attestation or asseveration of facts that to
avoid and ignore may cause injury to the one providing the facts. They
have agreed you are correct by failing in duty to point out the error.
Where did and does the authority lie to alter the form of an oath to God to
bear true Allegiance to a Christian Monarch (Canadian Oaths of Allegiance
Act) whose style and Title is “Defender of the faith” as contained in the
Royal Style and Tiles Act on Justice Canada’s website via lawful oath as
defined in the Statute of Westminster of 1648 chapter 22 sworn to defend
the laws of God via the Coronation Oath Act of 1688 that has been in place
for almost 4 hundred years? Sorry for the length of that question but I
am being severely intimidated by your assumptive, admiralty law
procession against me, the private bondservant of Christ, to violate my
sincerely held faith and beliefs and knowledge of Christ and God’s
commands.
I have included a brief list of credible references for your aid and perusal.
If you have evidence that you do have the Queens sanction to add to and
take away from God’s law in violation of Deuteronomy 4:2&12:32 and to
fabricate and swear to unlawful oaths unsanctioned by the Monarchy or
law then I expect to hear from you to be pointing out my error as, if you
do not, my lawful and honorable excuse for not appearing has irrefutable
standing and ecclesiastical merit defended by the Queen herself.
Does this court comprised of private men acting as officers respect and
honor the Canadian Bills of Exchange Act as applicable to them? Can you
lawfully intimidate a man being a bondservant of Christ and his minister,
to appear before false oathed impostors pushing contract admiralty law?
Are all men equal before the law? If you do not take the duty bound
opportunity to prove how you can lawfully force me to submit myself
before impostors perpetrating a fraud, I will not be making an
appearance, as that means submission to jurisdiction of false oathed
impostors pushing commercial law upon me the, minister of Christ and
heir of God. Reading section 423 of the commercial law, that your false
oathed lawyer advisors may be familiar with, tells you that, as well as 180
of your criminal code is total commercial application of admiralty law.
Here is the bogus oath from Alberta and it is reflected in every province in
Canada aside from Nova Scotia... Note the oath is to God not the
Queen!!..From the Federal Oath of Allegiance Act that says ...read
carefully and note the word "shall" is an imperative absolute.
(1) Every person who, either of his own accord or in compliance with any
lawful requirement made of the person, or in obedience to the directions
of any Act or law in force in Canada, except the Constitution Act, 1867 and
the Citizenship Act, desires to take an oath of allegiance shall have
administered and take the oath in the following form, and no other:
HER MAJESTY, by and with the advice and consent of the Legislative
Assembly of Alberta, enacts as follows:
(Notice there is no word “Do” and no “Queen of Canada” and the words
“According to law are not in the federal enactment”.
(2) Where the name of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second is
expressed In the form, the name of the Sovereign at the time that the
oath is taken shall be substituted therefore if different.
Official oath
Oath on
Judicial oath
3 When by a statute of Alberta a person is required to take a judicial
and faithfully and to the best of my ability exercise the powers and duties
of a . . . . . . . . . . . . So help me God.
The BNAA also in schedule 5 has the specific form for the oath as does
section 10 and 11 of the Goivernor Generals Act of 1947 as well as Chapter
22 from the Westminster Confession of Faith from 1648 to anchor us as to
the intent of Parliament to describe the meaning of a lawful oath. One you
see the law the Parliament intended to enact clearly states that a lawful
oath is an act of religious worship you can see Why God his laws and the
Bible have standing! No one has ever repealed that law! I make no use of
but bring to your attention as of it’s applicability to you! Ezekiel 33:1-10
Ezekiel 33:1-10 requires me to Notice you that I make no use of your law
by bringing it to your attention. It applies to you and the jeopardy it
imparts upon you if you ignore it. I cannot make use of a hole in law but
as the watchman, can and am commanded to warn you and all those who
may be harmed by your fictional actions in mans commercial law. As
ecclesiastics being heirs of God, His rule of law applies, not yours. I am
sorry if your business interests and commercial profit of the organisations
you are interlocking with in equity will be frustrated by the exercising of
my faith but no different than the Sikh already knowing, as of cultural
training, how to stand up for his beliefs, I intend to stand up for mine. If it
is your intent to persecute me and punish me for the actions of my faith
and the following of the commands of God Jehovah the queen is sworn to
defend and you wish to challenge God’s law by putting out a warrant, I am
demanding of you to Notice me formally as to your intent in that de facto
and treasonous Action. If I get no notice outlining where the authority to
get me to correspond with a fraud comes from I will believe you have
accepted my lawful excuse and I have no threat to appear. Corporal Renee
Banes has been noticed of this threat and intimidation I am under and I
have asked her for protection from the impostors in Stony Plain. She has
seen the false Oaths.
I will also be demanding in good faith and common sense course by what
authority the Authorised version of the King James Bible can be lawfully
removed from her Majesty’s court as it is the authorised law by the
Queens command that is to be available in her courts throughout all of
her realm in order for Her majesty to be able to carry out her Coronation
Oath to, with all her power, defend the laws of God in defence of the
Christian faith.
I thank you in Advance for your respected aid and direction in giving me
fair notice if it will be your intent to resort to unlawful intimidation
extortion and fraud by putting out a warrant for the arrest of the legal
fiction when I do not appear before the false oathed impostors
masquerading as judges in Edmonton or Stony Plain
Dated autographed and witnessed this sixth day of January 2011 A.D.
Autograph:
Witnesses: